- * the USofA Americans showed how to use that set-piece mentality against a tyranny (ca 1776-)
- * Shaka Zulu converted from stylized tribal warfare methods to a similar guerrilla form of war (ca 1790)
- * Gen. Sherman applied a scorched earth strategy through the South to end slavery (go away if you want to argue revisionist histories) (ca 1860-s)
- * British and German forces in WW-I continued that tradition, declaring means of production to be valid targets. (ca 1910s)
- * Everyone came on board in WW-II, though there was debate over day-light precision bombardment (in daylight, targets=factories) vs carpet bombing (at night, targets=cities). Nukes made the distinction irrelevant. (ca 1940s)
Along the way, things like the Geneva conventions have been struggling to make doctors and engineers part of the solution by making some of their products illegal (as war crimes), so we have a precedent for this idea.
The hegemony we saw in late 1700s in Europe has stopped spreading (because colonialism is evil). So the Euro-centric model of limiting war by rules is confronted by a genetic algorithm based solution that is right now trying to find out which system is better. At the extremes: the Western trended "rules of war". A the other extreme, the guerrilla tactics and all's fair models of the new tribal societies. Hooray for science, we know how to model the question of which will win (see Prisoner's Dilemma ). The bad news is that the genetic algorithm does not reward "fair", or "just" or "peace". It rewards fecundity (see Idiocracy) whether genes or memes.
"Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle."
Start with a word processor and a spreadsheet, and make it possible for poorer users to maintain data without having to own and maintain their own hardware.
Isn't that what Google Drive is doing?
we ban behavior that doesn't hurt anybody, allow people to hurt themselves, pay to fix people who have hurt themselves, have lots of people who are unemployable, etc. How do you reconcile the libertarian ideal of personal responsibility and freedom with the reality that many don't seem to thrive under those conditions?
Actually, libertarians may have to accept the dual-track society that Heinlein envisioned. The trick is keeping the "free" free (as a minority of self-aware people) and the proles fed and entertained in a world where we have one-person, one vote. Thank Decartes (my god this week) for the Car-trashians.