Digital Society - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The solving of mankind’s problems and abolition of government via technological solutions alone.

Moderator: Kolzene

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By RhetoricThug
#14398612
I've been following trends and dollars companies spend, considering high profile investments as of late, one can see the emergence of a future digital society. The internet and drone technology seem to be strong focus areas.

I will list major deals over the last year
Comcast & TimeWarner, http://time.com/79569/comcast-has-about ... is-is-why/

Comcast & Netflix, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/busin ... .html?_r=0

Netflix & Verizon, http://time.com/80192/netflix-verizon-p ... agreement/

Facebook & Whatsapp, http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/19/technol ... -whatsapp/

Facebook & Oculus Rift, http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml

Facebook & Drone technology, http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/27/tech/inno ... nectivity/

Google Glass explorer edition, http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2456541,00.asp

Google & Drone technology, http://techcrunch.com/2014/04/14/google ... -facebook/

Amazon & Drone delivery, http://www.forbes.com/sites/sap/2014/04 ... l-the-fun/

Samsung Flexible screen technology, http://www.inquisitr.com/1228803/samsun ... ones-soon/

Biometric systems, http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-gl ... 2014-04-29

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/power-fa ... ty-spying/

Many many more developments, please comment below if I missed an important headline.



In order to reach as many people as possible, efforts to expand internet access or Wifi are underway, under guise of education and market efficiency
http://www.forbes.com/sites/groupthink/ ... -equality/

Comcast is looking to expand programs similar to this
Comcast's Internet Essentials program has provided low-cost broadband Internet access and digital training to more than 1,920 people in West Virginia since 2011.

A household can utilize the program if it has at least one child eligible for the National School Lunch Program, has not subscribed to Comcast Internet service within 90 days and does not have an overdue Comcast bill or unreturned equipment. Initially planned as a three-year program, Comcast Executive Vice President David L. Cohen recently announced the program will continue indefinitely.


Google, http://www.droid-life.com/2014/04/25/go ... gle-fiber/

Government also forming new checks and balances to control this emerging digital society.
[youtube]ATbQnT0MSlM[/youtube]
Obama Calls for Secure Online-Identity System

President Barack Obama unveiled an ambitious proposal Friday urging the private sector to create a trusted-identity system to boost consumer security in cyberspace.

Digital rights groups cautiously welcomed the first-of-its-kind government proposal, calling it a blueprint for increased internet security and privacy, as the nation drifts to the virtual world to take care of basic needs from grocery shopping to paying taxes and dating.


This is all before applicable & mass produced nano technology, and sentient artificial intelligence. But we are well on our way, friends.

Our collective future is rapidly approaching, an age of constant and instant distraction, control, information overload, basically a digital society with cultural values being defined by technology. A world within a world.

Are you ready?

Image
#14398719
I'll respond more fully when I get the time, but are you actually coming out against the Online ID system?

Oh and which pill did you take?
User avatar
By Godstud
#14398731
Wait... which pill does what, again?
User avatar
By Varax
#14398821
I'M READY! We haven't even gotten to the direct neural interfaces yet. Eventually you will be downloading information directly into your brain, seamlessly communicating telepathically and thoroughly integrating ourselves into a constant information sharing collective.

This doesn't belong in in the Technocracy subforum though since it doesn't really have much to do with Technocracy as an economic system. This post is mostly just dealing with technology itself and what that means for us within our present society which would belong more in the technology subforum. Technocracy isn't matrix stuff, that's a common misconception. Kolzene made a post awhile ago detailing the difference and how Technocracy can be a way to avoid such things since it is about control over technology and not machines or technology being used to control people.

That said the advent of such technology clearly has broader implications for how we develop as a society - technology always does and I'm obviously hopeful about the potential implications such developments have for us in eventually bringing about a new economic, political and social model. But that needs to be taken into the context of other things as well.
By RhetoricThug
#14398942
I'm going take the red pill this time.

This doesn't belong in in the Technocracy subforum though since it doesn't really have much to do with Technocracy as an economic system.
This post is mostly just dealing with technology itself and what that means for us within our present society which would belong more in the technology subforum. Technocracy isn't matrix stuff, that's a common misconception. Kolzene made a post awhile ago detailing the difference and how Technocracy can be a way to avoid such things since it is about control over technology and not machines or technology being used to control people.


This does belong in the Technocracy subforum, Technocracy is not only for econocrats with utopian fantasies. Kolzene is not a sole authority on technocratic implication, in fact, I'd say his bias resembles that of a technophile. Technology is developed to solve problems, but like anything else, what new problems will technology create?

This post is dealing with future models of digital socialism driven by technical experts and their inventions, so you are wrong again. This is not just about technology and our present condition.

The internet is Matrix-esque, at least conceptually. Building a world within a world essentially, whereas one must be connected to a digital grid in order to participate in societal exchange. A digital grid that is controlled by a group of technical elite (private corporations most likely) backed by the centralised legal system of government. All of which reflects the core definition of technocracy. My hypothetical predictions are as valid as anything else, because we really do not know what a real technocratic system will look like. I however argue that we are living its precursor. If you cannot understand that, then I think you will be perfectly oblivious when such a system is fully implemented.

Technology is no substitute for intrinsic human values- Niel Postman

http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/fo ... sson7.html
Science is a powerful way of knowing that has transformed the relationship between human society and the natural world. Drawn from the Latin word for knowledge, in the broadest sense, science means a systematic way of gathering information and drawing conclusions. In a more restricted sense, science refers to information gathered using the scientific method, a systematic approach to gathering empirical (observable and measurable) data and determining facts about nature or society. A scientific approach to studying the natural or social world asks clear, specific questions, makes predictions (proposes hypotheses), tests the accuracy of those predictions, and draws conclusions based on measurable evidence. The natural sciences use the scientific method to investigate the natural world, and social scientists use it to research social issues, in other words, in human society. When conducting experiments with natural phenomena, scientists using this method can determine cause and effect relationships. The scientific method attempts to determine knowledge by eliminating, so far as possible, the potential for our own interests and desires to influence the results. This has increased the sophistication of our understanding of how the plants, animals, nutrients and energy are related in the environment.

Astonishing benefits, but not without problems
Science, technology and engineering have brought terrific benefits to society, and have made astounding wealth and material comfort possible. Yet upon closer analysis, many people have observed that these forces have had ambivalent effects. Tremendous benefits made possible by scientists and the scientific method have not been without negative impacts on the Earth, and in some cases, for the poor. The automobile has brought us convenience in transport, yet we have paved over much fertile farmland to make roads. Fossil fuels, such as oil and gas, have made possible all manner of industry and devices, yet the carbon dioxide emissions from their burning play a significant role in disrupting our atmosphere and climate. Nuclear technologies can promote health, for example, through radiation treatments for cancer. Yet these same when used for war could bring about indescribably horrific suffering. Nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gasses, which is good, but its waste products are radioactive (acutely dangerous) for 10,000 years or more. The wealthy nations of the world have generated great economic benefits through technology, but at times these technologies have extracted goods from poorer countries, and further frustrated their economic growth.


Humans barely understand the world as is, so how can we fully understand or anticipate a digital fantasy land?

I need not go into detail on how technology is being used to control people today, or how information exploitation is increasingly easier through social networking, or how drones can now travel across oceans and kill enemies of the state. Technology is good and technology is bad, but we need to focus on the bad as often as the good. The problem is, the peddlers of our future only focus on technological glory. But who will wield the power then? What kind of man will inherit this power?

Please remember we are talking about homo-sapiens, creatures who enslave their own, trade females for sex, drop atomic bombs, and kill for pleasure.

The rate of change is exponential right now and humanity is not biologically capable of adapting to its surroundings at such a pace. I'm worried how we will react collectively.

Of course we do not have sentient machines ruling over humanity... Yet. But let's keep going down the rabbit hole, eh?
User avatar
By Varax
#14398977
RhetoricThug wrote: This does belong in the Technocracy subforum, Technocracy is not only for econocrats with utopian fantasies. Kolzene is not a sole authority on technocratic implication, in fact, I'd say his bias resembles that of a technophile. Technology is developed to solve problems, but like anything else, what new problems will technology create?

I didn’t say he was and in fact I have disagreements of my own with Kolzene and Technocracy Inc. because they neglect the questions of agency or any realistic methods of implementing their designs which smacks of utopian socialism (limitations my model of socialism seeks to overcome), but I digress. However he still raises an important point which is if you read what I linked to is simply why are some people afraid of technology being used in the way you describe? Who is using that way and what are their interests for doing so? This is the core of the fear that is really being expressed here and that is such technology being used as a tool of the ruling class to control the population – to continue to enrich themselves and their benefactors while keeping the proles in line. I grant you that this is very legitimate concern, but this is not a problem with the technology itself but rather who is using it for what purpose.

RhetoricThug wrote:The internet is Matrix-esque, at least conceptually. Building a world within a world essentially, whereas one must be connected to a digital grid in order to participate in societal exchange. A digital grid that is controlled by a group of technical elite (private corporations most likely) backed by the centralised legal system of government.

Then that is a problem with private corporations and their allies in government controlling things for the benefit of themselves which is inevitably a feature of capitalism and the price system we inhabit today. The reason I’m keen to distinguish this from the technocratic socialism I advocate is that is precisely removes the dead hand of private property from the system – it removes control of these things from the corporate interests and abolishes the present state. By doing that we remove the means by which such technology is used for exploitative purposes.

RhetoricThug wrote:My hypothetical predictions are as valid as anything else, because we really do not know what a real technocratic system will look like. I however argue that we are living its precursor. If you cannot understand that, then I think you will be perfectly oblivious when such a system is fully implemented.

Actually I think this transition is a key part of building up what is to come next as all new systems develop within the context of the old. So yes, in a way we are the advanced capitalism we are living in is a precursor to what is to come next. I’m by no means saying that I know for certain what will come next – nobody knows really knows. For a all we know there could be some catastrophic event that wipes us all before we even get there. But if one takes things in the context of where we are likely to go then I do see the new technology being created, the build up of productive forces and the antagonisms of the present system where such the wealth of society is controlled by the interests of the ruling elite leading to the conditions of such a system breaking down and a new one taking it place – a socialist system that allows us to use that productive capacity even more efficiently and in a way that benefits all. So in the short run I think a lot of the concerns you raise are very important and have merit, but again the underlying context needs to be understood. Technocracy isn’t the enemy – capitalism is. Socialism using technocratic methods to abolish the price system and removing the means by which the wealth of society can be concentrated in the hands of a few is the answer.

RhetoricThug wrote:Humans barely understand the world as is, so how can we fully understand or anticipate a digital fantasy land?

Our world has always been changing rapidly especially as the productive forces of our society change. But we adapt and change with them.

RhetoricThug wrote:I need not go into detail on how technology is being used to control people today, or how information exploitation is increasingly easier through social networking, or how drones can now travel across oceans and kill enemies of the state. Technology is good and technology is bad, but we need to focus on the bad as often as the good. The problem is, the peddlers of our future only focus on technological glory. But who will wield the power then? What kind of man will inherit this power?

Again, I am very much worried about this as well. But you need to understand who the enemy is. Technology can be used for good or bad, it is only as bad as the people who are using it in the manner you described – by using it to control people and kill those who oppose the interests of the ruling class in order to prop up their own rule. That they would even need to use it in this way however shows weakness on their part – a fear of losing control. But now that we have established the negative, let’s look at the underlying potential. It can allow us to inform ourselves, to better organize amongst each other, to increase our productive capacity and organize it in a way that can better everyone. It allows us to have the discussion we are having now after all - voicing our concerns, spreading our ideas. So I say let us use this technology for good, use it usurp the old system where possible and then unleash its full potential in helping us create a new system.
By RhetoricThug
#14399793
Varax, the difference between us- I'm a pessimist when it comes to natural human behavior. It may take several generations of botched theory and mistakes before people see the fallacy within their cognitive behavior patterns. We cannot change overnight how things operate for it is a rule of evolution, I mean we are not even a century past one of humankind's most nauseating series of World War. The capitalists are wealthy because of greed wealth and war, the model encourages greed wealth and war. Any socialist system trying to shake things up will have to slowly condition and influence natural human instincts then selection. Tribal goonsmenship is an underlying factor behind some of our most irrational moments in history.

People fear technology because they don't understand it, and as you may know, that fear is an ancient defense mechanism to ensure survival.

Hypothetically, the technocratic elite will be products of capital greed, and any post capital system or transition toward socialism will be under their guide.

I grant you that this is very legitimate concern, but this is not a problem with the technology itself but rather who is using it for what purpose.
Of course technology is indifferent, of course it contains no initial agenda. But we humans are fickle, at any moment technology is a vehicle for, or instrument of war. History and the multitude of inventions past show we cannot trust men with unquenchable power. The scientific method develops unlimited energy, and the power behind its R&D want to monopolize & suppress its use. People are the core problem, but they are also the solution. And if you think now, in this current age of information, people can rise up or organize and throw off the shackles of their oppressor, you're wrong... All this technology is making them more distracted and more content than ever before. However, I admire your faith.
Then that is a problem with private corporations and their allies in government controlling things for the benefit of themselves which is inevitably a feature of capitalism and the price system we inhabit today. The reason I’m keen to distinguish this from the technocratic socialism I advocate is that is precisely removes the dead hand of private property from the system – it removes control of these things from the corporate interests and abolishes the present state. By doing that we remove the means by which such technology is used for exploitative purposes.
So you want to see a reversal of power, strip the foundations of current society and convince those at the head to relinquish power in the name of some just social system?



The pricing system will no longer revolve around currency, instead it will focus on energy, but control will still be asserted

Socialism using technocratic methods to abolish the price system and removing the means by which the wealth of society can be concentrated in the hands of a few is the answer.
How do we keep pace, considering the rate of technologies advancement vs the rate of social conscience?

For a all we know there could be some catastrophic event that wipes us all before we even get there

An orchestrated event can solve many problems

Our world has always been changing rapidly especially as the productive forces of our society change. But we adapt and change with them.

Not as rapid as you may think.
Image
As you may know- this is because of exponential growth due to industrialization and technological application. The mechanization of life as we know it is something we've never collectively experienced. Not to mention any carrying capacity earth may have... and how the ecological system will react to our rampancy.

Technology can be used for good or bad, it is only as bad as the people who are using it in the manner you described – by using it to control people and kill those who oppose the interests of the ruling class in order to prop up their own rule. That they would even need to use it in this way however shows weakness on their part – a fear of losing control.

So the cycle which got us to this point?

You should remember, Technocracy Inc was one reactionary movement during the Great Depression. Why wasn't it a dominant force shaping policy during the 20th century?

Why is capitalism a global force right now? I'll tell you why- natural human behavior, it is easier for our collective minds to practice capitalism. If you conceive an ethical plan to reshape the way we operate without some Brave New World approach, I'd gladly instigate such a thing.

Right now, I firmly believe the human mind is not collectively ready for a digital society, thus I will ruthlessly reflect on any negative possibility concerning Technocracy.



All I can say, Varax, is dream on you classy optimist.

"The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities." 1970, Zbigniew Brzezinski
#14413401
"Let's get this clear once and once for all: That the technological progression of the next thirty minutes invalidates and abrogates all of the social wisdom of history. Can you compete with a computing machine? No, you can't, but you glory — just as the Communists do — glory in work. Workers of the world unite! What for? To be more of the same? To be dumb and stupid. You never got anywhere. Why glorify and eulogize work? There's no sense in it. There might be some sense if you glorified sin, but then most of you are so damn incompetent, you couldn't even go in for it."

- "THE CONTINUING CRISIS" HOWARD SCOTT, DETROIT 4-27-63
archive.org/details/TheWordsAndWisdomOfHowardScott
By RhetoricThug
#14538088
Rule number one, Technology changes social organization and habit.
[youtube]pEbh_-P14-k[/youtube]


This subforum is a platform for technological propaganda. They never tell you that technology will automate government!

Nearly one year after my initial post, I return to update scientific socialism's progress. Some disturbing trends have occurred. The United States faces its existential crisis, while battling social media terrorists. Corporations have successfully fused marketing and cyber media, while securing their own citizenship inside the party politics image game... The future Technocratic regime will reign supreme during the 21st century.

Virtual reality will soon encapsulate the consumer of information within its artificial external reality. Making dissociative acts of commerce easier and more persuasive than ever before.
Virtual reality will allow advertisers to immerse passive audiences into an active experience

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kaviguppta/2015/03/19/virtual-reality-could-help-advertisers-become-relevant-again/

The noosphere is taking over home appliances, as the internet of things invades the privacy unit we call home. God help the advertisers, right? When search engines find you, does the private identity exist, do you exist as the individual?
The virtual you will be able to anticipate your needs, perform the necessary search and deliver the result you need, before you even have to ask. It will be able to adjust your thermostat before you realize you are too hot or place an order for tissues before you notice you have run out. Obviously, search still happens, but it is all done behind the scenes. If the Internet of Things becomes what we believe it can be, you’ll never need to visit the Google homepage again – except to check the daily doodle.

http://fortune.com/2015/03/18/internet-of-things-means-never-having-to-search-again/

Biological interface making it easier to participate in the window to the world. For the first time ever, Microsoft will be releasing its operating system free of charge in order to establish dominance and standardization in OS technology. Hardware will continue to favor biometric scanning over manually operated systems of security.
Microsoft plans a global launch this summer of Windows 10, complete with a new biometric authentication process intended to replace traditional passwords.

http://www.cnet.com/news/microsoft-to-l ... is-summer/

Cars will automate your travel and secure your place in life, while infiltrating your cortex with more advertisements since your mind and hands can freely surf the artificial external reality/noosphere/ecology of information.
"I don't think we have to worry about autonomous cars, because that's sort of like a narrow form of AI," Musk told NVidia co-founder and CEO Jen-Hsun Huang at the technology company's annual developers conference today. "It would be like an elevator. They used to have elevator operators, and then we developed some simple circuitry to have elevators just automatically come to the floor that you're at ... the car is going to be just like that." So what happens when we get there? Musk said that the obvious move is to outlaw driving cars. "It's too dangerous," Musk said. "You can't have a person driving a two-ton death machine."

http://www.theverge.com/transportation/2015/3/17/8232187/elon-musk-human-drivers-are-dangerous

Wearable technology will be popular between the years 2015-2020

Education will be extended to increase social indoctrination and advance the bee hive collective as the dominant form of togetherness. A quarter of your average lifespan will be consumed by social conditioning, making private identity harder to obtain, while enforcing participation in our global digital society. This increase in education will create various economic bubbles that operate on credit extensions and personal debt accumulation.

Technology will streamline involvement in traditional democratic activities. Commercial debates will cease to have any substance or platform. Elections will be determined by algorithms and marketing.

The consumer will become increasingly illiterate as technology automates living. Literacy and critical thinking skills will be used against the socialized under-class.
[youtube]-h3qDNMe7rA[/youtube]
"They feel much more groupie & trendy"

Republicans want voter-ID, while democrats endorse mandatory voting? Wouldn't it be fantastic if the two gangs got what they wanted, mandatory voting, mandatory involvement, and the micro chipped lapdog?
Obama: Maybe it's time for mandatory voting

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/19/politics/ ... ry-voting/

Terrorism will become a perpetual proxy war between the alienated peoples searching for identity and the tribal technolgical group securing their identity.
[youtube]wT2fdAKrHGo[/youtube]
This will help the weed out the unmutuals who cannot assimilate to the world order of things. Like a form of natural selection.


The language of law will continue to be used as a language that out wits the common-man. technological policy will be backed by centralized law & order.


There will be a technological merger, healthcare, taxation, and lifestyle. Bank statements will be under scrutiny by the health care system and IRS. Unhealthy habits will be taxed heavily.
Climate management will also fall on the shoulders of tax payers.

Games, and sports all-day everyday, complacent Brave Neuron World.
[youtube]kIaV9r7VVeY[/youtube]


Yet you think your imagination isn't the same as the television set at the molecular level.
[youtube]eZltkhD-Zxo[/youtube]

Amazon gets FAA approval.
Amazon’s plans for a drone delivery service took a big step forward Thursday when the Federal Aviation Administration gave the company permission to begin flight tests.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2899752/amazon-gets-faa-approval-for-drone-delivery-tests.html
By RhetoricThug
#14574520
That's nice & everything, but my research involves the real world & the real technocracy. You know, the current power structure (circuit circus) slowly encroaching, slowly assimilating. Technologies change human behavior and (re)shape social organization. Technocracy is government through technology. See, instead of people running the information systems, machines automate the system through complex scientific algorithms. Humans, being obsolete, will be left inside digital tombs, enduring womb to tomb surveillance, learning their living through the virtual denial of organic reality.

Sure, it's scientific socialism, similar to how the assembly line changed our labor organization. Mass production gave birth to mass consumption, obeying the mechanical order organized by industry (technology). You have some kind of fatal misunderstanding, technocracy is the story of man. Your myth involves the suspension of actuality, where you use inner mutterings to describe your fantasy with terminology made by men with information agendas. The fixed perspective you continue to regurgitate doesn't seem to recognize the always changing present. We extend our senses through technologies, but every new technology reorganizes our common-sense.

In short, I can't take your utopian blather to heart, because it holds zero substance or life-blood.

As I've said before, this is not a general technology forum, even if you want to talk about social issues concerning it.

Don't even pull that. I'm clearly not talking about general technology, Palestinian


This doesn't make any sense. You're talking about social issues and how technology will address social issues. But I can't talk about technology and how technology will manage social issues? Do I have to reword my rhetoric and agree with you to post in this subsection, called technocracy, which has many subjective definitions?
By RhetoricThug
#14575543
How about agreeing with the moderators of this forum, and even the founder of this site, who created this forum specifically to discuss this topic? Don't try to make this about me, I'm just doing a job here. I've already told you that the purpose of this forum has already been defined, and it was defined long before you were ever here. You may not like it, or agree with it, but there's nothing I can do about that.
This thread has been up for well over one year. What's your job exactly? The technocracy you're talking about doesn't exist.

The solving of mankind’s problems and abolition of government via technological solutions alone.

That's very vague, and technological solutions become government.

And yes, there are many subjective definitions of technocracy, you're right about that, but there is also one objective one, that is very clearly defined and is the one chosen for discussion here. Why not the other ones? I suppose you'd have to ask Siberian Fox about that, but I believe that it's because, as I've already said, that the other definitions are of little or no real value.
I hear he isn't coming back...

You keep pointing out "government through technology". What does that even mean? A government that uses technology?
Technologies create mediums or channels that humans use to organize their mind & extend their five senses. When I type, the tactile experience is limited by the technology's interface, therefore the technology governs my intelligent interaction.

I can understand why you would want to talk about the increasing trend in many modern societies to use high-technology in socially negative ways, I do too because it is troubling. But that is not what this forum is about. And using the word "technocracy" to describe it is just confusing for people. Why not techno-totalitarianism, or techno-fascism? That sounds much closer to what you are talking about and is instantly understandable by pretty much anyone.
Right now you're talking about nothing, using labels & accepted terminologies to explain your fantasy. The technocracy, or the definition of technocracy you believe in, is not feasible. Technology will be used alongside modern political & economic theory (like always throughout history). The technocracy silicon valley wants has nothing to do with the technocracy you describe. The real technical elite will not implement the outdated theory you cling to.

And there is nothing utopian about Technocracy. It is based on science, unlike pretty much every political or economic ideology. The results of the extensive research that went into it are available to you if you care to look. It's not just some crazy idea I personally cooked up in my head.

I don't think you're creative enough to cook up something this utopian. Think about what you just said... 'pretty much every political or economic ideology,' not based on science? You expect me to continue to debate you after such ah ridiculous claim? The pinnacle of this very moment is science, Kolzene. All empirical evidence put to the test, to bring us banking, voting, advertising, etc.

And as for your tone, I would hope that if you can't speak to me civilly as a human being, that you'd at least show a little respect for my position as moderator. I don't have to explain myself to you, and I've been nice in trying to explain to you why things are this way. If you continue to behave poorly then I won't be so nice.
What tone? I'm not using profanity, I'm staying on topic. Name one forum rule I'm violating? Are you actually threatening to use your moderating power if I don't agree with you? I'd like to have other moderators weigh in on this.

I am not just talking about social issues with technology. As I've said, this forum is for discussing a specific, well defined economic system. In case you don't know what that is there is a sticky topic post about it. So yes, we are talking about different things.
Last time I checked, we share the same time & space, and everything you are talking about is not a well defined economic system, let alone practical.
By RhetoricThug
#14576950
Kolzene wrote:I hope that makes it as clear as possible. If you still have a problem with it, there's nothing I can do about that.

I appreciate your sincerity & thoughtfulness (thoroughness). I rest my opinion, I hope this thread can stand for future reference. I will refrain from disrupting the order of content in this Technocracy forum. Thank you for being civil & not abruptly censoring this thread. This has been one of the best exchanges I've had with ah member of the PoFo moderation team. Really, keep up the good work, Kolzene.
User avatar
By quetzalcoatl
#14577174
I think a lot of people are unaware of the distinction between technocracy as a generic descriptive term and the particular philosophy that shares the same name. It tends to cause confusion. This board is for discussion of that specific philosophy.
The Evolution Fraud

Thanks for doing the homework for me. So you are […]

EU-BREXIT

^ Rich is a stealth white nationalist. The EU is[…]

No one cares because it doesn't fit people's polit[…]

The Popular Vote...

It bores me I agree. In fact, I remember callin[…]