The Zeitgeist Movement - Give me your best shot.

Post Reply New Topic

I am not sure why you would oppose GMOs. Even if you think that there are bad incentives in modern efforts, engineering the genetics of our crops is simply the next way to improve them, and many scientists are on board with the idea. I mean, certainly there is uncertainty, but honestly, there is no reason why our past efforts to genetically modify organisms through selective breeding is a lot better. Making them GMOs with explicit engineering really just a way to build on the genetic improvements we have already made.

I'm not sceptical of GMO's because of the technology, I just don't trust what they put in the crops themselves. I guess it doesn't matter either way, if they want to put things in our food they will one way or another.

We all know the problem though, unless you want to massively overbuild the electrical grid, you're going to have to economize on usage. Even if you do massively overbuild the electrical grid, there is always the possibility that people will start outright wasting power.

That being said, I don't think your claims really likely reflect the reality of the situation. I mean, are there alternative energies? Yes, but they are costly. I mean, whether it is hydrogen fuel cells, solar power, space solar power, or biofuel, there are significant problems with implementation. I mean, I don't really see why this alteration would be heavily opposed by the motoring companies, shipping firms, and travel firms, as if energy is cheap, more people and more industries gain than lose. So, if anything, we should expect proliferation if there is a magic bullet technology. Maybe you're talking about something I am completely unaware of, but I don't think there is enough cohesion to allow for systematic discrimination in the long-run based upon competition.

Honestly, they're already putting in a lot of stuff before GMOs. If anything, a GMO would probably reduce our crop problems.

Well, if it was a big public issue, I wouldn't be surprised if food started marketing itself as non-GMO, just like we currently have cruelty-free animals and all-natural products.

Shall we have a show of hands of who else can't see the content of my link? AG seems to claim that the link doesn't work. Here it is:

AAUTZM Podcasts

I certainly can see it. It definately loads up for me. It only takes 2 runs of the progress strip taking 2 seconds before the page loads. Wow, I know, it really takes that long. Maybe your patience is shorter than that and you clicked off. And if others can access this, then its your computer thats the problem AG. Maybe your computer mirrors its owner in the fact that it refuses to see information that it doesnt like.

Last edited by Adam-Anti-Um on 07 Jul 2012, 11:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Link does not load for me either

Ok, then go to the talkshoe website:

www.talkshoe.com

And in the search field type AAUTZM. what search results come up?

It may be because this site doesn't like the short form of the link. Here's the long-form:

http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=91995&cmd=tc

Coz if you can't find it, I can assure you that the thousands of downloads I've received have been because of people who can.

I don't see why it's so hard to just answer the questions here. If you already have answers then it shouldn't take long.

Hense why I have provided both te short-form and the long-form link to my talkshoe page. It saves the effort of me having to repeat myself, or transcribe my podcast answers, and it saves you the effort of having to sit there and read paragraphs of text.

And considering you haven't answered my questions to you is rather hypocritical.

Whether you can be bothered to click a link is your call. But if you try to claim that its reasonable to expect us both to waste more time debating about this when you could simply click the link and *gasp* expose yourself to this information, then I don't know what more I can say to you. Your refusal to click a link shows either or both of 2 possibilities:

1. You are scared of viewing information that could cause a change in your thinking on this subject
2. You wish to pick apart paragraphs with your own equivocations that aren't even fully informed on the train of thought because of your refusal to educate yourself about it,

Either way your refusal to click a simple link isn't getting this dicsussion anywhere.

I could see how it's possible to distribute food, clothing, and to some extent, shelter in an RBE because the needs these items address are universal, quantifiable, and already in excess. But things that don't address actual needs like lithium and indium are in short supply, if we woke up in a RBE tomorrow, we'd all want the technology produced by these elements but would have a lot of difficulty determining who should have access to them.

I know you might not agree, but I really feel like as a whole, we have a need to be competitive. There are many people I know who work hard because they want to have nicer stuff than anyone else. Sports is more interesting to most people I know than concepts like space exploration. And as was mentioned earlier, we've been at our most productive after a major war. Acting in the best interest of humanity doesn't give individuals the sense that they're ahead of the pack, beating each other in football does.

Having people like Doug Mallette in the movement gives me a little bit of hope for it though.

Especially since it's easier to reference, analyze, find what you are curious about, and address typed answers. I mean, hunting through a lengthy Q&A for particular answers sounds like a massive pain.


So, basically you thought I was just joking or being mean when I made a very straight-forward claim like that? And then you found out that others had the exact problem? Seriously???
1) Why would I lie when it would be equally admissible for me to say "I don't want to"?
2) Even if that website failed, you could easily transmit any file to another medium, meaning that you could call me out on that bluff.
3) Other people could confirm or deny the existence of this problem pretty easily, and if it is found that I am the only person with this kind of problem for the specific link you put on the forum, it would be suspicious, and obviously I would be aware of that.

My patience so far, has been of a sufficient length to deal with your BS, so I can handle 2 seconds, obviously. Also, given that you are simply an apologist for a particular movement, given that you don't actually know anything about economics and this drips off of many of the things you write, talking about my refusal to see information comes off as a bit ridiculous. My big issue is that I don't want to waste my time trying to dig through hour long videos for the small snippets of relevance, and that you continually say "Oh, it's answered somewhere else, do your own research" whenever you're pressed on an issue, instead of actually doing what would be reasonable and trying to sum up the information in a written manner and answering the objection.

The link doesn't direct you to anything particular in Talkshoe. What appears to be on Talkshoe is mostly scams.

I've always expressed a preference for paragraphs of text. They're faster to read than listening to the same things expressed verbally.


Your questions are asinine though.

How exactly do you define a "software planned economy"?
Is pretty straightforward in it being an economy planned by software.

How do you define an RBE as a "software planned economy" by this definition?
The proposal is that machines rather than people dictate allocation. The only way a machine can do this is likely with software. I mean, an RBE doesn't strictly need software but the proposals I think we're dealing with seem to.

What other "software planned economies" are there in existance?
None exist. Some of the closer things are MMOs, but those really aren't planned, as only a few variables are set, but a market exists for a lot of these issues.

There, I answered Burzum's questions for him.


Ok, but is there reading material on these specific issues on your link, so that way we can cross-examine the issue? Can you point them out directly given your familiarity with the issue and thus familiarity with how to find them? I mean, AAU, wouldn't just finding this text information and posting a direct link in response to criticism be a lot easier than trying to give excuses for why you won't? Certainly you'll avoid most of the criticisms people give you if you did that.

Thanks.

But we won't wake up in an RBE tomorrow. Of course the value systems we currently hold on the whole dont reflect optimal altruism and co-opertion over competition. So it would follow that of course if we were suddenly plonked into an RBE we wouldn't be able to cope. That's a foregone conclusion that all these tv documentries that explore the "fish out of water" situation when they take say a group of amish teenagers and put them in a city environment. But no-one in TZM proposes that an RBE will pop up overnight and we'll just have to deal with it. Thus the assertion that we would is baseless. People have tried this one with me before. The only thing that kind of assertion proves is that values have to change.



Actually I completely agree. People are unfortunately conditioned that way in this system coz that is how this system needs people to be. We're products of our environment. Which is why we need to change the environment to reinforce better values. And vice versa.



Absolutely, I completely agree. Thing is, all these conditions are down to monetary requirements. And you've actually acknowledged that altruistic behaviour is inverse to the motivations that benefits the economy. The selfish behaviours of competition are just that. Pack behaviours. And we're not pack animals. We've grown beyond that.



Absolutely.

Last edited by Adam-Anti-Um on 08 Jul 2012, 7:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

So where do you stand on the notion of social change? Do you think its not even worth trying and fully accept the power structure inhibiting it? If this is the case, then you shouldn't complain or hope for anything. And I'm glad that not everyone is this cynical.