AncapFTW Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U0s4_e9y38 I just watched this video on youtube. I thought I'd share it with everyone here. I was also wondering if anyone could think of an actual free-market society in Star Trek. The Ferengi are the closest I can think of, and they are actually a monarchy with a strong, but dictatorially controlled, market. 2
Laforge Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 Marvellous presentation! Thank you very much for sharing this! Yeah the Ferengi may have some fascist elements you can see this in the interactions with the Grand Nagus i think.
Magnetic Synthesizer Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 I barely watched any star trek in my life. I like the Borg. They are legit. ... nvm, I just arrived ot the part where they mention diseregard for NAP. Borg...ya u do dis. Good video, good talk. Thank you, I enjoyed it.
Guest Gee Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 Any advanced species in the Star Trek universe who are multicultural? Not different colours, but same species with differing cultures and values?
Magnetic Synthesizer Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 Great channel, discovered a book and a game! Awesome"! Ah the book Atlas shrug has been spoiled for me... oh no..
AncapFTW Posted September 6, 2015 Author Posted September 6, 2015 Any advanced species in the Star Trek universe who are multicultural? Not different colours, but same species with differing cultures and values? Only if you count the various colonies, usually human, that they come across, or the fact that the Vulcans and Romulans are the same species.
Magnetic Synthesizer Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 Dr. Andrew Bernstein is sometimes called an "Ayn Rand evangelist," Who is that?
Alan C. Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 I thought that his analysis was quite good. He noted that the writers never offer an explanation as to how the society of the future functions without money. In other words, they never explain how the economic calculation problem is solved. They simply take for granted that it is. In more than one clip, characters say that the driving force is no longer the acquisition of wealth, but the desire to better oneself. The problem is that the two are inextricably linked. It's not possible to better yourself if half of your day is spent on procurement and preparation of food. Progress and improved living standards grew at an excruciatingly slow pace in the past because people had to spend most of their waking hours on basic sustenance. Centuries passed with little improvement. The capitalistic order of production made it possible to manufacture labor-saving devices on a mass scale, lifting billions out of grinding poverty. 1
AncapFTW Posted September 7, 2015 Author Posted September 7, 2015 I thought that his analysis was quite good. He noted that the writers never offer an explanation as to how the society of the future functions without money. In other words, they never explain how the economic calculation problem is solved. They simply take for granted that it is. In more than one clip, characters say that the driving force is no longer the acquisition of wealth, but the desire to better oneself. The problem is that the two are inextricably linked. It's not possible to better yourself if half of your day is spent on procurement and preparation of food. Progress and improved living standards grew at an excruciatingly slow pace in the past because people had to spend most of their waking hours on basic sustenance. Centuries passed with little improvement. The capitalistic order of production made it possible to manufacture labor-saving devices on a mass scale, lifting billions out of grinding poverty. The best I can guess is that replicators cover all of the basic needs. It's the ultimate labor saving device. Because rocks can be converted into food, clothing, housing, etc., everything is ridiculously cheap. The only things of real value are those which can't be replicated (High-grade foods are too complex to make properly, Latinum is impossible to produce with it, etc.) Other than that, mass equivalence and power usage are about the only things that matter. It doesn't fix the situation, but it keeps people from starving or freezing when you do run into problems.
Alan C. Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 I think that they took some major creative license with the replicators in order to fill gaps. Even if food, clothing, and engery were in super abundance as to be virtually free to everyone, there is still an incentive problem. Like he asked in the video, why are people expending time and effort to build a starship when they could be doing other things? A question that he didn't ask was how do they know if the materials and labor that went into building a starship could have been put to better use elsewhere? That isn't a question that a central planner can answer. 1
AncapFTW Posted September 7, 2015 Author Posted September 7, 2015 I think that they took some major creative license with the replicators in order to fill gaps. Even if food, clothing, and engery were in super abundance as to be virtually free to everyone, there is still an incentive problem. Like he asked in the video, why are people expending time and effort to build a starship when they could be doing other things? A question that he didn't ask was how do they know if the materials and labor that went into building a starship could have been put to better use elsewhere? That isn't a question that a central planner can answer. Maybe they have a minimum threshold of need for materials, and if you convince them your project meets this minimum, the ruling council put in on a list. They could then give them out first come/first serve basis. It wouldn't be very efficient, but with most raw materials being ridiculously cheap, it might be good enough to function given their tech. You see a bit of this bureaucracy throughout the show, For example, in TNG they meet a scientist that is in desperate need of a rare material for his research. He thinks that the Enterprise is there to verify his need. In DS9, Chief O'Brian needs a part for the station, and gets put on a several month waiting list. Only Nog's trading gets it to him within the week. Then there are the references to certain raw materials being in high demand, such as dilithium, or that they'll want to mine an area with a rare material. I still don't know why people would do the work, though. In some cases they think it's fun, in some they have a sense of "duty", but most of the people in Star fleet seem to be filling a job just so that they can get the benefits of Starfleet service, like training or getting to visit new worlds, etc. Maybe everyone is just indoctrinated from birth to think that they have a duty to do everything they can for society and for others. Basically altruism in the extreme.
Petey789 Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 Stef actually did a podcast on Star Trek. Podcast 213. 1
Laforge Posted September 8, 2015 Posted September 8, 2015 Who wants federation credits when you can have gold pressed latinum?! I'm running low, anybody happen to have some for sale at the moment? http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Latinum
AncapFTW Posted September 10, 2015 Author Posted September 10, 2015 Quark prefers pre-federation plastic. Yesterday I started wondering what various episodes of Star Trek would be like if it was an anarchist society. Starfleet is a combined research/exploration/DRO business that gets its funding from businesses, non-profits, and other DROs. The Federation is essentially a free-trade, peace treaty, and free-trade agreement between various Earth factions and alien governments. How many episodes would need major changes?
Jer Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 The prequel series "Enterprise" included a few bits of free trade where they needed to get parts for the ship and such. I really enjoyed that they actually had to deal with scarcity for once.
Alan C. Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Even in the fictional future with a seemingly super-abundance of just about everything, they still need engineers, doctors, and scientists. However, there is still an incentive problem. Why spend years studying and working instead of going on vacation? In the beginning of Star Trek 2, there is a guy sweeping the floor as Kirk and Spock walk by.
AccuTron Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Even in the fictional future with a seemingly super-abundance of just about everything, they still need engineers, doctors, and scientists... All those occupations could be replaced by automation. A doctor is basically a human database with a range of sensor ability. Engineering is all about math, even checking the ground to be built upon. Scientists do what?...pursue questions, which like themes in novels, are limited in category, just tweak the particulars. Also, by that time in the future, most questions would've been asked already. Software, which is originally guided by all the human insight available, could easily see most questions. And carry out the research without supervision. Even artistic insights could be largely placed into categories, being that a human thought process is accessing data that is commonly available, then sorts it through various geometric or emotional intrigues.
AncapFTW Posted September 16, 2015 Author Posted September 16, 2015 The more I think about it, the more I think that they must purposefully NOT use robots. There was an episode in TNG where someone made a robot to do repairs in irradiated areas and everyone thought it was amazing. For some reason, though, you never see robots on the ships. As for doctors and engineers being replaced with machines:
AncapFTW Posted September 16, 2015 Author Posted September 16, 2015 The prequel series "Enterprise" included a few bits of free trade where they needed to get parts for the ship and such. I really enjoyed that they actually had to deal with scarcity for once. That's part of why I liked Voyager. Replicators were rationed (and the rations used as currency, especially for gambling), and they had to mine, salvage, or trade for the materials they needed.
Crallask Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 All those occupations could be replaced by automation. A doctor is basically a human database with a range of sensor ability. Engineering is all about math, even checking the ground to be built upon. Scientists do what?...pursue questions, which like themes in novels, are limited in category, just tweak the particulars. Also, by that time in the future, most questions would've been asked already. Software, which is originally guided by all the human insight available, could easily see most questions. And carry out the research without supervision. Even artistic insights could be largely placed into categories, being that a human thought process is accessing data that is commonly available, then sorts it through various geometric or emotional intrigues. I actually don't get why there's always this condition of super AI/Computer intellect dominating society and making everything else obsolete. I mean, wouldn't the eventual goal be to merge what we now call flesh based organisms and AI into even higher super entities which can organize faster than either separate? Wouldn't the highest being end up being some sort of goo-like creature made of highly engineered nano machines that can reorganize and grow almost indefinitely? Wouldn't such creatures want more than one of themselves to ensure there are no errors being overlooked and etc? I think we'd have a condition of seeing fields and specialists we have today only more focused and efficient. I'm sure you could find a way to recreate new brain patterns with IQs in the tens of thousands, hell, maybe tens of trillions at some point.
Jer Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 All those occupations could be replaced by automation. A doctor is basically a human database with a range of sensor ability. Engineering is all about math, even checking the ground to be built upon. Scientists do what?...pursue questions, which like themes in novels, are limited in category, just tweak the particulars. Also, by that time in the future, most questions would've been asked already. Software, which is originally guided by all the human insight available, could easily see most questions. And carry out the research without supervision. Even artistic insights could be largely placed into categories, being that a human thought process is accessing data that is commonly available, then sorts it through various geometric or emotional intrigues. Did you watch the video? He brought up some really good questions, one of which you left out of Alan's post when you quoted. Why would anybody sweep the floor? Why would anybody ride a scooter when they could have a starship? Who would build the automated systems and maintain them?
AccuTron Posted September 18, 2015 Posted September 18, 2015 I actually don't get why there's always this condition of super AI/Computer intellect dominating society and making everything else obsolete. >>In the first case, it makes for entertainment drama, and sets up psychological metaphors. I also see it as an extension of automation in general. Dominating society, maybe not a given, but surely having big effects...see what the future will hold for $15/hr burger flipping and employment. I mean, wouldn't the eventual goal be to merge what we now call flesh based organisms and AI into even higher super entities which can organize faster than either separate? >>B..b..b...b.. Wouldn't the highest being end up being some sort of goo-like creature made of highly engineered nano machines that can reorganize and grow almost indefinitely? >>B..B..BORG! Wouldn't such creatures want more than one of themselves to ensure there are no errors being overlooked and etc? >>> TEAM BORG! I think we'd have a condition of seeing fields and specialists we have today only more focused and efficient. I'm sure you could find a way to recreate new brain patterns with IQs in the tens of thousands, hell, maybe tens of trillions at some point. The Star Trek humans are not evolved or genetically reengineered (at least not to that extent). To have an IQ like that...avoiding for the moment the definition...troublemaking emotions would have to be vastly curtailed, and that is no longer a human species, however the individual.
AccuTron Posted September 18, 2015 Posted September 18, 2015 Did you watch the video? He brought up some really good questions, one of which you left out of Alan's post when you quoted. Why would anybody sweep the floor? Why would anybody ride a scooter when they could have a starship? Who would build the automated systems and maintain them? I did watch the video, and there's a lot going on, true. Why would anyone sweep the floor? I forget if that was in an episode. Possible answers: Somebody broke the Roomba. They are only capable of sweeping, for some brain reason. They are disgusted with high falutin' thinkers and it's meditative, and they occasionally find futuristic paper clips. It gives them something to do with a little exercise, since everything else is automated, and there's a line at the holodeck. They can eavesdrop. AS to scooter vs. starship: Try to get some private time with a starship. Try to take a starship into a forest. Try to feel the breeze in your face with a starship. Maybe someone is NOT an ego case. Who would build/maintain systems?: Who builds cars more and more--machines. Yes it sure seems like a lot of humans on those starships under construction, but as a fraction of the population, it must be tiny. I note this video of small drones assembling something: Two Drones Build A Working Rope Bridge [VIDEO]
GailG Posted September 27, 2015 Posted September 27, 2015 The video makes some provably false assumptions. Just start with money being necessary to human motivation. It’s not. The three tested and testable pillars of motivation are autonomy (the right to think for yourself and choose a life’s purpose), master (getting better at what you love to do), and using your abilities to be of service to something greater than yourself. The carrot and the stick method the video encourages is a known fail for anything but the most rudimentary of work, like digging holes or other menial labor. The evidence PROVES that the more money is paid, the poorer the job is done.The most successful cultures did not use money or barter. Their social glue was the healthiness of their relationships. The American Indians were such cultures that used no money and knew no crime, hunger, domestic violence, child abuse, child abandonment, mental illnesses, and a host of social ills that we have today. All these cultures were full equality, democracy by consensus, which is even better than the empire that became an extremely powerful central government. It was therefore still the domination politics that is harming us so much.The Iroquois gave up their warring ways that included cannibalism in order to start The Great Peace. Perhaps we should rethink our assumptions and realign them with facts. The carrot and stick approach is an epic fail and has been proven over and over and over again. You don't need free market trade to keep a culture growing. You need good relationships. 1 1
Alan C. Posted October 12, 2015 Posted October 12, 2015 Can Star Trek's world with no money work? There was a panel at the NY Comic Con which included Paul Krugman. So far, no video on YouTube.
Alan C. Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Star Trek Is Wrong: There Will Always Be Scarcity Why can't everyone have their own starship?
The Sage of Main Street Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 I thought that his analysis was quite good. He noted that the writers never offer an explanation as to how the society of the future functions without money. In other words, they never explain how the economic calculation problem is solved. They simply take for granted that it is. In more than one clip, characters say that the driving force is no longer the acquisition of wealth, but the desire to better oneself. The problem is that the two are inextricably linked. It's not possible to better yourself if half of your day is spent on procurement and preparation of food. Progress and improved living standards grew at an excruciatingly slow pace in the past because people had to spend most of their waking hours on basic sustenance. Centuries passed with little improvement. The capitalistic order of production made it possible to manufacture labor-saving devices on a mass scale, lifting billions out of grinding poverty. Opportunity Knocks With a Club to the Head Capital was around for thousands of years without any advances in lifestyle. Then science came along. Seizing this opportunity, mindless predatory plutocrats from the old regime emasculated and enslaved scientists, appropriated science for themselves, and controlled thought in order to give their parasite order the credit for all modern progress.
Alan C. Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 Capital was around for thousands of years without any advances in lifestyle. Then science came along. Advances require private property and free exchange. Science has been around for thousands of years, but people are reluctant to renounce their superstition and ignorance.
Recommended Posts