What are we doing?

1

A few years ago, I believed we would probably come together shortly. That I would obtain a community which would help me sharpen my thoughts and arrange together for the future we would love to live in.

That didn’t happen. Instead, I have been swerving fairly aimlessly, trying to get the full picture, the fuller picture, the complete picture, in my head. That hasn’t done much good for me at all, either.

At this moment I’m pushing and pushing to write some almost silly piece of code to assist in doing (~crypto, ask/bid orderbook markets) market trading. I’ll enhance that in the month after this one, with advanced statistical analysis. Hopefully converge it onto an ‘AI Fund’ that I can ‘tokenize’.

Ideally that will produce ‘final stage capitalism’, by having a proper ‘Cubit’ style currency in circulation.

If I manage to arrange it properly, that’s to say, without great dependence upon anything, and with great accessibility, and with decent daily operators, it should yield into great wealth. Perhaps even fantastic wealth. As it scales perfectly with capital invested, and it is a cleanroom implementation of ‘best capital investment’. That is when reality will start to hit.

Assumedly, I will have theoretically millions or even billions to invest within a 20 year timeframe. Depending entirely on the capacity to produce said fund, and to fill it.

I want to put that straightforwardly into ‘computing methods’, producing the fantastical combination:

  • Automated Large Scale Farming (the capacity to overproduce nutricious substance, in gardens rather than grids. The cost should be in the many millions, with fairly quaint execution)
  • Completionary Cellular Manipulation (the use of light and sound, chemicals and virii, to reprogram a cell, and to do so en masse to produce healing and programmed growth, and thus extend the evolutionary programmes that constrict our futures. The cost will be very computational, and hopefully achieved in great collaboration.)
  • Automated Factory Complex (the capacity to do incredible custom-yet-bulk production, with great planning automation; raw resources arrive on boats, electrically powered vehicles and trains move them, robotic arms shift, retool and arrange to fulfill orders, in large factory halls, the complex able to produce practically anything; glassworks, woodworks, metalworks, prints, lithography, labels and biological processes, and their respective tools. The total cost of this complex will be surmounting.)

The use of advanced means of finance, collaboration, etc. may allow me to revolutionize many existing industries. The goal would be to more aggressively utilize capitalist means, to create fair yet competitive ‘inner markets’, and thus provide ‘clean’ implementations with minimal overhead, for any common service. Lowering costs through design re-use and simply applied global scale. Purchasing many companies and combining them into a streamlined version. Nothing easy, but honest labour, given right and moral attitudes.

I obviously am a long way from this dream of ‘the universal/distributed Chaebol’, but I’ve come to believe it is /the/ way to force the world onwards quickly.

I’d love for some collaborators to pop up and come to support this mission. I do believe new ways of living together can produce great productivity, even compared to our present nests. I don’t believe I’ve seen anyone here suggest to produce such laborous camps, and think that perhaps a network of co-living-co-working places (where one can rent a room and office space) will be the way to implement this stepwise, in accordance with present developments.

2 Likes
2

And I thought I was the only one here with grandiose ambitions :wink:

You sound like you have more concrete plans than what you’ve mentioned so far. If you want, we could discuss them in private.

I think the greatest challenge is scaling such ideas. The first hurdle is to create a compelling MVP (Minimum Viable Product). That’s the hurdle most people already can reach.

The next problem is that most people over time tend to provide what they think the market requires, rather than products that produce superior value or progress. The allure of making quick bucks derails most from their initial ambitions. Why do you think the same won’t happen to you?

1 Like
3

I’m massively assuming the initial AI fund will produce a great deal of capital, which can be employed towards the idealism of automation to the point of ‘automatic plenty’. This is the principle immunity. It should permit a certain ‘academic distance’.

I’m more worried of the opposite situation; completely ignoring the market, and not making any money with the additional projects! I can imagine we finish the ‘pumpkin robot’ and just end up with practically infinite pumpkins! Then we get into some very odd sales positions, where we can expand production seemingly linearly, with a known fixed cost per ‘production unit’ added. I believe practically the same is already true of onions, for example, where onions are just almost too easy/cheap to grow. Basically, we ruin every market we get into, and will definitely have to get some additional work done to ‘add value’.

It’s moreso about organizing the skilled people, setting them free to develop these only slighly dreamy robotic solutions, until it becomes a rather full set. I expect strong synergy between farming solutions that predict biological outcomes and combinatorics, and the cellular manipulation. Similarly, a compiler for ‘robotic factory produces arbitrary product’, should be a lot more doable with great experience in generic robotic operations, which would be quite fun to do in improving farming.

So, ehm, with the goal being ‘to replace the market with fully automated plenty’, I feel quite immune to being subject to market demands.

2 Likes
4

That sounds interesting, but this can cause a lot of problems:

  • A disruption of the free market like this would be challenged by
    • those who are pushed out of the market
    • those who want to enter the market by adopting best technologies and practices
    • regulatory bodies who want to break up monopolies
    • the workers who are made redundant
  • The PR backlash against near complete automatization financed by an AI fund would be so severe that you would appear like a new evil megacorporation.
  • Creating complete market disruption by sudden abundance within one single market is certainly hard to achieve, and even if it could be achieved, it would be far from optimal. I would prefer a gradual decrease of prices for all kinds of goods, so that market dynamics aren’t disrupted, but the advantages of reduced prices benefit consumers across the board so much that loss of income is at least compensated.

Maybe. I think the motivation to work on solutions like that will soon rise quickly, as people get increasingly aware that they are supposed to be kept in dependence on big agriculture. Decentralized food production is needed to counter the current rapid centralization of the economy.

It’s still a challenge to organize a highly motivated workforce, because getting people to collaborate and move in the same direction is far from trivial. You certainly need someone with excellent leadership skills.

Yes, I think that’s a grand mission statement that can grant you a lot of support. You definitely won’t have the problem of thinking too small. Solving the practical challenges will be the really hard part, though.

5

Will we fund “Curiosity Fellowship”? | Manifold Markets

6

i evern tried to put all these posts into one post cos people get mad sometimes. I couldnt.
OMG now i can only post 5 things cons in a row. grrrr. hackers be like…

7

i guess ur strict forum controlled my by makinh by… likre the rules. who knows how many posts there could habe been but now only 5. except… i hack around it LOL.
oh. i could edit the posts? I could go back and… organise things better. but im lazy and i got like better things probably to do. I’M NOT BEING MESSY OUT OF DISRESPECT.
i respect you and i value your timr and thankyou for listening and thanks in advance for…

i feel like i want to balance things. soo because you are so formal and strict and proffessional…
i do the opposit to give the forum balance?
if you were messy, id be tidy