Kill the Culture and Burn the Pulpit Part 1: An Analysis of a revolution

[Doktor Howl]

Ever study what happens after a revolution?

What are you thinking of in particular?

The reprisals that follow every revolution, of course.

[Captain Utopia]

I was thinking more along the lines of the industrial revolution, than the "let's storm the castle and become the new leaders of this land" sort of revolution.  Especially since the latter rarely seems to achieve its stated ideals.

[Doktor Howl]

I was thinking more along the lines of the industrial revolution, than the "let's storm the castle and become the new leaders of this land" sort of revolution.  Especially since the latter rarely seems to achieve its stated ideals.

Looking around, it never achieves its stated ideals.

But this turns out to be some "singularity" crap (with the term used incorrectly)?  Well, I can tell you what the results of interfacing humans with information systems REALLY does, because it's happened already.

The humans go nuts.

Yep.  Your brain is built to handle the stresses of hunting antelope and dodging leopards.  That's it.  You were NOT designed to have a constant inrush of information.  This will NOT cause you to make better decisions, it will cause you to either go crazy, or self-medicate with prescription meds, illegal drugs, booze, and/or weird religion.

Also, what the fuck is up with this direct democracy crap?  That's been tried, and it was a fucking horrorshow.  I speak, of course, about Athens.  They used ostrakos instead of computers, but all computers will do is speed up the horror.

[Jasper]

Has anyone tried some kind of rule by antelopes and leopards? 

I mean that in the most straightfaced way imaginable.

[Doktor Howl]

Has anyone tried some kind of rule by antelopes and leopards? 

I mean that in the most straightfaced way imaginable.

Yeah.

Then we improved on it, and got all that we have today.

[Nast]

My ideal future is to be mostly left alone.

[Jasper]

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have some kind of brain-computer interface that let me google stuff and pirate nugget porn while I drive to work, but I don't see myself using it to save the world and end hunger or anything like that.

[Doktor Howl]

My ideal future is to be mostly left alone.

You'll be dragged kicking and screaming into cybernetic utopia, and you'll like it.

[Captain Utopia]

But this turns out to be some "singularity" crap (with the term used incorrectly)?  Well, I can tell you what the results of interfacing humans with information systems REALLY does, because it's happened already.

The humans go nuts.

Yep.  Your brain is built to handle the stresses of hunting antelope and dodging leopards.  That's it.  You were NOT designed to have a constant inrush of information.  This will NOT cause you to make better decisions, it will cause you to either go crazy, or self-medicate with prescription meds, illegal drugs, booze, and/or weird religion.

I'm talking about a phone/web app, not a cybernetic implant!  Just a place a person can go to throw their weight behind a particular topic, instead of just griping about it impotently on some forum.  Incidentally, they could still gripe on a forum, but the actual participation aspect that I'm talking about would only take a fraction of that time.

Also, what the fuck is up with this direct democracy crap?  That's been tried, and it was a fucking horrorshow.  I speak, of course, about Athens.  They used ostrakos instead of computers, but all computers will do is speed up the horror.

E-Democracy is an umbrella term for using information technology to allow members of a defined group to decide on issues.  Direct democracy is one form it could take, but it wouldn't be my first choice, and there need not be only one method of voting.  Catholics may choose to proxy their vote to the Pope to vote as one bloc, for example, or they may choose to do so only on certain issues or not at all.

[Jasper]

So it's almost like a tiered democracy.   Many will vote directly, but "leaders" would only have power insomuch as people support them at a given moment?

[Doktor Howl]

But this turns out to be some "singularity" crap (with the term used incorrectly)?  Well, I can tell you what the results of interfacing humans with information systems REALLY does, because it's happened already.

The humans go nuts.

Yep.  Your brain is built to handle the stresses of hunting antelope and dodging leopards.  That's it.  You were NOT designed to have a constant inrush of information.  This will NOT cause you to make better decisions, it will cause you to either go crazy, or self-medicate with prescription meds, illegal drugs, booze, and/or weird religion.

I'm talking about a phone/web app, not a cybernetic implant!  Just a place a person can go to throw their weight behind a particular topic, instead of just griping about it impotently on some forum.  Incidentally, they could still gripe on a forum, but the actual participation aspect that I'm talking about would only take a fraction of that time.

Also, what the fuck is up with this direct democracy crap?  That's been tried, and it was a fucking horrorshow.  I speak, of course, about Athens.  They used ostrakos instead of computers, but all computers will do is speed up the horror.

E-Democracy is an umbrella term for using information technology to allow members of a defined group to decide on issues.  Direct democracy is one form it could take, but it wouldn't be my first choice, and there need not be only one method of voting.  Catholics may choose to proxy their vote to the Pope to vote as one bloc, for example, or they may choose to do so only on certain issues or not at all.

Wooooo...Rush Limbaucracy!  

[Jasper]

Dok has a point.  A system like that would just empower the loudest assholes who work for the biggest networks...who work for the richest fucks.

[Captain Utopia]

So it's almost like a tiered democracy.   Many will vote directly, but "leaders" would only have power insomuch as people support them at a given moment?

Yeah, it's as flexible as you want to make it.  These are open-source projects developing open api's - it's hard to imagine it really working any other way - so you get to choose how to place your vote, and you can place whatever software you wish in the decision making process.  E.g. Your friend Jane may be more into "Space Science" than you, so anything which is tagged under that area you can proxy your vote to her, and revoke it at a moments notice if you review her decisions and don't agree with them.

Wooooo...Rush Limbaucracy! 

Sure - but with dittoheads in particular, the situation won't change much under this new scheme.

[Captain Utopia]

Dok has a point.  A system like that would just empower the loudest assholes who work for the biggest networks...who work for the richest fucks.

How is this different from our current system of Governance which sways with the political winds anyway?

Here's how - idiotic policies can be passed quickly and repealed just as quickly when they fail because of their own stupidity.  You don't have to wait 4-5 years, while those in an echo chamber keep beating the dead horse, for the reckoning to come.

[Doktor Howl]

Dok has a point.  A system like that would just empower the loudest assholes who work for the biggest networks...who work for the richest fucks.

How is this different from our current system of Governance which sways with the political winds anyway?

Here's how - idiotic policies can be passed quickly and repealed just as quickly when they fail because of their own stupidity.  You don't have to wait 4-5 years, while those in an echo chamber keep beating the dead horse, for the reckoning to come.

~ 50% of America still supports supply-side economics, 30 years after it was proven to be a failure.