Comments
powerscunner t1_ivuf0r8 wrote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy_movement
Distribute and track energy, not money.
> At the core of Scott's vision was "an energy theory of value". Since the basic measure common to the production of all goods and services was energy, he reasoned "that the sole scientific foundation for the monetary system was also energy", and that by using an energy metric instead of a monetary metric (energy certificates or 'energy accounting') a more efficient design of society could be made...
WikiSummarizerBot t1_ivuf2hv wrote
>The technocracy movement was a social movement active in the United States and Canada in the 1930s which favored technocracy as a system of government over representative democracy and concomitant partisan politics. Historians associate the movement with engineer Howard Scott's Technical Alliance and Technocracy Incorporated, prior to the internal factionalism that dissolved the latter organization during the Second World War. Technocracy was ultimately overshadowed by other proposals for dealing with the crisis of the Great Depression.
^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
AssWreckage t1_ivum5x0 wrote
Technocracy is saying "Mainstream economics is a hard science like Physics, you can't argue against it because it is natural, therefore we ignore democracy to favour policies designed by economists based on theories they learned in college".
This is what Technocracy means, and this is what put us right under the finger of neoliberal free-market systems, because that is what mainstream economics teach.
Don't muddy the waters with bad understanding of terms or fringe definitions.
SkaldCrypto t1_ivv628f wrote
Incredibly based
SWATSgradyBABY t1_ivvlhx2 wrote
I wasn't going to even bother really correcting the contribution but thank you for doing so
powerscunner t1_ivuxmxi wrote
The 1930's were a naïve time, but it is hard to argue against the tight coupling of economics and energy. Does anything affect the economy like energy?
Plus, it's harder to hide energy use than to hide money use. And I feel like it's easier to distribute energy than money too. The technocrat's whole getting rid of a representative democracy is a bit much - but don't we all wish we could get rid of politicians ;)
Energy accounting (in the technocrat sense) is one of the few alternatives to money I've heard of. My other favorite being an beneficent, omnipotent superintelligence as the only entity with the PIN number to humanity's checking account. But that's still kind of a dictatorial setup, even if benevolent.
I like the idea of allocating energy. It feels fair and closer to true value than abstract moneys.
SgtAstro t1_ivwf2vu wrote
If we followed this, solar panels would be much more expensive.
The energy to extract raw materials from the earth's crust does not factor in the scarcity of those elements. So as a corse example, a salt mine and an iron mine having the same value because the same energy is used to extract the mass.
SWATSgradyBABY t1_ivvkgyp wrote
In this vision, how does the average person obtain consumables when there are no jobs?
Shelfrock77 t1_ivu5zep wrote
Can’t wait for Amazon to send out packages with drones
SFTExP t1_ivui9wn wrote
cutoffs89 t1_ivub7c8 wrote
For those wondering what the big deal is;
Before the robots could just move the packages to various locations in the warehouse before they begun their delivery journey. Now these new ones can do the repetitive selection process and move all different types of objects, not just the packages.
tedd321 t1_ivukgvh wrote
Once they automate manufacturing there will be a point where you can send them a blueprint (or even text describing a blueprint) and they will send you the product
Sigura83 t1_ivu5cf8 wrote
If I buy in bulk, Amazon has food prices comparable to what nearby discount chain (Maxi) sells at. And its delivered to my door. This is likely to let them beat that. Plus, the AI research well shows no sign of drying up soon. The fancier grocer (IGA) in my area has robotics warehouses and delivery now, but still demand a premium price. They'll likely lose to Amazon and Walmart in the coming decade
Amazon is like a pearl, with the piece of shit Bezos lodged inside. Walmart was one of the first places to use computers to do business, and they're still going strong. I hope the monopoly Amazon/Walmart prices they settle on aren't too steep once they've driven the locals out of business
tatleoat t1_ivu4lfs wrote
How is there no video
Surur t1_ivu7i65 wrote
Good question. Here is a gif of it in action.
A bit more info than in the press release:
> The system — as with its predecessors is an off-the-shelf Fanuc system customized with Amazon hardware and software. The former is a hydraulic-based suction system capable of lifting objects at a variety of weights.
> The latter utilizes sensors to identify the items based on a variety of different inputs, including size, shape and bar codes. An Amazon spokesperson claims the system is able to identify around 65% of the company’s entire product inventory.
tatleoat t1_ivuebv3 wrote
That's incredible! 65% is a fine start!
SWATSgradyBABY t1_ivu7kh7 wrote
You know why
s2ksuch t1_ivvcutz wrote
Robots to support what, the employees' eventual demise? 😂
Artanthos t1_ivwmcun wrote
Yes, and they have been openly stating this for years.
And it’s not the first piece of automation distribution centers have adopted to reduce labor requirements.
jackInTheBronx t1_ivvi4gr wrote
Captain! It’s captain Jack Sparrow!
QuartzPuffyStar t1_ivuxekc wrote
>Investing in our employees"
What a circus LOL
SWATSgradyBABY t1_ivu7vc1 wrote
We really need to figure out a viable plan for wealth redistribution