Comments on: “We” isn’t an advanced form of “I” https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/ NoMoreFakeNews.com Thu, 24 Jul 2014 06:54:15 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.2.10 By: Amaterasu Solar https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9795 Thu, 24 Jul 2014 06:54:15 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9795 Truly, I don’t grasp what attitude has to do with the fact that We have better ways of solving Our issues that a system that promotes psychopaths into power. We use money to facilitate getting needed items to Those in need – accounting for Our energy input – and to motivate People to do needed work They don’t want to do.

Free energy makes accounting for it moot, and robots remove the need to force, coerce or bribe (pay) People to get needed work done.

These are all functions and mechanics of foundational economics. What’s attitude got to do with it?

]]>
By: OzzieThinker https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9794 Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:14:18 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9794 Here is the issue, AS, and I can summarise it in one word – ATTITUDE. Attitude has made the world what it is and will make the world what it will be.

Don’t get me wrong; I am certainly not against you. In a world without attitude, your suggestions/recommendations are entirely plausible. But this is a world driven by attitudes and attitudes, for the most part, are impossible to change. That is where your “solution” collapses.

Watch out for my blog post after next (“Beliefs and UFO’s”). It will simply be titled “Attitude”.

]]>
By: Amaterasu Solar https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9793 Wed, 23 Jul 2014 02:19:24 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9793 ♥♥ "ALL money systems promote the most psychopathic to the top of the money/power heap - THEY will do ANYTHING to get there." "The love of money is the root of all evil; remove the soil in which the root grows..." "If the universe is made of mostly "dark" energy...can We use it to run Our cars?" "If You want peace, take the PROFIT out of war."]]> I think You are stuck in the scarcity paradigm, where if You figure out something, You hide it until patented, and then try to make money on it. Or worse, the company You work for does.

In abundance, You don’t need anyOne to acquire things from You. You can live as richly as You choose without having to exchange anything.

No. No barter (again, an accounting mechanism of the energy We input). Rather than buying and selling, robots and Those who love to do necessary/needed work. Products can be ordered over the interweb and delivered, no exchange needed.

I am very different from Venus, which has a central governing body of programmer-priests (though Jacque does not call them that). Rather, I offer emergence, stigmergy, as the governing factor. No One doles anything.

I agree that Venus sucks. They want to relegate Human input to preferences.

And very little funding will be needed once free energy is flowing, removing most of the cost of things.

Perhaps You might want to read some of My articles?

http://stateofglobe.com/2014/03/07/liberty-and-the-american-way/

http://stateofglobe.com/2014/07/06/what-would-it-be-like-living-on-this-planet/

http://stateofglobe.com/2014/07/22/the-playing-field-of-consciousness/

♥♥♥

“ALL money systems promote the most psychopathic to the top of the money/power heap – THEY will do ANYTHING to get there.”
“The love of money is the root of all evil; remove the soil in which the root grows…”
“If the universe is made of mostly “dark” energy…can We use it to run Our cars?”
“If You want peace, take the PROFIT out of war.”

]]>
By: AP Ryan https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9792 Tue, 22 Jul 2014 19:25:52 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9792 So let’s say you create a clean, efficient motor vehicle. What’s to stop the person with many more resources from taking it apart, figuring out how it works, and reproducing at a much better exchange rate simply because they have the means? You may be credited for the invention but that doesn’t mean people will acquire it from you if it’s more efficient to acquire elsewhere.
I’m assuming that we’re bartering here. How is that different than using money? Money is a symbol of said goods, except easily transportable, and is only bad when it’s not backed up by a finite resource that can be accounted for, as in the American fiat system that is backed by thin air.
Your idea sounds aligned with the Venus Project ideal of a moneyless, resource based economy that is run by a non-existent, benevolent Gaia machine that will dole out resources fairly/appropriately at all times via an infallible distribution algorithm.
If this is you, then this is dangerous thinking, in my opinion. Such a project would take massive amounts of funding and resources to be overhauled and put in place. Who controls the majority of money and resources again? Somebody would have to program this machine and if the PTB are the ones footing the bill, do you honestly think that they would suddenly change their pace and create something that would take their feet out from under them? People would still have to go through the faceless, centralized, intermediary arbiter of all goods. This is merely exchanging one form of collectivism for another, only this time you deal with an “infallible” machine when you have issues instead of a system of humans.
I can think of no other way to implement such a scheme other than to go through the current monetary system. How else?
If I’m mistaken then please forgive my rant. But do elaborate if possible.

]]>
By: Magnus Göller https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9791 Tue, 22 Jul 2014 17:12:56 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9791 Here – in the ever ingenious NYT – I found this nice piece with the charming title “The End of ‘Genius’ “.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-genius.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region&region=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region&_r=1

It’s worth reading. Even copyright comes in.

“WHERE does creativity come from? For centuries, we’ve had a clear answer: the lone genius.”

A little further down the author continues:

“But the lone genius is a myth that has outlived its usefulness. (!!!!! – Exclamation marks by M.G.) Fortunately, a more truthful model is emerging: the creative network, as with the crowd-sourced Wikipedia or the writer’s room at “The Daily Show” or — the real heart of creativity — the intimate exchange of the creative pair, such as John Lennon and Paul McCartney and myriad other examples with which we’ve yet to fully reckon.”

And then, after quite some intelligent remarks, towards the end:

“At its heart, the creative process itself is about a push and pull between two entities, two cultures or traditions, or two people, or even a single person and the voice inside her head. Indeed, thinking itself is a kind of download of dialogue between ourselves and others. And when we listen to creative people describe breakthrough moments that occur when they are alone, they often mention the sensation of having a conversation in their own minds.”

Now this is really interesting. Even a single man or women is two, simply because in the creative process he or she talks to him- or herself or some mysterious alter ego, we download dialogues with (of?) all kinds of Jacks and Janes.

Ah, yeah, a painter who looks at the picture of others is sort of a thief, and every reader who writes himself a robber. At least if they sell “their” work, which logically can’t be their own, not giving the dough away to all quarters of the planet.

Now, I don’t know (I doubt it) if the author of the article plans to give away his forthcoming book for free, just deducing the cost for printing, binding and shipping. This would indeed be an alternative for solving the problem honorably and practically, wouldn’t it?

This bit of joking aside, I really don’t understand why Mr None Genius at the end praises pairs as best, after hailing (Internet-)crowds and large networks at the bginning.

]]>
By: Magnus Göller https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9790 Thu, 17 Jul 2014 16:34:36 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9790 Now, what do You propose then?
Again, I don’t see that Jon wants to atomize the planet or create easy prey for the witty centralists of whom he (knowingly?) be a collaborator.
What about copyright? Should it be abolished or not?
And, if yes, for what purpose, for what benefit for whom?

]]>
By: Ivan K. https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9789 Thu, 17 Jul 2014 11:26:40 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9789 Rappoport: ….The ancient story of the Tower of Babel is an early propaganda op. The one universal language was destroyed, as punishment for trying to reach heaven, and therefore, new languages proliferated.
And the problem with that? The collective was destroyed. Power was decentralized. That’s a problem?….

Power was decentralised – to thousands of monolingual collectives! Thousands of smaller central powers!

The guy who earlier said you’ve created a false dichotomy is right. The universal ‘we’ has never existed, it conceivably never will, and there has never been an ‘I’ that hasn’t cared a lot about other I-s, various Kaspar Hausers and Jack the Rippers excepted.

There is independence of mind, and there is infantility. When people respond to the call to “Decentralise”, the separated individuals are always an easy prey for the gangs composed of those who ignored the call.

]]>
By: OzzieThinker https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9788 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 06:19:12 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9788 @Magnus

Correct. I write for “free”. Work for money but only work under the contract of “dual contributism”. I must get out precisely what I put in. Money is merely an inconvenience imposed on me by this stupid system. Those that don’t like my terms will not engage me. If no one engages me, I die. Simple. Personal development is the only purpose of life even though we are “units of experience” or “experiencers”.

]]>
By: henry https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9787 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 03:52:26 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9787 You and I can agree to work together for a specific goal. Or not. The “we” that Jon is writing about is not a voluntary agreement that all parties are free to enter. It is the “we” that you value. That is, the individual is not competent to make decisions so the community must take action. If your neighbors don’t agree with the actions that the community decided then the options for your neighbors are: do what the community leaders and organizers say even if they disagree, or be put in a cage where they can be anally raped, or be killed by a SWAT team.

]]>
By: Magnus Göller https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/07/13/we-isnt-an-advanced-form-of-i/#comment-9786 Tue, 15 Jul 2014 18:52:46 +0000 http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=6840#comment-9786 @ ruffsoft

“If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”
This is sheer rubbish. Some may have inherited or bought or stolen their business, others DID build it indeed.
I think You misunterstood Jon completely. Or You are distorting his words. Where does he say that man – especially the writer – is completely a lone wolf, born in the prairie, raising and educating himself, just by looking at the grass and the fowl, after having been (untimely?) ripped from his mothers womb?
Of course everybody is inculturated, learns from his forefathers, his peers, his parents, his teachers. His work is his anyway. I do not see where Jon foments the “false choice” You’re talking of.

]]>