Much as I hate contacting far Left organisations, do you think we might do fairly well by discussing this with ‘Old Left’ groups?
There’s a serious—several years now—transhumanist attempt to reach out to the religious (e.g. Mormons); so perhaps even Communists can be jawboned—if nothing else. Now, it is extremely unlikely we could work with them, they mean business, and virtually all business is brutal. Yet if you need numbers then you might want to cast about everywhere, to anyone who wants change.
I wouldn’t go near Old Leftists with a ten ft. pole, but then yapping with the religious can be Fool’s Errand, too.
By Alan Brooks on Mar 08, 2013 at 5:36pm
The word “wave” reminds me of the futurist book “The Third Wave” which I read in late 1970s. I am trying to assess to what extent the predictions had materialized.
“Wavism is the belief in a coming great wave of technological and societal change, and the desire to harness it toward positive outcomes as much as possible.” This is a welcoming belief. Just that one would have suspected the great wave of change is already happening, except we do not know whether the outcomes will be that positive as desired. (btt1943, vzc1943, tanboontee)
By venze on Mar 09, 2013 at 8:37pm
I think in the U.S, most particularly in the east, it should be a high priority to contact people in the “Free State” Project. Look them up.
By Sia A. on Mar 09, 2013 at 11:46pm
I agree, the Singularity is far from inevitable. It is birthed by technological progress. Technological progress requires the continuation and thriving of a great number of situations and systems whose continuance is not at all a sure thing. It could easily dissolve into a Big Whimper or explosive destruction or a global police state. None of which would lead to Singularity even where they are survivable - at some level.
I also agree that the ramp up to a Singularity, and especially what I think is the most probable trajectory for it to turn out a *positive* Singularity, will challenge humanity on multiple levels - from our own deep psychology and throughout many of our institutions. A revolution indeed!
I like ZS general principles a lot, especially that natural concomitant of freedom, voluntarism. They all sound great. Now to see how they are being worked in practice.
You start out in section 4 talking about Meritocracy, which is great! But then three paragraphs down you switch to direct democracy. Direct democracy cannot work headed into a technological singularity of increasingly complex challenges if it is indeed true that nearly 80% of the people in even advanced Western countries are incapable and or incompetent to read and understand a simple news story or basic math. To try it would be to pretty much guarantee disaster.
A business entity is a group of people working toward a common purpose, often for longer than any single member lives. It must have at least some rights as a legal entity or it cannot function. If it does not function a lot of very important things are likely to go with it. I would also point out that such a ‘corporate person’ is the most likely form for AGIs and for human uploads and perhaps people in cryogenic stasis or with their state preserved otherwise both before and after they are revived. So care must be taken when deciding what should and should not have rights.
Overall I am very favorably impressed.
By Samantha Atkins on Mar 11, 2013 at 8:38pm
“Some Futurists feel strongly that politics has no place in the community”
The old jest/truism is someone says: “not everything is political.”
The reply is: ” ‘not everything is political’ is a political statement.”
Funny, though: many can’t comprehend news stories or do simple math, however they can memorise pages of sports statistics.
By Alan Brooks on Mar 13, 2013 at 7:00am
The most interesting idea behind ZS is to be at the same time something more and less than plain-vanilla transhumanism.
More, in the sense of being a more content-rich and politicised movement, without the need to justify every single choice, tenet or platform by reference to a core of traditional transhumanist beliefs, and speaking in principle to a larger audience which is only required to embrace its principles and programme and not the entire “culture” we come from.
Less, in the sense that it does not aim at being the umpteenth umbrella organisation covering all the conceivable range of transhumanist positions and fostering unavoidable controversy whenever it starts taking stances that at least for the time being reflect only the views of *some* transhumanists, as opposed to the entire tribe.
By Stefano Vaj on Mar 14, 2013 at 10:13am