It starts not with a bang, but with a wimper. . . . .

reply to post by beezzer


I am also for positive change. There is also a force that is keeping the change from coming as well. Call it what you will, people are too divided to really come together. I'd like to see space exploration as a global effort, but i doubt i'll see this in my life time.

A lot of folk are still stuck in this system, thinking that its the most amazing thing, and in comparison to other countries. it is. But a lot of other countries are in shambles because of us too.

I think things will change if/when something really big happens, a big good thing i hope.
A growing body of research has shown that there is some form of global conciousness, if a big enough event happened (on 9/11 scale only positive), it could possibly galvanize all of society to change. But what possible good could happen that it can be felt all over the world.

EDIT: I think alien contact would be huge, huge enough for almost the entire world to stop in its tracks. Or discovery of another life form in general anywhere but here.

reply to post by beezzer


Welcome to the real meaning of "Capitalism". To create misfortune and then derive capital from it. Find a weakness and exploit it. Not your workaday job holder, the people who employ them. Not the homeowner, the people that pay rent. Not the corporations, the people that buy their products.

I live in Silicon Valley. Yesterday at the grocery store a gallon of milk was 5.00 (4.99). Here they think that everyone is an engineer at Apple.

My guess is its the same everywhere. Thats not capitalism, its serfdom.

"The price you are paying is too damn high, while your'e living beyond all your means." --Traffic (song from the 60's)

I thought Obama was the CEO of America?

reply to post by beezzer


Is this a joke? Or some kind of "trolling"?

Whoever advocates more centralism instead of pluralism, and even calls for the deprivation of power from the people (transfer of administrative authority??) is certainly not an Anarchist, but a sellout.

I'm not saying our state-of-the-art Governments are trustworthy (some are less than others...) but giving up the last bit of influence and independence we have is unconditional capitulation.

ColCurious
reply to post by beezzer

 

Is this a joke? Or some kind of "trolling"?

Whoever advocates more centralism instead of pluralism, and even calls for the deprivation of power from the people (transfer of administrative authority??) is certainly not an Anarchist, but a sellout.

I'm not saying our state-of-the-art Governments are trustworthy (some are less than others...) but giving up the last bit of influence and independence we have is unconditional capitulation.

That's why I brought it up.

I found it. . . disconcerting.

reply to post by beezzer

She is very smart and leadership qualities, but suffers from not being mature yet.
Rush Limbaugh could probably smooth-out her "rough edges" if she read "The Way Thing's Ought To Be" and listened to his show for three months.
Mr. Snerdly would get a caller with a teachable moment for the record books

When computers and machines do the work they do not need money for motivation, but they still do need to account for all the resources they use. Sure making the computers and machines that can replace or complement a society of people does take a large amount of people at work in the first place. With the author coming from a software background most of this effort is in making the first one, from there the copy function does all the work.

Where this world is going is of concern as the trend of technological change and growth is quite amazing, even evolutionary. As for what kind of relationship will develop between man and machine as technology continues will be a reflection of the environment in which the progress takes place. If the mantra of development is to capitalize, take advantage and have the ends justify the means, then so will the machines.

beezzer you would have been running your printing press a couple centuries ago being nervous and distraught over this coming Industrial Revolution...


Change is inevitable, as is progress. While I do not think world corporations are going to necessarily benefit mankind some of the best run ones are those that started really bringing innovations that are beneficial into the mainstream like recycling, energy conservation, land management. Problems arise from GREED not only from the Golden Parachute CEO's but from the bottom line investors (supposedly us) as well!

What other options do we have instead of complaining about the upcoming cliff lets start figuring out ways to build bridges to get across safely!

reply to post by abeverage


Change is inevitable. But we can go in a good direction or a bad one.

To what end, I still have yet to determine.

reply to post by beezzer


Is this the same Google that recently purchased Boston Dynamics, AND has a R & D dept AND has even more capabilities surrounding AI?

Um, post-capitalism sounds a lot like people lining up to be little worker bees for very specific industries.

Not quite sure if I like what these things taken together seem to be inferring.

reply to post by beezzer


Exactly, not everything progressive is successful, which is why centralism per se is against the laws of nature.
Decentralised and independent systems are protective mechanisms of nature for good reasons... they compensate failure.
We have just witnessed what fiscal centralism did in our latest global financial crisis... it startet at Wallstreet and spread around the world. Nature would never allow such a contagious situation.

beezzer

But we are entering a brave new world. One that I don't understand.

Today I read an article
Link

The headline reads,

Occupy founder calls on Obama to appoint Eric Schmidt 'CEO of America'

Pretty straight forward situation in my opinion. We are discussing the structure of authority. Which is the same as the structure of knowledge.





Strap on your protective sanity and walk my path for bit.


Authority according to the Old Testament
Doctor
Lawyer
Astronomer

Authority according to Academia
Astronomer
Lawyer
Doctor

Authority according to the Television
Actor
Artist
Athlete


What we have here in the linked article is a completely different picture of the structure of Authority.

Authority according to the Petition
CEO (Executive)
COO (Operations)
CFO (Financial)

CDO (Diversity)
CTO (Tech)
CIO (Information)

Which shows a fundamental misunderstanding of political power and a heavy bias toward a corporate world view. In addition, where diversity outranks tech in his own company, by replacing The President of The United States with the chief tech company officer, he has effectively protested against the high rank of diversity, and done little more than call for Diversity to follow after Tech.

He only got two signatures.











According to what I read in the article.


Hope that helps


Mike Grouchy

reply to post by beezzer


Well, with her well paid position with Google, she must think
that only the 1% is allowed to continue in Capitalism, while the
rest of the world should be subject to anarchy.

So, not all corporations are evil then, certainly not Google!
And, apparently she plans on creating a private "Militia" too.
?!? Funded by cash, and maybe Soros?

If we raised $1m to kickstart a nonviolent militia for #occupy w/ weekly trainings,
would you guys be interested? @OccupyWallSt @VFPNational

Cash incentivizes people to show up and make ends meet. It's also the right thing to do.

twitter.com...


This looks to be classic its only bad if others do it, not if we do it.
Rinse and repeat - Those who are in power are only bad until
they are overthrown by those who want to be in power.



I might add that this particular crowd of anarcho anti corporatists
just might be the most blatant hypocrites of all, since they
are in bed also with the NSA.

Amassing power unto themselves, thereby creating a government
unto themselves, rather than a government by the people, for the people.

burntheships


Amassing power unto themselves, thereby creating a government
unto themselves, rather than a government by the people, for the people.

I wonder if this is the future we have to look forward to. . . .

beezzer

I wonder if this is the future we have to look forward to. . . .

They still have a ways to go, though they certainly are a very dedicated
bunch. I find it ironic that these minions claim they want to abolish
the NYSE, while at the same time they are working for Hedge funds
to make them profitable, and working for the Government as they
increase the surveillance state, and are well connected with
Google, and Palantir.

Palantir Technologies, the secretive Silicon Valley company that makes
software primarily used by US intelligence agencies and hedge funds.

www.businessinsider.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

Palantair cofounder

Peter Thiel, the venture capitalist and early Facebook investor
... which counts In-Q-Tel, the venture arm of the CIA, among its investors.

"Palantir's analytics give us a powerful new tool for our compliance and surveillance team
www.stamfordadvocate.com...

As pointed out by jadedandcynical, Googles recent acquisition of Boston Dynamics,
and NASA Hangar one coupled with its massive data mining, and cohort NSA
it all points to kind of an Orwellian 1984, with a
Brave New World Order Skynet kind of twist.

Does anyone actually mention 'OWS' without an awkward cringe?

reply to post by beezzer


BEEZ!!! You are neither simple nor man you are a complex bunny....

Anyhow on topic, this seems like a lot of wishful thinking on th eparts of the tech companies, it's probably going to happen sooner or later anyhow, but it's still a republic for now and I don't think the general population will actually go for it, or wait... no forget that, they would if given free broadband and lots of porn...

reply to post by burntheships


Hey, if you make it, you also know how to break it.

I'd guess she's anti-liberty and has enough big corporate chops now to realize the kind of power in the structure, to see that kind of structure on top in China (which is really the world's largest corporate state operating under a veneer of communism), and wants to be in power for herself. If she can get her own corporation in power, then she can be part of the power that changes the world ... just like she signed up for.

reply to post by ketsuko


Indeed, while she....out of the other side of her mouth feeds the
sheep the orwellian double speak. And sadly, they are too blind
to see that she is not one of them, she just leads them in sheeps clothing.

"I'm not saying our state-of-the-art Governments are trustworthy (some are less than others...) but giving up the last bit of influence and independence we have is unconditional capitulation. "

Precisely. And although change is inevitable and sudden change requires a catalyst, these things also can't happen without certain conditions being set up and met. Well, we all know those gears have been in the works for a long time now. "CEO" of America indeed.

Just because change is inevitable doesn't mean we have to roll over and take what is already a world too much run by corporate entities become even worse. We could make a change towards cutting corporations out, as hard as it would be.

Just the knowledge this has happened is scary on so many levels.