I spy with my little eye,
the answer to all your problems.
>>71199300
Is this some kind of "New Auschwitz"?
>>71199300
I spot with my little eye a communist hell hole.
>>71199451
without a government* where you're empowered to make your own choices*
>>71199551
can i rape and pillage freely though?
>>71199300
Needs to be gray and more run down with piles of trash from immigrants, unless that is the gated part where party leaders live.
>>71199671
with everything provided, I can see why there would be no need to pillage.*
clearly, if there is a constant threat, relocate them elsewhere, whether in the wild or not*
>>71199782
so..
yes?
>>71199551
>without a government
literally impossible fantasy bullshit
>>71199986
What you need to acquire for it to work is something called "self-government".
>>71199300
https://www.thevenusproject.com/
Another Soviet Hellhole "idea."
Note the design of OPs pic-related. Autistic, toddler-level understanding of design for a city that occurs on the surface of a planet. Located at any latitude above or below about 30 degrees North/South of the equator, it's designed to block incoming sunlight instead of capture and use it efficiently.
Pot-smoking libertarians and moron hippie types that barely comprehend enough high school education to graduate think this is "awesome" and "the Answer."
In reality, look up any Soviet slumrise concentration center for worker drones and you get a clear understanding of how "awesome" it would be to live in a hell like this.
I did, in fact, live in one of those Soviet slumrise designed communities. After the first three months or so you are suicidal and all hope of having a life is crushed out of existence in the core of your soul. After a year you begin to delude yourself into thinking "this isn't so bad." Get up every morning, work a pointless job, drink a couple bottles of vodka every night to fill the empty void in your soul.
Not so bad. Much superior to all other rest of world.
Until you actually get out into the rest of the world, and you want to kill yourself rather than go back.
>>71200631
>Get up every morning, work a pointless job, drink a couple bottles of vodka every night to fill the empty void in your soul.
You clearly don't know anything about the project to even include "work a pointless job" in your argument as a comparison. Maybe, just maybe it's the effect of causality, whereby the fundamental things like having to get up every morning doing something you absolutely hate /causes/ the effects which follow from that.
>>71199300
I've spotted an aerial view of the building site for Venus Project.
Looks damn impressive, OP.
>>71199300
Sanic did it better in his Amerilard comics.
>>71199300
Jacques Fresco is a Jew.
>>71199300
What am I looking at
panopticon
>>71199300
Albania apparently built one already and it hasn't worked that well for them, if their current society is anything to go by.
>>71199782
I just wanna chop off your foot and leave you in the woods to die, don't care about that shit.
>>71199300
A novel idea of a resource based economy. It is highly possible. Billions will need to die and people will need to STEM major. Personally, this would be Utopia to me. Too bad niggers still wouldn't thrive in a resource based economy.
>>71200631
The idea is to have robots do all the menial tasks while humans move and learn efficiently and we progress technologically in a safe and stable environment you mong.
>>71199300
Good luck with that when you have minorities fucking your shit up. And keep downplaying the proven effects of genetics on behavior, while overstating the effects of the environment on human behavior.
>>71199986
you should look up medieval Iceland and Kowloon city block. Those are instances where people have been running reasonable lives without government. You just need a strong monolithic culture to bind individuals together in one society.
>>71200917
That is looking impressive, I will give you that. Those circles look attractive. Nobody is going to deny that city planning is a positive thing. Unfortunately, it will be ruined when free riders enter your system.
Wipe out 99.99 percent of the human race first. Then, we can talk about this commie utopia
>>71200631
If you lived in a bad town it probably sucked, I hate socialism/ communism but I have fond memories of that sort of comfy living.
>>71201044
Venus project
>>71204386
More specifically, a Resource Based Economy.
>>71204489
That's all economies.
I think you mean a "post scarcity economy", which is a Star Trek pipe dream.
>>71204686
The name of the actual design, both socio-economic and physical infrastructure, is called Resource Based Economy. It centres itself around using and producing resources appropriately by the demand of the people, and melting down, separating and returning the materials when they break to be reproduced again. Your "economies" don't do this. It is the smartest, most efficient way to live. Why people refuse simplicity and efficiency makes me scratch my head.
>>71204974
>It centres itself around using and producing resources appropriately by the demand of the people, and melting down, separating and returning the materials when they break to be reproduced again. Your "economies" don't do this.
Yes they do.
>>71205058
Care to make a trip to a landfill? And simply place an object you'd like to return onto a conveyor belt to disassemble all the parts, and add the pure materials to their bulk masses instead of hiring 1000 miserable people to do the job for you?
"Right..", know what the thing at hand is about before you speak.
>>71205195
Ever been to a scrap yard? What do they do?
Even the dirties of landfill sites don't just leave things to rot if they can get some use out of it (and even the rotting is made use of these days, with bioreactors producing methane and compost)...
>>71205439
Bet you didn't read the rest of my post because your response would have evolved a stretch further.
>>71205555
This happens by magic I assume?
>>71199300
>city state without borders and police/military
>what can go wrong?
>>71205661
If we want it true or not. The nature of mankind can't be changed over night
>>71205636
No, it happens by the practicality of how far technology can go and could be used which current infrastructure doesn't get /anywhere/ close because money intervenes its progress rather than personal interest (which doesn't expect reward for deed). You're so engrained in ideas "set in stone" that you really cannot imagine a world without money or reigning government, can you? You need reward for every good thing you do, right? Isn't the reward for your effort a society and infrastructure that actually works to keep alive your next generation? I bet you anything if you saw a group of 100,000 people living in this environment, together as a group, and you saw first hand how people could live, you would be motivated to change your ways.
>>71206010
>No, it happens by the practicality of how far technology can go
That's just "magic" with more hand waving m8. In reality there is still going to be a load of people picking through your shit for useful stuff.
>>71205735
"Nature of mankind" philosophers love to wank over is simply genetics.
And it's not something that can changed, ever.
Especially when the very same philosophers condemn genetic human engineering and eugenics.
May the machinegod save us from ourselves, for we are doomed if we keep governing ourselves.
>>71206086
Why do you always quote the first thing I say? Do you not even read the rest? This is why you are so clueless. You don't listen to anybody. You know absolutely nothing about this.
It is not magic. It is truly possible if you create a technological organism that can do these tasks for you. Just like how we can transport an object from point A to point B along a conveyor belt, we can transport an object from the state of its piece's together to a pure separation by material.
If there is an abundance of resources available, nobody will have an incentive to steal. Nobody will have an incentive to get "addicted to spending and creating" because the damaging psychological effects of a monetary system would not be in effect.
If there's a button, always working, that says "Dispense me a sandwich", never will you find someone stealing food from another's house. There's no reason to.
Do you understand yet?
>>71206395
>Why do you always quote the first thing I say? Do you not even read the rest?
I do, but when you start from a false premise and then expand off into pretentious nonsense, that's all that's required.
>>71206451
It's not a false premise. It just doesn't align with your socially-engrained ideals.
You are so stupid that you block out incoming ideas the moment you suspect that it doesn't align with your beliefs. Maybe if you give people the chance to explain things a bit, you might come to understand reasoning a bit better (because you are clearly lacking it right now; its appalling) and maybe for the first time in your life you can admit you were wrong. Oh, but you hate admitting fault, so to preserve your ego, forget it.
>>71206277
Thats worng. Bonobos for example evolved into a more peaceful society. And it's been observed that shimpanze clans get more peaceful when the lead troublemakers are taken out
>>71206662
>It's not a false premise.
Yes it is, that premise being that robots will do all the work with the "how" being left to "magic".
Then you go off on one saying "You just don't get it maaaaan, it's going to give us everything we ever wanted (somehow)! There'll be no crime!"
Your utopianism is as bad as the commies.
>>71206395
What about people with kleptomania ?
What about rapists ?
Sadists ?
Psychopaths ?
What about foreign invasion ?
Immigrants ? Can you maintenance growth of output ?
Remember, you have no police, no army, no governing body, and probably no weapons since you sound like a huge hippie believing in the blank state hypothesis.
You are utterly delusional.
>>71199986
>You need a government to get along in your own house.
Governments are actually needed in the minority of of interactions. And most of them would be self-correcting if the government didn't get involved at all.
>>71200027
>"self-government"
literally impossible fantasy bullshit
>>71206835
You're asking "how" a procedure to disassemble an object into parts of same composition my melting them together can be done? Just because the technology doesn't exist at the moment, what on earth in your delicate head makes you assume that it's "magic"?
Here's an example:
Heat the entire device to temperature that would first melt off the plastic, and "sieving" it through, and the same for metal and all other materials. How is this magic?
The burden on us is unintelligent people like you. You are what's stopping progress. It's true, we really are as weak as our weakest link.
>>71203334
>That is looking impressive, I will give you that.
That's burning man you fucktard
>>71199300
>utopian top-down designs
>in 2016
its one of those times where it makes sense to remind everyone of the current year.
>>71206946
Would it not be interesting to see how the human psychology shifts when the very thing that hasn't changed once in human history (money/trade-offs being in effect) and the horrendous psychological effects it may have on the people (greed, competition, and other traumas) is removed?
>>71206751
Bonobos have degeneracy inbred indeed, as in it's genetic. Glad you agree.
For the chimps, regression to the mean is a huge force that require to be fought by a huge selective pressure, generations after generations. Your agressive males would emerge at the next generation. Repeat the process long enough though, and yes, you'd have peaceful chimp clans ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Domesticated_Red_Fox#Initial_experimentation ).
>>71207088
>You're asking "how" a procedure to disassemble an object into parts of same composition my melting them together can be done? Just because the technology doesn't exist at the moment, what on earth in your delicate head makes you assume that it's "magic"?
If you can't describe the process beyond "conveyor belts", "technological organisms", and "undefined general technology" then what you are talking about is fucking magic m8.
>>71207270
It's as interesting as asking what would happen if your mother stopped sucking all the dicks.
It will never leave the realm of thought experiments since it's impossible to implement in real life.
>>71207274
Yes, I was mearly disagreeing with your statement that this nature could never be changed
>>71207088
Every "answer" you've posted in this thread has either been 1) incomprehensible babble or 2) "then magic happens" in the form of meme buzzword.
I think Canuckaduh has gotten into the free weed supply. Seems like it's pretty dank, too.
>>71207337
Holy smokes, you really are clueless!
The technology is something even you should be able to get an idea about.
If you read a couple lines further, you'd see that I cared enough to explain myself. How would you ever know this? It's not like you read anyway. You just said if you start with a false premise, you stop reading. Well, I went on to explain the very thing you asked about, but you were too fucking stupid to reach it.
>Here's an example:
Heat the entire device to temperature that would first melt off the plastic, and "sieving" it through, and the same for metal and all other materials.
Even a youtube channel that aims to show you how to do things yourself gives you a primitive understanding of how to extract materials from objects.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2epi6xRFKFE
Don't give me your progress-retarding bullshit. You're an idiot and you know it.
>>71207408
It cannot be changed in human without eugenics laws, very harsh, and good ones.
And while the argument is gay, "who decide what traits are good" is a very valid one.
We may see it implemented on its own through the designer baby though, but then i don't think behavioural traits would be prioritised over physical and mental traits.
We could even see an emergence of whole generations of sociopaths, since competition is easier when you don't feel guilt and can backstab everyone.
>>71207535
>incomprehensible babble
Would you ever suspect that this says more about your ability to understand ideas than my ability to convey them?
I'm writing tangibly. The burden is on you to understand it.
Please see "Personal Incredulity" in pic related.
>>71199300
>city has the diameter of certain WOMD
How convenient, a false flag waiting to happen
>>71207712
>tangibly
That's some subtle bait.
>>71203334
Kowloon had a government though, it was a government composed of mob bosses and triads. They also still required the HK government to lay down waterpipes for them and later on HK police even patrolled the city to keep the triad rule in check.
>>71207562
>Heat the entire device to temperature that would first melt off the plastic, and "sieving" it through, and the same for metal and all other materials.
How are you separating the various plastics from this soup? How are you ensuring purity? What do you do about the thermosets like Bakelite?
>>71199300
Looks like the Imperial City in Oblivion
>>71207754
Tangibly in the sense that not only is it understandable, but you can literally observe the technology with your senses if it was made. And to say that it is "magic" I think is the greatest bait to human progress is the limitation of your poor mind to understand this as well as the confidence of God you have in your ideas of -isms that, as history has already shown, don't work.
>>71203334
Ron Paul city.
>>71208015
You're cracked m8.
>>71203334
Who the hell would want to live in that 3rd world shithole
>libertardians
>>71203334
This is such a neat experiment.
I'm on my laptop and lost my 4chan folder since the old one fucked up, thanks for getting this back in my folder.
>>71207850
>How are you ensuring purity?
Do you not know about all the technologies and procedures today that purify materials? Do you know that you can obtain a mass of zinc or any other element from a solution by well-defined steps that you can even do in first-year chem labs?
Your persisting ignorance is what I think makes you cracked. All the information is out there, and you'd rather do nothing to learn about them and stay with well-outdated and even obsolete ideas. Technology is moving quickly. It has the ability to do everything for us in a long and complicated procedure. Complication doesn't mean impossilbility. It just means a lot of work is to be done to get there. Catch up with your learning of science and technology or die out.
>>71208312
>Do you not know about all the technologies and procedures today that purify materials? Do you know that you can obtain a mass of zinc or any other element from a solution by well-defined steps that you can even do in first-year chem labs?
You're still hand waving. Define them for your process.
>>71208388
>These processes clearly exist.
>You demand that someone rube on 4chan explain them to you in a single post or you won't accept them in an argument.
Kill yourself, faggot.
>>71208514
>He doesn't need to explain himself. You putting your rubbish on a conveyor belt and having it come out the other end as fully formed products is self evident!
No, you.
Is this the retarded OP thread? I heard a lot about him.
>>71208677
>It really is self evident.
>Double down on fagging it up.
No. Fucking really. Kill yourself.
>>71208388
For the sake of argument, sure:
A laptop.
We can say that it is made from plastic, metal, and even sulfuric sheets (chip bases).
Experimentation might render this approach ineffective (but all learning so done by trial and error), but it might be better to start the heat lower and work your way up. The lowest melting point of these materials is plastic. So we would raise the temperature to a point where the plastic melts off like liquid. The container that catches the plastic will contain it.
Suppose that this plastic is not pure. If the non-plastic residue has an electric charge, you can actually extract it from the material by using methods that can take advantage of this effect (by bringing near an opposite charge) of sieving it through a charge to purify it.
Now, sulfur might be next. Apply the same method to this, and do the same procedure to remove impurities, and take the finished mass to the bulk mass of sulfur you have.
Then metal. See the video above.
If you've watched "How it's made" you get a nice view of how complicated technology can be to outdo human labor.
>>71208795
Well then maybe you can give a workable process for it. You may just be saving the world...
Wow so much shitposting in this thread. And none of it by Australians
>>71208817
>Experimentation might render this approach ineffective (but all learning so done by trial and error), but it might be better to start the heat lower and work your way up. The lowest melting point of these materials is plastic. So we would raise the temperature to a point where the plastic melts off like liquid. The container that catches the plastic will contain it.
So fractional distillation then? An interesting idea, but doesn't work for things that burn rather than melt (like computer chips), the burning of which would contaminate your product.
>Suppose that this plastic is not pure. If the non-plastic residue has an electric charge, you can actually extract it from the material by using methods that can take advantage of this effect (by bringing near an opposite charge) of sieving it through a charge to purify it.
That's a big if, the problem being described by yourself. Not all are. Also in this soup of various different materials (some aren't even plastic) you now have an electrically charged soup of various plastics and metal. Still a long way from a product.
>Now, sulfur might be next. Apply the same method to this, and do the same procedure to remove impurities, and take the finished mass to the bulk mass of sulfur you have.
You are applying these chemical process to all at once. Usually when doing these things you are looking for ONE product, and don't care about the rest. Your purification process will affect the subsequent products you are trying to distil.
>If you've watched "How it's made" you get a nice view of how complicated technology can be to outdo human labor.
If you've read between the lines, you might have twigged to the fact that I know how quite a lot of things are made.
>>71209238
>but doesn't work for things that burn rather than melt (like computer chips), the burning of which would contaminate your product.
Do you even read what you say? EVERYTHING has a melting point. All matter does. Do you not know about states of matter?
I think instead of arguing with you, I'll do what you have done this entire thread and stop reading. You've made it clear as crystal that you don't have a fucking clue what I'm telling you. ">Not all are". Are you that NOT creative that you can't think of an idea of what to do if that was not that case? Does everything need to be spoonfed to you as a way to make you stop using your own brain?
Anything is possible, and frankly, everything that I'm telling you is already being done.
Lessoned to be learned is this: The people who oppose this project know absolutely squat about it and everything else in life. They cloak behind a false sense of knowledge to keep themselves ignorant and from using their heads.
I
>>71209448
>EVERYTHING has a melting point.
Try melting paper. See what comes out the other end.
>I think instead of arguing with you, I'll do what you have done this entire thread and stop reading. You've made it clear as crystal that you don't have a fucking clue what I'm telling you. ">Not all are". Are you that NOT creative that you can't think of an idea of what to do if that was not that case? Does everything need to be spoonfed to you as a way to make you stop using your own brain?
>Anything is possible, and frankly, everything that I'm telling you is already being done.
>Lessoned to be learned is this: The people who oppose this project know absolutely squat about it and everything else in life. They cloak behind a false sense of knowledge to keep themselves ignorant and from using their heads.
OK brainiac. You go back to your weed.
>>71209448
>>71208817
I find it weird that someone as articulate as you could be so ignorant
Quintessentially Canadian, I guess. Fancy burgers
>>71209675
Let me google that for you. Scientists have already figured out.
http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae531.cfm
>No in the sense that a material must maintain an identical chemical makeup and then change from one phase to another, not all solids have a melting point.
>Many materials, for example paper, will begin having chemical reactions with surrounding materials as temperature increases, before a phase change, as paper will burst into flame (by combining with atmospheric oxygen) at about 450 degrees F. Even in a vacuum, many materials will begin chemical decomposition before they can change phase. I would expect a complex mixture of large organic molecules like wood to undergo various catabolic reactions as first macromolecules and then smaller molecules gained enough activation energy to break down into simpler, less energetic (i.e. lower enthalpy) constituents, long before these molecules were able to change phase.
Chemical reactions are happening in the paper, but if you extracted all the pure elements from that paper into a mass, and then heated up those masses, you'd see a liquid. I cannot believe you are this stupid. I refuse to believe it.
>>71209968
If you were to go all the way and actually melt paper, what you would get at the other end is not something we can put in a machine to form back into paper.
(well, I suppose you could use it as fertiliser to grow trees and then turn THAT into paper, but still.)
>>71209968
>Chemical reactions are happening in the paper, but if you extracted all the pure elements from that paper into a mass, and then heated up those masses, you'd see a liquid. I cannot believe you are this stupid. I refuse to believe it.
"If you wish to recycle paper, you must first recycle the table of elements" -Garl Saggan :D
>>71207562
>The technology is something even you should be able to get an idea about.
A few unfortunate facts:
-Melting plastics degrades molecular bonds. It can no longer be used for the same purpose as before.
-Melting metal takes large amounts of energy. Modern foundries could not work without coal as an energy source.
-These are things we already do. Automating the sorting of garbage will not fundamentally change how physics and chemistry works.
>>71210110
Two things I want to say to this:
1) Paper is already being recycled without breaking down into its primary elements. Why heat it up when you can just throw it into water, stir it up to break apart (watch what happens when you put paper in water and stir the paper. It's a beautiful thing), and extract the ink from the material by similar methods. Using deckle-like technology, you can take this soup of "liquified" paper and create new paper.
2) Hence, if there is an easier way, go for it, as is the entire idea behind a "Resource Based Economy". Paper seems to be efficient and a lot of it seems to be needed, so because trees are more abundant and reproduce-able, it might be better to use paper than sheets of sulfur for paper. :)
>>71210188
Then find new material or find a way to re-strengthen the bonds. if the latter is not possible, do the former. "Efficiency" is what a RBE is about.
Please see this video to counterargue your second point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2epi6xRFKFE
>>71210330
>Why heat it up when you can just throw it into water,
Because you just suggested heating a product up to melt the paper off, quite literally
It's funny watching you come up with new groundbreaking methods on the go
>>71210464
Unless paper is being used like wire in a system, why not extract paper from a body first before making it undergo heat? Does every step need to be spoonfed to you?
>>71208817
>plastic is not pure
Also... how to separate polyethylene terephthalate from polyvinyl chloride and polypropylene from polystyrene. Mixing produces unusably low quality of plastic. Note also that only monomers can be melted, polymers do not work like this.
>>71210611
>why not extract paper from a body first before making it undergo heat?
Wasn't your whole point automation?
Now it's "automation, but tear all the paper out first"?
>>71210631
Great, then in your field of expertise, you can use your knowledge to come up with ways to extract impurities from liquid plastic to contribute to the development of an RBE! If there were a few people contributing to this field and needed more, I'd start hitting the books to catch up with you and develop a way. Just don't expect reward though, it's for the greater good!
>>71210699
Why do humans have to be the ones to extract the paper?
>>71209154
>Wow so much shitposting in this thread. And none of it by Australians
In the magical land of /pol/ every Leaf can be a shitposting king.
>>71210789
Do you have a system that automatically tears paper and stickers and other non-meltable material out of complex machines in mind?
>>71209968
>pure elements
Try making stuff from pure elements! Extensive research was made into this a long time ago. It was called alchemy.
No but seriously, you cannot make plastic from pure elements. Perhaps some sci-fi tech in the future could do it. But not now. Perhaps during our lifetime, but requiring e few nuclear power plants to power the process.
>>71210739
>This is my field of expertise and what you're saying could be used as a method does not exist
>>Great! So come up with one!
lol
try to come up with a method to fix your mental illness
>>71210789
Sure, let's leave it and any other inconsistence for God-computer to decide upon!
https://youtu.be/gPuU8Pq9D3Q
>>71210842
If robots are already being made to respond to sensory stimuli, with effort you can also develop a technology that can respond to the stimuli of any material.
If you want to be even more efficient, don't manufacture items with stickers on products in a RBE. The process of developing something efficient is doing what I'm doing now: going through many wrong ideas to finally come up with one that works. Can you give me some examples of objects where the person sending an object to be disassembled can't remove the paper themselves and put it into another compartment?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCMVnd64cJQ
>>71210739
To get as pure a plastic as possible in a recycling process you have to, only put ONE type of plastic into the process and make sure it is clean and that there is no extra stuff in there. The resulting recycled plastic will still not be the same quality as the input products. Sorry.
>>71210949
Right, so paper, until then, is not meltable but hypothetically it could be if the elements were separated into their respective pure masses.
That isn't to say that you can't melt plastic though. I'm at a loss to explain why you need me to tell you this when you know full well an elaborate system that adapts to the physical environment is possible and just needs work to get there.
The Venus Project is headed by a marxist JEW from Floirda
>>71211088
>you can also develop
So it doesn't exist.
So what you're saying is a theory and not already possible. You claimed otherwise before.
>The process of developing something efficient is doing what I'm doing now:
No, you're just doing mental gymnastics and none of the things you're "developing" exist and it's doubtful many of them CAN exist.
>going through many wrong ideas to finally come up with one that works.
No, you're just going through many wrong ideas because you can't actually check wether they're wrong because you're not trained or educated or have professional experience in anything.
>Can you give me some examples of objects where the person sending an object to be disassembled can't remove the paper themselves and put it into another compartment?
I could, but is this relevant? You talked about fully automating the process.
>>71211162
Great. Then by the time it's not considered useful, maybe enough time has elapsed that the trees would have grown to replenish it, and the reside can be used for something else, such as another form of paper. ;)
>>71211255
Holy shit you think it's easy to split things into their constituent elements? You think this wouldn't take a shit load of energy?
How you going to do this?
>>71211327
You're now suggesting to fuck recycling, just trash it or try to come up with better stuff instead.
Doesn't that exist already and is called capitalism?
>>71199300
Walls?
>>71211284
He is pretty much harmless. The only support his project will ever receive is from the kind of people who wouldn't lift a finger to do anything as long as there are others who *might* be willing to do their job for them.
Which is also a good illustration as to why Venus Project is nothing more than a pipedream.
>>71199300
these things always fail to factor-in that kikes and niggers exist
>>71211316
>So what you're saying is a theory and not already possible. You claimed otherwise before.
The only thing impeding progress is money. The technology is definitely doable. This is from a programmer who is learning Assembly x86 and will be putting code into a microprocessor to get gears to respond to its output. It is just so complicated in structure that a lot of time and money, and perhaps further research (but that isnt to say that it isn't possible), would be needed to get there. If people could readily delve into their fields of interest without the burden of working a 9-5 job and doing exams when you're not ready (and without getting enough hands-on learning), and without the burden of money, you would know enough to be able to contribute enough.
>No, you're just doing mental gymnastics and none of the things you're "developing" exist and it's doubtful many of them CAN exist.
You said it yourself. It /is/ mental gymnastics. You have to work out your brain to come up with solutions. First ideas are usually wrong. If it is wrong, you see what about it was wrong, and fix that part was wrong until it works, or just start over and try something new.
>>71211327
Sounds cool. Bioplastics is a large area of research at the moment. The problems are of course obvious. Plastic from fossil hydrocarbons are molecularly different from bioplastics that always have shorter molecular chains. Bioblastics cannot be used in the same applications as other plastics can. I don't see how this will change in the future.
>>71199300
Ah Venus project, babbys first mini red pill. Don't worry OP soon you'll graduate to libertarianism or national socialism.
>>71211458
If it degrades through each cycle, why not use the material that cannot be used as regular plastic for something else? This is what is meant behind the term "efficiency" which a RBE totally takes advantage of.
>>71211801
>or something else
Yes. This is what is done today.
>>71211438
Umm, how do you think every other element was moulded to shape the parts of our technology today? Hello? What's in that head of yours?
>>71211634
No, the laws of reality impede "progress". Case in point: your hour-long retarded discussion about whether or not you can melt paper.
>>71211846
Great! Now let automation take care of the entire process for you. No more useless jobs! More about what interests me without having to worry about what pleases an employer by whether or not something generates enough revenue!
>>71211634
>The only thing impeding progress is money.
> The technology is definitely doable.
Do you have a single source supporting these claims for the specific examples you've given?
>This is from a programmer who is learning Assembly x86
>This is from a programmer who is learning Assembly x86
>This is from a programmer who is learning Assembly x86
>This is from a programmer who is learning Assembly x86
>This is from a programmer who is learning Assembly x86
> It is just so complicated in structure
kek
You're actually blind to how retarded you are huh? That's something a NEET with a book can learn on his own time.
>It /is/ mental gymnastics. You have to work out your brain to come up with solutions.
So then why are you just spouting random ideas instead of actually putting them to the test?
Because you can't.
If you can't validate the ideas you have, why spout them?
You're essentially saying
>humans can live on the sun with the proper tech
and when asked to elaborate or give validity to the claim you say
>The proper people will figure it out. I'm the one doing the brainwork here, though!
Ignoring that it's probably entirely possible and even if possible, probably just not worth it.
>>71211952
>your hour-long retarded discussion about whether or not you can melt paper.
Hour long discussion of whether or not I can melt paper? Someone brought it up, and I simply responded a hypothetical that could happen as well as the alternative of just drowning all paper in water and stirring to break apart the delicate fibres of paper and to make it into new paper...
>>71211863
There is a big difference between reusing stuff like metal and reusing composites.
>>71211968
>Vast amounts of plastic get turned into useless shit
>"I'm sure they'll be something we can use it for"
>"Automation will make it fine!"
Who builds and maintain the robots? Who organizes the processes? Who embarks upon expansion in order to cope with population growth?
Your answer is obviously either "the state", or "the community", which is a vague way of saying "the state". Do they tax to maintain it? Or does this perfect state just build vast networks of infrastructure for free? Will the people who run this network be completely uncorrectable, unwilling to use their power for corruption?
Were you dropped on your head as a baby?
>>71211968
Is this where you drift into intentional satire to sell the idea that you've been pretending to be retarded all along?
>>71211968
I don't understand you now.
Automation is already profitable. Capitalism is automating everything that moves.
Recycling is already done, but as recycled plastic is of lower quality in cannot be used in the same applications as before. New fossil oil is needed for the high quality plastic.
It's just socialism that treats technology like magic. Luckily for all of us there's no credibility in the movement because they treat technology like magic, and the people behind do nothing but draw pictures of circular cities and what they think a hover car might look like.
>>71212179
>Who builds and maintain the robots?
Not him, but maintenance robots
It's not like your entire robot stock has to be working at all times and in danger of suffering a malfunction
>>71212097
>Do you have a single source supporting these claims for the specific examples you've given?
No, because I haven't heard of anyone that has really worked on it. But if I was given enough time for trial-and-error work, I could. But that would mean I have to customize each and every part manually to not flatten my wallet because there would be the technology available to make it for me readily.
>It is just so complicated in structure
By that I meant the elaborate technology and each and every constituent that serves a purpose in it. Misunderstanding, as usual.
>humans can live on the sun with the proper tech
The Sun's surface is 10 million degrees. Metal melts at no greater than the 4 digit numbers. It is not possible to live on the sun, because even if we were to use metal, its P orbitals would transfer electrons that have captured this energy everywhere. Metals are great conductors so the burden is once again on you for being more ignorant than I am.
>The proper people will figure it out. I'm the one doing the brainwork here, though!
I can't do everything, neither can you. All you need is basic understanding of limitations. The "proper people" are those willing to commit to that field while I commit to mine to help out in a different way.
>>71212196
The /entire/ process. So that all you have to do is put the item some point within walking distance and press a button to relay it elsewhere and to the disassembling.
>>71211968
>No more useless jobs! More about what interests me without having to worry about what pleases an employer by whether or not something generates enough revenue!
Advances in technologies have been decreasing amount of manual activities for decades now and the difference it made only translates into more workload.
For instance, decades ago designing large-scale hospitals required huge teams of engineers and architects. Computers allowed for slashing needless activities from the process, meaning that previous job post would only have to perform a fraction of previous tasks. Did it meant that such team would only need to work for 4 hours per day or less while doing next to nothing? NO! It meant that the whole process would be handled by ~4 employees while others would have to find other job openings.
>>71212536
wouldn't be the technology available to make it for me readily*
>>71212579
kek, go back to watching star trek
>>71212536
>No
All I read. Quit with the justifications, you need a credible source for claims and not mental gymnastics.
>Misunderstanding, as usual.
Misunderstanding meaning you genuinely tried to brag about learning 32 bit assembly like it's astrophysics
> It is not possible to live on the sun,
Wrong. I don't have any source for this, and no expert on the topic agrees with me, but it's possible. They'll just have to come up with something :)
>>71212649
Isn't it funny that The Jetsons had this thing that you put a dish into it press a button, and it heats up? People thought that would be useful to have. Oh look, a microwave not much longer after!
>>71212179
>"I'm sure they'll be something we can use it for"
Leave everything to Canadian genius!
>>71199300
Could work, whites and japanese only, but there would be still figtiing over who gets the hottest females, and the place in the best location, and many would be dissatisfied with the size of housing, and lack of luxuries. Better for masses, worse for the rich.
>>71212661
>All I read. Quit with the justifications, you need a credible source for claims and not mental gymnastics.
So you base your limitations on what only exists today and refuse to accept that things can be created, invented, and learned? That is a poor mindset to have and frankly, if you keep that up, you will not be wanted in a RBE.
>>71212719
Microwaved food is, for the most part, much less good.
>>71212661
Wasn't bragging about Assembly. It's just more "efficient" because a microprocessor won't have to compile higher-level languages and therefore the tasks you make it carry out will perform quicker and better than using C++ or Java.
The motives you assumed of me were only a reflection of yourself and what you'd do.
>>71212590
And yet, for all our progress with automation, unemployment is still in the single digits in most developed countries. That suggests that in almost all cases, the displaced workers have succeeded in finding new jobs, and overall productivity has grown as a result.
>>71212869
Great argument!
>>71212844
>So you base your limitations on what only exists today
No, I don't.
You claimed these things are possible now and today. They're not. Now you claim they will be possible sometime in the future, a claim for which you have absolutely no source or authority on.
This is all that's been happening with you here once you realized you've been spouting bullshit.
>let's do x!
>>x doesn't exist
>BUT IT WILL EXIST TECHNOLOGY WILL ADVANCE, I have no source that states that it even MIGHT but you'll just have to trust me :)
>>71213002
They may not be possible today because they don't exist. That isn't to say that they aren't create-able, though. Your limitations really are set to what exists today. You cannot imagine the development of new things at all, can you?
>>71212649
>kek, go back to watching star trek
Don't give him ideas. Star Trek's post-scarcity utopia required a nuclear holocaust and entirely wasted century to happen.
>>71212719
When the day comes that all the maintenance and manufacture is performed by machines, I can promise you that it was brought on by capitalism and not by some hippie college dropout ideas.
It might well be that the natural end result of capitalism indeed is RBE.
>>71213066
>That isn't to say that they aren't create-able, though.
It isn't to say they are, either. You're basing your entire argument on something that has no credible for or against evidence.
If I claim that we can live on the sun because there's the offchance that some time in the distant future it will be technically possible to, does that make me right?
>>71212719
The microwave oven was a thing before the Jetsons.
>>71212946
Yes, but wasn't Canadian's point that such progress would allow general populace to pursue their interests regardless of how unproductive and pointless they would have been?
>>71200631
I just visited that joke of a website.
Where they aren't repeating themselves pointlessly spouting buzzwords, the only explanation I was able to find on how any of this is supposed to work reads as follows:
>In a Resource Based Economy all goods and services are available to all people without the need for means of exchange such as money, credits, barter or any other means. For this to be achieved all resources must be declared as the common heritage of all Earth’s inhabitants.
So...
>everyone gets unlimited access to everything
>there is no limited on how much food etc. anyone can take
>this totally will not deplete resources but somehow create infinitely more because muh heritage
Confirmed for cultist ideological clickbait for potsmoking hippies and SJW scum.
>>71213221
If that were to happen, then development would stall. Imagine if, say, the Internet had stayed as it was in the 80s or early 90s.
Actually, the reactionary in me says that might have been a good thing.
>>71213142
How can I take you seriously when you seriously assumed that I said I'm learning Assembly to brag that I'm learning it? Read this in case you missed it: (>>71212908)
>You're basing your entire argument on something that has no credible for or against evidence.
I'm basing my entire argument on practicality. You don't need superior intellect to foretell what is possible. To put it in intellectual layman's terms: lots and lots of detectors, sensors, conveyor belts and physical manipulators. Beyond the "cliche" words of a college drop-out pothead you easily assume of me, there is truth behind the words because they serve a fundamental purpose. I could develop a mini-system of this if I wanted to. But I want to make a machine that does something else instead.
>>71213221
His entire point is the wet fever dream that is communism.
His point is that eventually all commodities will be so easily created and recycled, there's no need to work for them anymore and they will be distributed freely (as there's no cost to society to do so). That's the concept communism was originally based on.
It just doesn't work because automation isn't a magical "turn on robot and it'll do it for you, fin" thing
>LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT UTOPIA
>THINGS WILL WORK OUT AS PLANNED
>YOU'RE AN [insert ad hom] IF YOU THINK OTHERWISE
>>71199300
>Solution to all the problems
So... death?
>>71206395
Some people are thieves. Doesn't matter what the economy is, the society is, or any of that. They're just thieves.
>>71213300
He could have included meritocracy as a method of evaluating each plea for resources.
But then again, meritocracy is *RACIST*.
>>71199300
That's a Star of David in the middle you Jew cuck
>>71199300
>all that stagnant water
Smell will be terrible
>>71213373
>Read this in case you missed it:
I've read it, it's no longer relevant to the discussion because you're only using it as a means to insult me.
> I'm basing my entire argument on practicality.
What fucking practicality, mate?
>You don't need superior intellect to foretell what is possible.
When even experts on a given field tell you it's probably not possible, you claim it will be. Seems to me like the only one with a superior intellect here is the man you wish you'd see in the mirror.
>To put it in intellectual layman's terms:
Fuck off, you cunt
> lots and lots of detectors, sensors, conveyor belts and physical manipulators.
Can you give me any concept or practical (you said yourself your argument was based on practicality) real world examples that show this to be possible? Can you give me any expert opinions that would view this as a realistic development in robotics?
No, you can't. You've said as much before. You're just doing mental gymnastics and pretending that because everyone could do the same mental gymnastics, you're right.
>Beyond the "cliche" words of a college drop-out pothead you easily assume of me
Funny, I haven't said anything of the like. I assumed you just started education in robotics or something and are still very ignorant of the matter.
>I could develop a mini-system of this if I wanted to. But I want to make a machine that does something else instead.
Not sure what to say to this. You could take the first step in what you claim to be possible that nobody else does for mystery reasons, but you won't just coz?
>>71213514
In this world? Absolutely. It thrives of having poor people so poor that they can't afford a living, so they resort to such primal solutions to keep themselves alive.
This is the only world you seem to know. It's hard to use your imagination and think of human nature as something that can change if the environment (in this case, the need for money) changes.
>>71199300
>things that will never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never ever happen
>>71213536
OP and Project Venus are full of shit, but your grasp on geometry is on preschooler's level.
>Softening Earth up for a Xenos invasion
>>71213655
I can imagine humans flying without any practical means to do so, just by flapping their arms. It's a fun thought.
Where's the evidence, Canuck? Where is anything that supports your claim that human nature can be changed so drastically? Everyone can imagine it. Doesn't mean it can happen.
Has any of this actually been built? If not, what's stopping them?
>>71213831
>I could develop a mini-system of this if I wanted to
white racist capitalist patriarchy
>>71213753
If you knew all your resources would be catered to you, like a household pet, what would be the incentive to steal knowing that your next meal is on the way apart from "people just /LOOOVE/ to steal even without incentive"?
>>71199300
>another "Why can't we all get along" land
Because humans are predators. Fighting and killing other humans is part of our design.
>>71213927
>white racist capitalist patriarchy
lol every time
>>71213711
Oh shit I jump the gun this time that is 8 points not 6, you win this round jews
>>71213831
No demand, the only ones who can afford to live like that are the super rich, and they have no interest in it.
>>71213655
>Crime and waste exists because people are too poor to acquire necessities
Have a poster from our gommie era. "Bumelant" is someone too lazy to work, seeking to maximize his benefits at the lowest possible personal expense.
Most of the time crime exists because people find it easier to wallow in squalor or thrive off others than to provide for themselves.
>>71213831
Funding *, support, and land.
* = (in a monetary system since that's the way current infrastructure works; but I support the idea that RBE should start completely from scratch, as though we were using shaped stones to cut objects to not depend whatsoever on this society because only from there we can build our own technology and truly claim it ours)
>>71213950
And this is where the cracks start to form in their utopia.
>>71200917
Is this a real picture or shogun total war? kek
>>71213950
>apart from
Why apart from if it's a very reasonable argument?
I've grown up with kids who grew up rich who could eat free lunch in a restaurant one of their parents owned and they still felt the need to steal chocolate bars.
There's old people who are set until death with their old-age pension but they still steal (or try to).
As of right now, there's no reasonable evidence to assume that people wouldn't steal in a social system like you're describing. It's reasonable to assume they still would, because right now theft is common in every culture, every social background, every region, every age group, every racial demographic.
>>71214110
I think it's safe to say that if people steal for the thrill like people hunt for the thrill of the kill, then they simply will not be allowed. Relocate all such people into their own community and let them fend for themselves. This project is only suitable for those who have adopted self-governance and a understanding of human nature. Laugh up the last part all you want, it is 100% true.
>>71214253
>Relocate all such people into their own community and let them fend for themselves.
So now you're suddenly saying to add jails to your system.
I assume you mean jails because the only way to make sure they don't leave their assigned communities is by locking them in. It doesn't have to be a jail like we have them now.
How are you going to keep them in? How are you going to keep the socialist gommies from revolting against this cruel treatment of poor criminals?
Automated government? :))
>>71214253
And by "an understanding of human nature" I mean understanding that in most cases, people will not be incentivized to steal and do wrong if essential resources are readily provided. The rare exceptions who like to test their free will and do an action against what's normal and expected can be the ones that live for themselves in the wild. Adapt or die out.
>>71214253
Also, the thieves will only steal so much before they realize they don't have anymore space, and meanwhile the people they have stolen from have already replenished what went missing by the press of a button.
>>71214253
>Relocate all such people into their own community and let them fend for themselves.
Damn, this Utopia gets scarier by the minute!
Post your rare Trumps
>>71214411
No, literally move them out into some area devoid of any RBE development, but with the resources that would allow them to construct their own lives. I would think thieves don't would be that harmful to the society, because anything can be replenished easily, but knowing that they will still for the thrill, they'd probably want to ruin the central automated system too.
>>71199300
That doesn't look like immortality to me.
>>71213655
Why do communists, when theorizing on their "utopia," just end up describing the thing they supposedly despise; the aristocracy? Devoid of want, need of money, with all things available leaving one free to pursue their own avenues of betterment? That's the aristocracy, m8. You seem to be the one who hasn't thought this through.
>>71214625
So you're exiling them.
>but with the resources that would allow them to construct their own lives.
Exiling them into ghettos. Polandposter wasn't so wrong, kek.
What prevents them from rioting and harming your RBE culture that isn't fully developed yet?
>>71200027
Okay, so no niggers, spics and any other sub 100 IQ race
And a lot of luck
The new Bioshock is looking good
>>71199300
I doubt suicide has such nice gardens
>>71214625
Why even do something so severe as kicking them out of society if there are magic buttons everywhere that can magically replace anything that gets stolen or broken?
Also, you're treating technology like magic.
>>71214745
>What prevents them from rioting and harming your RBE culture that isn't fully developed yet?
Nothing. The buildings will be firm and earthquake- and lightning-resistant. It's really a test to who is fit for this environment and who isn't. Clearly, they will not be welcomed, and the development of the RBE would get better and better over time. No body is forcing them to move in. It will be a "watch and see what happens" and people will see that this is in fact the only life that is reasonable and happy to live in." And as the demand for it gets greater, it would be a slow, slow conversion. And if the rich bomb it, well, now we all know what money does to us so maybe then the shift over to it would be so dramatic that the development of it would increase a millionfold.
>>71206010
>>71206010
>You need reward for every good thing you do, right? Isn't the reward for your effort a society and infrastructure that actually works to keep alive your next generation?
bro...you are right and wrong here. You need to realize 95% of people arent like that and never will be. The only way to make them that way is with heavy propaganda and dictatorship. You would need to handpick people for your utopia.
>>71215062
> It will be a "watch and see what happens" and people will see that this is in fact the only life that is reasonable and happy to live in.
So wait, what prevents the violent thugs you're exiling from coming back and violenty fighting for the future tech that allows them to live effortlessly?
Don't you think your theory would just turn into a game of king of the hill? Most violent tribe to live in the "fertile land" until it grows soft and gets replaced?
Or do you plan to have authoritan systems in place that keep invaders out? How do you handle immigration? How do you handle the scenario that in order for your "safe" community to grow, it has to take space from "unsafe" communities/exiles?
>>71211508
>literally no housing that isn't in an apartment complex
who the fuck wants to live in an apartment complex forever
>>71215062
>the buildings will be firm
Oh God, you are 12, aren't you.
>>71215231
This society, while liberating, is very serious about what is accepted and what isn't. Don't break the spine that keeps you alive. Don't kill your mother. It's good knowledge to have that the central automated unit is like your backbone and without it, everything that binds you to primal methods of maintaining survival such as manual hunting and hut construction will persist, which means no personal pursuits of knowledge, no leisure, nothing.
>>71206999
yeah, bad things never happen in a house between family members
>>71215641
You haven't answered my question.
What protects this society from outside forces violently invading and taking over?
>>71200631
>Note the design of OPs pic-related. Autistic, toddler-level understanding of design for a city that occurs on the surface of a planet. Located at any latitude above or below about 30 degrees North/South of the equator, it's designed to block incoming sunlight instead of capture and use it efficiently.
This. I'm an urban planner and it annoys the shit out of me when the hipster fags who permeate this profession show off their fantasies that can only occur on an infinite plane of perfectly flat ground and don't take local conditions into consideration.
>Bu-bu-but look at muh transit spokes!
Assholes.
Somebody just watched Zeitgeist 2, I see.
>>71215699
Nothing. We'll continue living our lives and if they threaten our lives, we'll fight back. Keep to yourself and only fight unless initiated.... Why do you need me to tell you this?
>>71214137
Looks like "the burning man" to me.
>>71215712
It annoys the shit out of me that even and "urban planner" doesn't understand what can be possible, much like how some geologist who sees the evidence of the Earth being billions of years old at some well renowned university can believe in creationism because "that is what God said of me to do".
>>71215825
Ok, so your hypothetical society is defending themselves.
Do they do this by means of military or by means of automatic machines shooting down invaders?
>>71213950
>Exiling them into ghettos.
How will hippie without police or military exile niggers with AKs into ghettos?
>>71213950
Because why work when hippie faggots will be doing all job for you when you can lazy around, enjoy luxury life and rape their wifes?
>>71215979
This is just a moral issue and it's really hard to decide what the best course of action should be done.
If they enter and kill somebody, maybe kill them before they kill us. Some will object that killing anybody is immoral and you should try to resolve all issues through the understanding that we will never bother them, if not, they will think of something else to do.
Morality is really hard to discuss because there are many sides to take in every thought.
>>71213374
Retards like him definitely have difficulty separating fantasy from reality.
We are nowhere near post-scarcity. When claims are made that "we have the technology to do X" it completely evaporates from their minds that technically being able to create X, does not make it feasible to create X.
Economics is not an evil capitalist invention, it is a matter of resources and efficiency. A monetary representation of something is most certainly a representation of the energy expenditure involved in it, even if it can be unjustly or artificially inflated.
Even building projects that benefit everyone beyond a reasonable doubt simply require tremendous materials, time and energy. The people involved in it are unable to do other things in the meantime and still need their needs taken care of as well.
I.e. just because we have the technology to give a cancer patient an extra 6 months, doesn't warrant $6 million in resources. Meanwhile claiming we have the "technology" to do so is a misleading and outright delusional narrow statement.
who decides who works in the mines? Will they get better housing for working there ? inb4 better technology and "the reward is feeling good that you are helping"
>>71215979
In my opinion though, I think it's possible to teach people through logic and understanding that their unnecessary stealing is just a product of this society. Only this society reenforces ideas which lead people to steal. I think if you teach them and raise them in families where the kids don't grow up miserably, they will not have this inclination to do bad/"evil". Do you think Hitler was born angry and evil, where at the age of 3 he looked at a Jew and said "I know nothing about you, but I hate you"?
>>71216137
Does it mean that all Project Venus needs to get off the ground is a lavish dose of NatSoc?
>>71216430
It's like "God" saying from "above":
"Another, but much better world is possible, but in order to achieve it, you have to let go of all the things that bind you to this society and let your desire for it get you there."
That desire will be what fuels progress, not money.
>>71216729
What is money?
>>71216805
A concept that takes advantage of "want" and "need" and orders the intensity of those qualities into a hierarchy of value. This value is "traded off" for material good, and so by losing conceptual worth, you gain materially (or conceptually, if you're going to school).
>>71215949
It annoys the shit our of me how you keep going on about how efficient an RBE would be and just mutter "muh possibilities" when people poke holes in its perfect designs.
>>71200631
>Pot-smoking libertarians and moron hippie types that barely comprehend enough high school education to graduate think this is "awesome" and "the Answer.
What the fuck are you talking about?
>>71217031
Those holes are only realistic to you because you live in a world that embeds itself in those conceptual holes. To me, it couldn't be anymore logically pure.
>>71216545
>I think it's possible to teach people through logic and understanding that their unnecessary stealing is just a product of this society.
Even if we image that it is possible changes could not be applied to entire Earth simultaneously. Project Venus could only grow starting from particular areas. This means that people outside these areas would not have such teaching and are free to invade Venus. And they will as Venus don't have any protection.
>>71216901
>A concept that takes advantage of "want" and "need" and orders the intensity of those qualities into a hierarchy of value. This value is "traded off" for material good, and so by losing conceptual worth, you gain materially (or conceptually, if you're going to school).
So you don't actually know what money is and prefer a made up pseudo intellectual idea of what you think it is to fit your vision of the world.
I'll ask again what is money?
Why was the concept of money universally and independently invented the entite world over anywhere and everywhere civilization arose?
What is money actually used for?
so, who works in the damn mines?
>>71215949
There's a difference between what's possible and what's effective, you autistic leaf. That design is an economic clusterfuck that raises construction costs by probably an order of magnitude and sacrifices usability for aesthetics. Get fucked and for the love of God don't ever go into planning once you get out of high school, there are too many flakes as it is.
What do you do when the city gets too full? Kick people out? Start building more shit on top of your gardens?
I mean, I can't even play Dwarf Fortress and stick to a perfectly symmetrical design. Something always fucks it up.
>>71217290
I think you don't understand what money is.
Imagine two tribes of different backgrounds confronting one another. Each have resources that the other tribe wants. To obtain those resources, a trade-off is made. They base the level of value that resource has on them hierarchically, where the more valuable it is, the more it is worth, and trade it equally of worth. Instead of making two material tradeoffs, why not have one conceptual and one material? This is where money spawned. Some processing unit in the Roman era made "coinage" that take the form of elementary value. How are you telling me that this is pseudo-intellect? I'm getting the idea that the people who spew the word "pseudo-intellect" are ironically the ones without the intellect to understand what entails intellect and so the entire concept to them is "false" or, synonymously, "pseudo".
Personal Incredulity. Read the /pol/ sticky image.
>>71217332
Dem robots 'n sheeeit!
>>71217332
>>71216444
>>71215197
WHO WORKS IN THE MINES ??????
HOW DO YOU FORCE DINDUS AND AKBARS TO BE PRODUCTIVE MEMBERS OF YOUR SOCIETY WITHOUT DICTATORSHIP AND HEAVY PROPAGANDA ????
ANSWER YOU FUCK
>>71199362
First post is always the best post
>>71199300
This looks suspiciously cult-like.
>>71217603
More cities, or population control, depending on the situation and circumstances.
>>71217717
But anon, every man is good natured at heart :3
>>71217717
Those who have an interest in geology? When you were a child, you had interests, whether rock collecting or whatever. Before the current system sucked you into its ideals, do you think it would have been possible to be someone that enters a cave and does some work for your own good?
>>71217131
>you live in a world that embeds itself in those conceptual holes
You mean the world that cares about the details?
>>71213536
8 pointed star of Ishtar you dolt.
If you're going to imply some conspiracy where occult memetics are in in play, at least get the geometry right.
>>71217743
>or population control
LOL
>Sir, our city's getting too overcrowded. We may have to build another tier of apar--
>FUCK THAT DUDE, START STERILIZING THESE MOTHERFUCKERS
>>71217652
What you described here isn't what you described
>>71216901
A simple modicum of exchange isn't what you're describing in your previous post.
So yes you are putting pseudo intellectual ideas onto what money is.
>>71217743
>population controls
Oh so everyone is a full slave to either an AI or some unaccountable bureaucracy.
Sounds allot like what has happened in the past
>>71217131
top shitposting, leaf
>>71217603
>What do you do when the city gets too full? Kick people out?
Resettle them. :^)
>>71217131
There's no such thing as logical purity.
The folly of urban planning is to pretend there's such a thing as a correct way to build a society, or a city.
Nah. There are many perfectly decent ways to approach it. None are obviously superior to all others. It's because different people have different goals and ideals, and different goals and ideals will lead to different outcomes. In order to have one correct path, you have to deny people their values and substitute your own.
>>71217882
The details which are outdated, pointless, and unnecessary? Sure. It's possible without them, you know. It's just a matter of being ignorant to them and moving on. In one generation, you can move from being like ISIS to being someone like me by just being ignorant to it all and letting the problem resolve itself from that ignorance. The more about history you know, the more you hate things that were done which you will forever hold grudges to. Let's forget about them and move on, and maybe look back at it in when we're in our living rooms in a RBE and think "wow, that would have been an endless battle."
>>71217844
>Those who have an interest in geology?
>Have them toil in the mines
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>>71217929
No, you just aren't able to understand concise language that gets to the point. You have to have everything spoon-fed to you in a long and drawn out tirade about how things work for you to finally get it. My original post encompassed entirely what my longer version said. The burden is on you, not me. I'll try to remember to elaborate expansively with you.
>>71218150
Do you think automation can't do it?
>>71218012
/Most/ logically pure in the sense that it's difficult to come up with anything else that resolves most problems and creates a better mode of life for everyone. That is what we are all after, right? Why turn down the very essence you're after?
>>71205661
Give me a horse, arrows and an address
>>71217743
>or population control, depending on the situation and circumstances.
Fuck, this has to be a bait, but it is too entertaining to just look away.
>>71200631
Why would you not be able to capture Sunlight if you can block it effectively? let alone not needing 30 degrees North or South.
any 3d model to show to explain your view.
Plan to infiltrate this Group with alot of people for the longterm, and then since the venusproject has no police, we can just subtly remove people that are a threat to our Power and then take it over completely.
>>71218161
>You have to have everything spoon-fed to you in a long and drawn out tirade about how things work for you to finally get it.
>said the guy thinking ideas in zeitgeist haven't been proven wrong across the board
>The burden is on you, not me.
You're the one suggesting all of humanity live in your vision of the world the burden is fully on your Shoulders
And again you're going off with a long winded sentence that isn't actually saying anything which is a common theme of people like you.
We do get it you just aren't accepting anyone calling out your empty shit
>>71217922
No, part of self-governance means you understand that you can't keep reproducing after you reach the point where more people are consuming than that which is being produced.
You seem to depend on your current government to make all of your choices for you by law and to confine your will to them since you are too impulsive to control otherwise through understanding. Is this not a matter of who is more thoughtful than impulsive?
>>71199300
>>71199551
>>71199782
OP don't listen to these naysayers. This is the best option for humanity, the only problem being our respective governments. There have been more patents denied from the Venus Project then practically any other source in the world.
There is no money in near perpetual energy.
There is no money to be made in a house that only costs 5000$ to produce.
There is no money in a lightbulb that lasts a thousand years.
We are technologically stunted for these... filth in government. Humanity should be far ahead of what it is, one day I hope it is.
>>71218287
What you would consider a problem could be a desired thing for me. Your idea of a better life could be a hellish existence for me.
It is not at all obvious that we're looking for the same thing.
I come from the realization that meticulous quality of life improvement over the last century or so has undone its achievements: the people we've tried to help cannot afford their new improved lives and are worse off. It would have been better if we did nothing in particular to shape urban development.
>>71218486
at this point you are spewing random rambles straight outta Marx
>>71218497
>There is no money in near perpetual energy.
>There is no money to be made in a house that only costs 5000$ to produce.
>There is no money in a lightbulb that lasts a thousand years.
then why dont you sell it for current_market_price - 0.01€ ?
then why dont you sell it for 50 000€ ? ez 45 000€ profit
where can I send you my contact details? Wanna buy one.
OK good baits guys, 10/10
>>71216729
Now I know you're a troll.
Motivation says nothing about feasibility or limited resource management. Fuck off and die, delusional hippie.
>This fucking thread
I knew the Venus project was feed-fuelled madness, but I never expected it to be this fucking crazy.
I'm laughing my ass off, but hope to god none of them ever get anywhere near anything important.
>>71218773
weed-fuelled*
>>71218046
By details I mean more like technical details. Like how we don't have a magic automation wand that just removes all the undesirable jobs and allows the Venus Project to be a thing.
>>71199300
Autism town planning?
>>71200631
You're clearly ignorant to the Venus Project and how it would work. The system does not resemble communism in the slightest. It is entirely possible to farm using machines alone, that's the food problem. It's entirely possible to set an electronic voting system up for citywide decisions.
Don't even get me started on the energy that is in abundance, untapped and some unresearched because of our horrible oppressors. When everything is provided for you, you have no reason to steal, no reason to murder. The ones that did would be outcast from the city, and that's it. Prison gone, government corruption, gone. Everything nearly provided save for your intent and purpose.
>>71218720
>Your idea of a better life could be a hellish existence for me.
Great, then you can remain where you are while we develop and work towards our ideals. When ours is finished, please don't start wars with us due to your lack of understanding of our nature. We'll be minding our own business because we understand yours. But knowing your behaviour, it will be inevitable since your decisions are capricious, oscillating and are made indecisively.
One day I bet you will come throwing a bomb at as for the lulz like how you steal for the lulz. If this would be true, never complain about ISIS or anyone again then, since you are no different.
>>71217922
You mean like overpopulated china?
Earth has a fixed amount of miles of land and you can build houses a certain amount high.
Then you have to have forcefully population Control and remove the blacks.
