[MG] scientific method

alex at twister11.de alex at twister11.de
Sat Feb 25 17:43:58 EST 2012

What you wrote made me smile :-)

I think what you have is a sci-fi vision, but it is not possible to get all
the data that is needed for "perfect calculation", so you first have to
install it.
You cannot ignore the status quo, if you do, people will feel u violate
their freedom.
Maybe you only want it for the greater good, but how can they be sure? From
their perspective you are just a single human beeing and maybe you are

So before such a vision can become reality, you have to use the status quo
and lead it into a "state" where all that data is gathered.
Who should install all these sensors and who should repair them when they
dont work anymore? more forcing? more commanding?

So eventually after a lot of forcing and commanding to do the right things,
you end up with a fully automated economy ... what should it produce? the
same house, over and over again? how do you decide what is fancy and what

By the way: "  I will not have irrational desire to have fancy staff.  "

Sex is fancy, isnt it? Dressing "hot" is fancy - think about all the
clothes you have to buy and stuff you have to do to seduce someone.... why
not choose the perfect partner from genetic code, let one masturbate and
transmit it to the place in the world where that perfect partner sits... so
you can save the cost to fly over there.... why do football? why do
dancing? why listen to music? why singing songs? why making jokes? - its
all energy inefficient stuff, isnt it?

Maybe it's not and some day we will decode what it is useful for, maybe
some scientific disciplines have already done so and you can fit together
the parts of the puzzle... but at least the fit puzzle - if it exists (i
doubt it) is not mainstream yet.

What is the place of humans in that model you describe? what will they do?
there might be no work left - maybe only a handful of experts are needed
and what there task is might be perfectly calculatable :-) ...so the more
advanced your proposed concept becomes, the less experts are needed,
because eventually the semantic web can decide everything and learn on its
own and eventually it can build robots for all kinds of purposes to do
stuff - in your vision, there seems to be no place for humans at all :-)

you dont seem to go for kybernetically enhanced humans that love to play -
you seem to go for an androids only approach, where things that seem like
they are "fun" at least to some people are only "irrational desire to have
fancy stuff"

...in the end - whats the meaning of life at all? whats the difference
between beeing dead and beeing alive?

Maybe I'm exaggerating things, but somehow i can't exactly see where you
are coming from.

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 10:47 PM, russell perera <russell1q2w3e at yahoo.com>wrote:

> Hi Alex and Michael, ****
> Main Problems – Money, infinite material desire that generate by monetary
> system, lack of understanding about resources management and technology
> inaccessibility due to patents.    ****
> Before I explain housing building challenge I should explain resource
> based economy. ****
> Resource Based Economy:****
> ·         Resource Accounting****
> ·         Dynamic equilibrium****
> ·         Strategic design( technological efficiency)****
> Particular region must calculate their resources, use the dynamic
> equilibrium for resource management for example production of wood must
> relate to planting of trees. Products must produce collaborative way with
> best technology we can use in this moment. ****
> This is a central planning system. Interdisciplinary team (experts)
> involve for planning the cities, industries and farming. Demand or opinion
> influenced by resource of the region and technology of the region. Other
> way to demand is fulfilled with access abundance system. Instead of
> property based system we should have access based system, for example
> instead of own a car we have access to cars at any time. Once we have
> access to houses and build according to resource base economic model then
> our opinion is not use as an infinite demander, as a participant on the
> system, because we know our limitation of resources and technologies. I
> think this is a true participatory democracy. For produce the stuffs of
> course we will use scientific method. Our opinion and interdisciplinary
> team opinion are subject to resources, dynamic equilibrium and technologies
> thus voting to produce stuff will be more rational and unbiased. Access
> abundance may lead to the property ownership obsolete.  ****
> Simplification- Design everything collaborative democratic manner with
> resource base economic model--- Produce the stuffs according to scientific
> method------ access abundance.  ****
> If we have advance super computer, then we can design software for
> resource accounting, dynamic equilibrium, strategic design with that super
> computer to produce best stuffs with minimum human opinion and less
> interdisciplinary team involvement. Actually United States military has
> such a system to produce weapons that not use human opinion.     ****
> Only thing that we have to develop software to unite people, industries
> and professionals that come together to allocate one place to develop a
> prototype city then rest of people can follow. I think direct democratic
> software can play crucial role to overcome this challenge. ****
> Let me explain housing building in resource based economy. I have to
> inform interdisciplinary and central computer that I need a house at
> particular region. Since it is not my property and it is an access based
> method I will not have irrational desire to have fancy staff. The house is
> going to build according to resource based economic model thus I already
> know what resources utilize for build the houses and technological
> parameters. So my opinion is reconciled with experts and supercomputer.
> However in monetary system how we can ever accept experts plan that we
> don’t have any idea of resources and technologies. More over manipulate the
> masses by the advertising lead to over consumption of the finite resources.
> I think opinion of the people and expert’s opinion are never going
> reconcile in the monetary system.     ****
> That is why I advocate participation of the people to understand and
> educate by themselves to restriction of the resources and technologies.
> Then they will have self control and satisfaction that driven by knowledge.
> The participation of people on decision making process would lead to
> psychological tendency that they are not under control by some authority.
> So participation of the people is not a problem, it is a solution. It is a
> necessity until them confident over that system.     ****
> -------****
> Russel ****
> ** **
> ** **
>  ****
>   ****
>       ****
>   ------------------------------
> *From:* "alex at twister11.de" <alex at twister11.de>
> *To:* Metagovernment Project <start at metagovernment.org>
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 25, 2012 3:00:58 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [MG] scientific method
> If the people do not like it, it is because of REASONS :-)
> 1. Could be, they dont like the color
> 2. Could be, because they want to use the building in a way that was not
> anticipated by the experts (a requirement that was not expressed in the
> first place)
> 3. Could be, because people have habits (structure in mind or body (like
> muscle memory) that built over time) and they know its too much change to
> anticipate the "new ways" of doing/living - so they might need smaller
> increments
> 4. It could be, because they don't see or comprehend how they could do all
> the stuff that they did in the past with the new design.
> 5. Could be, that cooking in the kitchen was of intrinsic value for some
> people, they enjoyed cooking food, and maybe the new approach uses a
> replicator like the one used in Star Trek - and they hate it to not be able
> to do their hobby, or maybe they FEAR that they are not needed anymore and
> dont see how they will fit into the new way of doing things
> ...
> ...its lot of potential issues - and everyone has a subjective view on the
> topic, so who knows if experts do not miss a perspective or maybe there are
> conflicting perspectives and experts need to make trade offs, because there
> is no technology known yet that could solve the issue with a win-win
> situation, or maybe in an actual situation there is no one imaginative
> enough to find that solution...
> So in essence it SCIENCE vs ART - Is programming ART? Or is it SCIENCE?
> ...is XY an ART or is it SCIENCE?? - where there is room for Art and there
> normaly is if the issue is not trivial, - and with enough subjective
> perspectives there will be many requirements and thus the issue wont be
> trivial anymore and there will be always room for ART :-)
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Michael Allan <mike at zelea.com> wrote:
> Russel and Alex,
> I think we still need a better understanding of the problem as Russel
> sees it.
> russell perera said:
> > It does depend on the issue. The issue is a demand and then software
> > has to consider their opinion directly. For example the issue is a
> > demand about housing. It is a basic necessity that demand must be
> > addressed. ...
> So when it comes to deciding whether to build housing, the opinion of
> the people who are affected by that decision matters.  However:
> > ... However building the houses is a technical issue that needs
> > scientific method approach.  The issue needs only opinion base
> > resolution and then software has to consider both direct democracy
> > and liquid democracy. For example security or foreign policies that
> > need opinion based decisions.  The issue is atechnical and then we
> > have to use scientific method as a primary method to resolve the
> > problem. Direct democracy should consider if people are well
> > informed and educated on this issue. ...
> When it comes to deciding *how* to build the housing, the opinion of
> the people who are affected might *not* matter, or it might matter
> *less*, or in some qualified way.  I want to understand exactly what
> you mean here.  Please consider this situation:
>  (1) The people who live in a community all agree that housing is the
>      top priority for the infrastructure budget.
>  (2) A detailed plan is drafted by experts.  The experts agree it is
>      a good plan.
>  (3) The people who live in the community do not like the plan.  They
>      agree it is a bad plan.
> Ought the plan (2) to be executed?
> > ... If people don’t have knowledge but still they want to involve,
> > then they can use liquid democracy. For example energy production is
> > highly technical issue that can use scientific method, if the people
> > have knowledge about energy production and then they can participate
> > directly and the people who don’t have knowledge can use liquid
> > democracy. In reality people don’t have knowledge about such highly
> > technical issues but we should have a software program that anybody
> > can participate on the issue as a matter of pure democratic
> > principle.
> You see liquid democracy (transitive delegation) as a solution to a
> problem, or part of a solution.  But before talking about the possible
> solutions, we need a better understanding of the problem.  We wished
> away the problematic fact of decisions being made by the opinion of
> the few and are now in a counterfactual situation where we confront
> the opinion of the many (3).  In this new situation, what exactly is
> the problem we face?
> --
> Michael Allan
> Toronto, +1 416-699-9528
> http://zelea.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Start : a mailing list of the Metagovernment project
> http://www.metagovernment.org/
> Post to the list: Start at metagovernment.org
> Manage subscription:
> http://metagovernment.org/mailman/listinfo/start_metagovernment.org
> --
> ______________________
> Alexander Praetorius
> ICQ - 8201955
> Skype - alexander.praetorius
> Facebook - Alexander Praetorius
> Diaspora / Geraspora - serapath / Alex P
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> _______________________________________________
> Start : a mailing list of the Metagovernment project
> http://www.metagovernment.org/
> Post to the list: Start at metagovernment.org
> Manage subscription:
> http://metagovernment.org/mailman/listinfo/start_metagovernment.org
> _______________________________________________
> Start : a mailing list of the Metagovernment project
> http://www.metagovernment.org/
> Post to the list: Start at metagovernment.org
> Manage subscription:
> http://metagovernment.org/mailman/listinfo/start_metagovernment.org

Alexander Praetorius
ICQ - 8201955
Skype - alexander.praetorius
Facebook - Alexander Praetorius
Diaspora / Geraspora - serapath / Alex P
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://metagovernment.org/pipermail/start_metagovernment.org/attachments/20120225/440f137d/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Start mailing list