|
Post by argonbalt on Jan 7, 2017 2:57:00 GMT
In regards to newageofpower
In the end i think we should not jump to conclusions too quickly in regards to late term colonisation or society, though today we live in a capitalist/liberal (even that is declining quickly) western society we should not assume that it is as was once predicted to be penultimate society or structure. I should also clarify that state run systems have in the past been limited by autocratic dictatorships in basically every "communist" nation, coupled with the lack of democratic process it is no wonder they did not rule efficiently enough to stably survive.
I think as well that your assumptions towards regression and self interested groups may occur, perhaps. But nowhere will ever be Earth, certainly not Mars even after a thousand years of colonisation. This is why to me it represents such a strong ground for a colonial target. A domed rotating asteroid could get back to the habitable Earth like conditions in no time, but Mars will never be that. The society we seem to agree acting like bedrock, the scientists and technically minded folk, this alone has never been truly tried before. I am overtly optimistic, even if it should follow some gradual degredation, following the historic trend set by the Bronze Sea Peoples, Great Britain and the United States amongst others. Starting over, even with religious fanatics, in a resource rich land has generally led to the upwards well being of all of humankind.
Mars is even better for this specifically, as now there is no millions of Native Americans to be killed by disease, no wildlife(as we know of on the surface) to be hunted to extinction, and now instead of fanatics we have our best, hardiest and brightest. Sure Utopia it might not entirely be, but i imagine being a step towards it and beyond modern civilisation at the very least.
As for AI, is say damn it! Are we not men? or are we dogs? waiting for the ideal master to pat our heads and feed us table scraps? An AI in power is nothing more than a perfect king, but a king non the less. What claim can humankind have to freedom if it is leashed? (albiet to what may be a godlike level of intelligence) Is it really so mad to think that in the same way that a new more advanced culture that arose in America, a new flower of civilisation will bloom on Mars? That perhaps even we will not just advance, but evolve such that we will need no master, but yet not be monsters? I hope so, and i refuse to let the modern day spoiled tantrums of a humankind still raking its crib bars of this Eden world convince me otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 7, 2017 3:31:53 GMT
I'm rather disappointed in you, argonbalt . I had you pegged for a more logical person. In regards to newageofpower In the end i think we should not jump to conclusions too quickly in regards to late term colonisation or society, though today we live in a capitalist/liberal (even that is declining quickly) western society we should not assume that it is as was once predicted to be penultimate society or structure. I should also clarify that state run systems have in the past been limited by autocratic dictatorships in basically every "communist" nation, coupled with the lack of democratic process it is no wonder they did not rule efficiently enough to stably survive. An anarcho-capitalist would reply to your (highly cliché) assertation about flawed implemetations of Marxist systems that Western Democratic Capitalist societies are also highly tainted by government influence in the 'free market' and of the flaws of democracy (indeed, any government) itself. and now instead of fanatics we have our best, hardiest and brightest The more intelligent the human, the more effective they are at subverting the instruments of State towards purposes not originally intended. See the Imperial Chinese Meritocracy based on Confucian Examination (also implemented in pre-Shogunate Japan and the similar Yangban system in Korea), look at the immense abuses of power from the Medieval Catholic Church. As for AI, is say damn it! Are we not men? or are we dogs? I suspect the vast majority of intelligent humans (say, defined as +1 SD in general IQ) will have the same exact reaction. Thus, initially, exponentially evolving intelligences will likely ignore humans that are not in their way (according to their inscrutable purposes) and manipulate/subvert/exterminate human groups that oppose them. Until one day, we realize we are no longer the masters of our own destiny.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 7, 2017 3:39:22 GMT
...Perhaps in the end, the only surviving human enclaves will be the 'pet' human reservations of unimaginably intelligent post-Singularity AI. I hope these post-singularity AIs will be like in Orion's Arm: benevolent caretaker gods.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 7, 2017 3:49:18 GMT
I hope these post-singularity AIs will be like in Orion's Arm: benevolent caretaker gods. I'd rather we self-rule, even with our hilarious flaws, but competition and the allure of ever advancing technology means that AI research is out of Pandora's Box, and will probably not be put back in.
|
|
|
Post by someusername6 on Jan 7, 2017 3:56:08 GMT
I hope these post-singularity AIs will be like in Orion's Arm: benevolent caretaker gods. I'd rather we self-rule, even with our hilarious flaws, but competition and the allure of ever advancing technology means that AI research is out of Pandora's Box, and will probably not be put back in. Indeed. Either we make sure the first true AIs have interests aligned with ours -- and that that alignment remains stable, but not stagnant, we are not the same people who were around 100 years ago -- either we become the AIs. I favor the "become the AI" option. "Power becomes easier to concentrate over time, so eventually everything will be terrible for most if we don't act" is a funny argument to have on a thread mixing transhumanism and politics.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 7, 2017 4:02:13 GMT
Indeed. Either we make sure the first true AIs have interests aligned with ours -- and that that alignment remains stable, but not stagnant, we are not the same people who were around 100 years ago -- either we become the AIs. I favor the "become the AI" option. "Power becomes easier to concentrate over time, so eventually everything will be terrible for most if we don't act" is a funny argument to have on a thread mixing transhumanism and politics. The problem with such an optimistic outlook is that human minds are evolutionarily designed (and messily so) for a meat-body environment. A purpose-designed 'operating system' designed to run on optical machinery/quantum computers/unobtanium will be far more efficient than the Uploaded Human. We could shave off bits of our minds that are less compatible, rework our programming, logic pathways, OODA setup, core directives... but is the end result still human? This is even assuming (probably false) that optimizing a human for virtual space is even close to as efficient as designing a purpose-built intelligence from the ground up. Transhumanism is something that should be deeply read into before making *any* assumptions about.
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jan 7, 2017 4:06:31 GMT
Regarding colony government, I suspect that direct democracy will be the default rule (that is, everybody is part of the government, voting collectively on every significant point). It is technically feasible nowadays, even with large populations. And it is harder to subvert than any system relying on major decisions by an elite or otherwise limited sub-group (like we have in every large modern government).
Specialist departments would certainly be set up eventually (like a committee of engineers planning how best to expand the colony with resources at hand), but budgetary allotments and final approval of large projects (or their cancellation) can be made by popular referendums.
I expect the population of a colony to be about 70% various types of engineers, 20% scientists, 10% other.
|
|
|
Post by someusername6 on Jan 7, 2017 4:10:51 GMT
We could shave off bits of our minds that are less compatible, rework our programming, logic pathways, OODA setup, core directives... but is the end result still human? This is even assuming (probably false) that optimizing a human for virtual space is even close to as efficient as designing a purpose-built intelligence from the ground up. I'd care about whether the sentience and identity are preserved. If the result isn't "human" then it isn't a successful transformation, as much as creating something new, and we get to argue separately about what those qualities are. Initial efficiency doesn't matter that much, either, if the end result can improve themselves. Along with your initial point, I do see it as inevitable, and I think that incorporating it into humanity -- or humanity into it -- gives a much better shot at survival and independence than just trying to prevent anyone from building AIs, or placing all eggs on a single basket of one AI king.
|
|
|
Post by someusername6 on Jan 7, 2017 4:13:38 GMT
Regarding colony government, I suspect that direct democracy will be the default rule (that is, everybody is part of the government, voting collectively on every significant point). It is technically feasible nowadays, even with large populations. And it is harder to subvert than any system relying on major decisions by an elite or otherwise limited sub-group (like we have in every large modern government). Specialist departments would certainly be set up eventually (like a committee of engineers planning how best to expand the colony with resources at hand), but budgetary allotments and final approval of large projects (or their cancellation) can be made by popular referendums. I expect the population of a colony to be about 70% various types of engineers, 20% scientists, 10% other. Direct democracy sounds great, and very workable for a small community, but it probably places an upper limit on the colony size.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Jan 7, 2017 4:20:48 GMT
I'm rather disappointed in you, argonbalt . I had you pegged for a more logical person. Oh i assure you i am ruggedly pessimistic for Earth, i'm uncertain of any real conditions that can truly lead to any sufficient Marxist system Earth side. An anarcho-capitalist would reply to your (highly cliché) assertation about flawed implemetations of Marxist systems that Western Democratic Capitalist societies are also highly tainted by government influence in the 'free market' and of the flaws of democracy (indeed, any government) itself. If a group of chefs want to make a cake, and end making taco after taco after taco, it does not matter if they say they are making cakes, they are making tacos. And do not mistake me i am no Leninist! The singular state driven entity that was the USSR ultimately doomed itself by unilaterally governing so much. If anything we are in agreement on the fact that the current system is clearly better than previous, but not quite so much the permanent solution. As far as "influence" goes im sorry but i must disagree heavily. If anything it is the free market effecting government and democracy not the other way around. naturally there are flaws with the current system, but that in itself is a whole other ball of wax. The more intelligent the human, the more effective they are at subverting the instruments of State towards purposes not originally intended. See the Imperial Chinese Meritocracy based on Confucian Examination (also implemented in pre-Shogunate Japan and the similar Yangban system in Korea), look at the immense abuses of power from the Medieval Catholic Church. These are all far too time period specific/feudal society bound. We are not trying to implement a functioning bureaucracy here, we are trying to colonise a planet. Of course in a multi levelled tough system like feudalism a group of like minded educated individuals will elevate themselves and implement a power drive to their benefit, they have hundreds of thousands of serfs to utilise and abuse. Mars has no human surplus so these groups are not really relevant. Likewise im not really sure were you are going with this? The Martians might rebel or something? Against who? as we have gone over their will likely not be a lower class job a machine can do, and after a fashion sure a somewhat comfortable society may emerge and then perhaps, like maybe abuse power or something? It is too far ahead for any of us to say for sure, and all historical presidents are just that historical. I suspect the vast majority of intelligent humans (say, defined as +1 SD in general IQ) will have the same exact reaction. Thus, initially, exponentially evolving intelligences will likely ignore humans that are not in their way (according to their inscrutable purposes) and manipulate/subvert/exterminate human groups that oppose them. And who will be building these intelligences? Where? When? how? Once again this is so far forward in speculation and ability that we have no real way of knowing or saying. Likewise you invalidate your example right away, you say they will ignore us unless we are useful or jeopardise them, so what is the point? We may as well make magic fairies or super gods, seeing as you think that they will exist outside of and beyond our power or effect any way. My point remains, potential super AI aside you may as well argue that once the lebotomax-9000 comes online and removes the dangerous parts of the human brain we will be a peaceful and perfect human society. I for one do not believe in humanity going forward by reduction, if man is to step forward he must do so by free will and power of mind not by masters.Until one day, we realize we are no longer the masters of our own destiny. Here let me cut out the middleman, i'll put a toaster oven on my head and rule by divine technocracy!
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jan 7, 2017 4:43:23 GMT
Direct democracy sounds great, and very workable for a small community, but it probably places an upper limit on the colony size. I don't see why there would be an upper limit for a colony with direct democracy. Decision overload can be avoided by letting local decisions stay local, at various levels. Like, deciding whether to upgrade a sewer system serving Sector A; it can be done using Sector A's resource cache without dipping into Sector B's, so Sector B does not need to be part of the decision, unless Sector A asks B nicely for some resources or offers trade. Colony-wide decisions, like deciding whether to remain neutral in an interplanetary war, would still go out to all colony citizens, whether there are 2,500 or 250 million. If you're worried about cheating in the polls, that can solved by having everyone's voting record public. Standard identity-verifying logins will then suffice for vote authenticity.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 7, 2017 5:05:43 GMT
Indeed. Either we make sure the first true AIs have interests aligned with ours -- and that that alignment remains stable, but not stagnant, we are not the same people who were around 100 years ago -- either we become the AIs. I favor the "become the AI" option. "Power becomes easier to concentrate over time, so eventually everything will be terrible for most if we don't act" is a funny argument to have on a thread mixing transhumanism and politics. The problem with such an optimistic outlook is that human minds are evolutionarily designed (and messily so) for a meat-body environment. A purpose-designed 'operating system' designed to run on optical machinery/quantum computers/unobtanium will be far more efficient than the Uploaded Human. We could shave off bits of our minds that are less compatible, rework our programming, logic pathways, OODA setup, core directives... but is the end result still human? This is even assuming (probably false) that optimizing a human for virtual space is even close to as efficient as designing a purpose-built intelligence from the ground up. Transhumanism is something that should be deeply read into before making *any* assumptions about. Let's call them... Psychomodified uploaded humans, or PMUHs. Anyways, I am 100% transhumanism.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 7, 2017 5:19:11 GMT
Despite flaws, I am pro-transhumanism as well, personally. "Death is a disease - Cure it." -Eclipse Phase. If you're worried about cheating in the polls, that can solved by having everyone's voting record public. *looks at recent American electoral violence*Yeah...
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 7, 2017 5:37:31 GMT
Despite flaws, I am pro-transhumanism as well, personally. "Death is a disease - Cure it." -Eclipse Phase. If you're worried about cheating in the polls, that can solved by having everyone's voting record public. *looks at recent American electoral violence*Yeah... Dusk over America. The Fall of Donald Trump.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Jan 7, 2017 5:57:41 GMT
No offense but America is hardly the ideal modern example democracy, the fact that you do not even have direct representation and still have the madness that is the electoral collage disqualifies it as an example of a direct democracy on top of it's laughably corrupt senate.
|
|