> I'm not sure you have a complete grasp of the Sysop Scenario. It is not
> about "forcing" anything at all. No one is forced to modify their mind,
> or live a libertarian life. The whole point is everyone is free to do
> what they want, live the way they want, etc. It is volition-based. It
> is about protecting what you want and how you want to live.
>
> I would not call it a libertarian or any other society. Some people may
> form governments or societies inside of it, others may not participate at
> all and focus on individual pursuits. Yet they all can still interact with
> other without any possibility of stepping on each others toes (unless they
> want their toes stepped on).
I think you miss my point: how does the Sysop Scenario prevent a group of
people/entities using their "freedom" to dismantle the Sysop Scenario and
set up their own form of managing things in which people/entities have no
freedom at all?
The only way that you can prevent this is through use of force and coercion
by the Sysop.
(And my original point was that if you don't have the freedom to destroy the
society, then it's not a truly libertarian society, which is why a truly
libertarian society can't exist).
> I have yet to see a better solution to the issue. At some point the matter
> (as in atoms) must fall under someone's control, and personally I don't
> relish the idea of having to constantly protect myself from everyone else
> who can't be trusted with nanotech and AI. All it takes is one Blight to
> wipe us out. That kind of threat does not go away as humans progress to
> transhumanity, rather it increases in likelihood. What is the stable state
> if not Sysop or total death? There may be some other possibilities, can
> you name some?
The most likely outcome is just as it is now -- you will be constantly
having to protect yourself from entities that can't be trusted. Just that
the tech involved will be somewhat more sophisticated. It's dynamism in
action -- things constantly changing. The Sysop Scenario sounds like wishful
socialist central-planning type thinking...although there's nothing to say
that central planning couldn't work if you have sufficient processing power.
But it's not a free society.
Reason
http://www.exratio.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:01 MDT