Richard Stallman has recently ruled on the zeitgeist movement. Since I use the English language only failure to control, I will now post the original text, translate it in German on the text answers and try to translate my response into English. Friday, June 19, 2009
Toilet Paper Roll And Penis Size
response to Richard Stallman
Richard Stallman has recently ruled on the zeitgeist movement. Since I use the English language only failure to control, I will now post the original text, translate it in German on the text answers and try to translate my response into English.
Richard Stallman has recently ruled on the zeitgeist movement. Since I use the English language only failure to control, I will now post the original text, translate it in German on the text answers and try to translate my response into English. 
Here the original: I recently read the 
.
The first half, Which criticizes the current economic system, seems to be more or less valid (there are points I do not know enough to be certain of). However, the recommendations in the second half seem to have basic flaws. It
propose that we should entrust a computer system to decide how much to make of every sort of product. Given a well-formulated problem, with a choice between a limited set of products, and a clear idea of what they are useful for and who wants what, it might be feasible for a program to calculate an optimal solution. But real life is far more complicated than that. It might be feasible to calculate how much resources to put into "growing chocolate", but how could any centralized system decide how much to produce of the thousands of different kinds of chocolate candies, chocolate pastries, chocolate puddings. Each person might like one of these more than another because of subtle differences in taste and texture, which that person would be hard put to describe.
The article also points out that societies can change values. That is true, but we don't know how to predict how they will change, let alone how to change them to order. Meanwhile, there are tremendous actual differences in values. Some value systems, such as the ones that motivate "honor killings", deserve to be morally condemned and rejected. But there are many other variations in values within the bounds of decency.
Also, I saw no solution for dealing with one aspect of human nature: the tendency to compete to for the admiration or envy of the neighbors. This drives competitive consumption, which is a major cause of waste. Wise people opt out of this, but if we want to lead everyone to opt out, I don't think exhortations to wisdom will suffice. We would need a method that works. I don't know of one, but I don't see that the Zeitgeist Movement does either. copyright (c) 2009 Richard Stallman Verbatim copying and redistribution of
this entire page are permitted provided this notice is preserved.
translation of the original / translation of the original:
Recently I read the comments to the principle of the zeitgeist movement.
The first half, which criticized the current economic system seems, more or less to be correct (but there are points with which I am familiar not me). However, the proposals appear in the second half to include some basic error.
The article continues to make clear that companies can change values. That is basically correct, but we can not predict how to change these values, let alone how we sort of values, because there are currently huge differences in the existing values. Some value systems, such as "reward" killings, those who deserve it, morally abandoned and declared invalid on. But there are many other variations of values, which could be described as decent.
Next, I found no solution to the following aspect of human nature: the tendency for the admiration or the envy of the neighbor to strive. This is the one that incites performing competitive consumption, and a major cause of the littering is. Way people can resist that, but if we want to induce any person to translate to that, I fear that we will need more than calls for wisdom. We would need a method that works. I know the zeitgeist movement not any, but I think.
My answer / German Answer:
I agree that it was weird from the current cultural point of view seems to leave the supply of things we want or need us as a people, a fully automated, industrial computer system. Also, I doubt if there will ever be a society that creates this global, centralized computer system, and formed in accordance with their wishes. Your critique of the possibility of creating such a system, I agree, however, does not apply. By today's standards it is the market principle of supply and demand, that the tide produces chocolate bars in different places, it would be just as well possible to replace the market mechanism with a global database, where each person who is yes then the fundamental right to access the Internet, expressed his desire chocolate bars-places on a website. This data is analyzed statistically, and depending on current demand, the season and the mood of the people shall have the machine producing the bars from raw materials. It would be technically possible to run the analysis each day fully automated.
Furthermore, you seem not to have read the text very thoroughly. The scientific hypothesis that there is a human being, genetically or by chance inherent in the people is a myth and can not be maintained. It is the environment in which a person grows up, for the most part for responsible as the person behaves. The proportion of innate instincts that lead to violence or robbery would be negligible in a totally dreamed of the Zeitgeist movement social environment, since there is no property that you could get rid of another person. And that brings us to your theory that man has the desire to compete with other people. There are ways, like the game or sport, where such competition is desirable. Unfortunately, forces the current economic system, money to us to prevent vital questions in the performing competitive action. And to destroy this very outdated, outmoded and embarrassing Institution, it is indeed the Zeitgeist movement indicated.
The GPL and the entire free software movement is the first proper step in this Richtung.
ins Englische zurückübersetze Antwort/English Answer:
I agree, that, under the actual cultural perspective, it seems awkward to rely the support of Goods and Things that we want or need as a human on a fully automated, techical Computer System. I also don' t think, that there ever will be a society at all, where this global, centralized, Computer system is established. But i do not agree at your Critic of the technical possibilty to create such an system. Today, it is the „Market“, the Principle of Supply an Demand which controls, which sorts of candy bars are being produced and delivered to the consumer. It would also easily be possible to replace this Princple with an global Database that every Person on the Planet could access (access to the Internet could be a human Right!). The consumer could place his wish about the candy bar he demands. This Data would be collected and evaluated statistically, and depending on the per-Day demand the Machine decides how much of which Resource would be used in the Production line. It could automagically rely on the Demand, the Season and the temper of the people. It would be possible to automate this procedure on a daily or even hourly basis.
Furthermore, it seems like you have not read the Text very detailed. The scientific these, that there is a human spirit, that lies in the Humans, and that depends on a genetic or random factor, is a Myth and not True. It is mostly the environment that's responsible to how a person develops his social Skills and that develops his Character. You can nearly fully neglect the amount of Intrinsics or Instinct that lies in the human Spirit and that leads to Violence or Theft, cause in an Utopian World, like dreamed from the Zeitgeist Movement there would be no Property and thereof nothing to Steal or to waste your Violence on. Now on to your Perspective, that every Human strives to a competitional behaviour. There are possibilities, like Sport or a Game, where this behaviour is wanted. But it is the monetary economical System that forces us to be competiotonal even in serious issues in life. It is about to vanquish this old, outmoded, embarassing Institution, and that's what the ZM stands for.
At Last – is not only wise People, who are able to opt out of this competetive strive. People, who did not had the NEED to act competetive because of their childhood or their environment will be that ones, that don' t do it for the rest of their lives. Of course, the Game and Sport are exceptions. I think, there are better Instruments than Wisdom. It is reconnaisance – not the historical Term, but the Teaching one. I mean the unconditional possibilty to gather Informations all over the World.
The GPL and the whole Free Software Movement is the first, right Step towards this Direction.
Endlich konnte ich mal die Labels Philosophie and use technology in a post ... :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment