Jim Craddock's avatar
Jim Craddock jimcraddock@primal.net 1 month ago
You'd have to sacrifice progress. A centralized planning authority really helps. I don't think that we have found a good long-term system that doesn't tread on the individual. That's probably mostly due to the minority of people with a criminal mindset that eventually (and inevitably) end up in leadership. China is full of wonders and well-educated people but we all know what comes with that territory. Worth it? To some, certainly. Now, we are beginning to see what late-stage capitalism brings. Worth it? To some, certainly. Star Trek always seemed like they had it figured out. Maybe we just need energy to matter conversion and all the greedy, lying leaders will melt away. I doubt it, though. I can speak with certainty that #medicine and #science are broken due to #centralized control. They simply redact things they don't want you to know. A great analogy from my personal life would be the transitions my condition comes with. For years, my body operates one way until it hits a hard limit. Then everything goes to hell for a while until a new way of operating emerges and stabilizes. Those transitions are tough, painful physically and mentally, because there must be a system, some order, but finding the new equilibrium is painful. Basically, some transition grows near. We all feel it. We are hitting a limit. I think those on Nostr are less susceptible to the fog and disinformation. #Decentralization will be a part of the future systems. Keep growing #Nostr. I know it's something we need. 🔥👆 Science is Redacted! www.redactedscience.org Read Redacted Science for Free
↑ Parent

Replies (1)

sister_sam's avatar
sister_sam sister_sam@primal.net 1 month ago
Diasgree. Centralized planning by government which initiates force to make it so fails compared to the dynamic nature of any and all innovations being tried that can find a way to fund themselves. No central committee can escape the information bottleneck. It chokes trying to process enough information to make the best near real time decisions. It literally cannot tell what is most interesting, innovative, needed by the most people or how much so via not being able to gather and process all the relevant data. Also in practice it escapes some of this overload by picking and letting relevant "experts" make the decision. Trouble is those experts became respected due to past work and are not so likely to be as open-minded and innovative. Not to mention being politically connected. China is and isn't full of wonders. It does a good deal of monument building by top-down fiat to its own greatness. More than a little of that is a misallocation of funds including some of their ghost ultra modern cities that no one hardly at all lives in. And they got really rich by the West offshoring much of its manufacturing. So China is and is not innovative. IF the central committee thinks something is cool enough and will be a jab in the eye to the West and may make China greatness more obvious then it gets funding. If not then not. And the innovators best toe the Party line and not run afoul of social credit system. Even then China has unfortunate habit of deciding a successful innovator has too much financial power and arbitrarily yanking them down a few notches.
↑