Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Machines replacing bank tellers? (Score 1) 281

Yeah, and the world has seen what that leads to. People who had all of their assets taken away and maybe shot, sent to gulags, what that does to a country and to its population is unthinkable. While in the Tsarist Russia there might have been few that were destitute, in the new Soviet Russia the entire country was destitute, millions died, millions murdered, the country with its socialist ideas taken to some form of a local maximum existed on slave labour and product deficits and eventually fell apart because that type of an 'economy' is not sustainable.

'Up against the wall' may sound good at some point, it leads to total disaster of-course for the ones who are still left to linger.

But the point is that automation should make it much easier to protect yourself and your assets against such assaults.

Comment Re:Tradeoffs (Score 1) 610

I am in no way a populist, I am an anti-nationalist and I would prefer to see the people of the entire world doing better, so why would I be an enemy of the West? I am not UKIP, not Donald Trump, not Marine Le Pen and not Vladimir Putin.

As a libertarian, anarcho-capitalist I do not believe in building ever bigger governments though, so the smaller the better. This is a win for individual freedom, that's what it is.

Comment Re:Machines replacing bank tellers? (Score 1) 281

The mob wants to steal, that much is clear. When you are talking about 'resisting' what exactly is it you imagine people must resist? Their inability to steal from people who are better at protecting their assets today than ever before.

What exactly are the expectations? That you will come out with stones and you will get somebody to throw you a bone? That you can put together a system to steal on your behalf because you can throw stones?

I think the productive population on this planet needs to mobilise and make sure this never happens again that a mob with stones should be able to steal anything at all. Automation is the answer.

Comment Re:Dilemma Solution (Score 1) 380

Again, without politicians and generally the government making it artificially harder for people to start businesses people start businesses, at least they try.

Now I don't know what business somebody may decide to start, you think that for some reason you know what kind of business they will start. Your entire line of thinking goes like this: somebody will attempt to start the same business as some established company. This somebody will know exactly all of the processes that will go into building the business, so they will start with automation and will avoid hiring people.

OK, I beg to differ. When you start a business you do not know the processes that will have to be set up so you cannot automate upfront unless the business you are starting is something that has been done many times before. Trying to compete with a number of established businesses where the automation solutions are already well understood and can be purchased as long as you have the capital and believing that you can do it better ... I guess that is one way to go.

I am not talking about that type of a startup though, I am talking about starting a business that makes sense for that person, possibly it is a local service, maybe it is a new type of a product. If it is a new type of a product, the manufacturing will most likely be outsourced anyway, but creating the product will take man power (actual human power).

If it is a new (local?) service then it is not at all clear that there is any form of existing automation that can be applied immediately and besides, again - it is costly to buy an automated solution just to find out that your processes cannot use the solution and it has to be redone. It is *cheaper* to hire somebody while working out the processes, looking for clients, etc.

Finding clients can be partially automated (lists, directories, robocalls?) but it is not clear that these strategies will lead to sales without a person closing the deal.

In any case, if somebody decides to start a business hand making bongs they will have to have these hands.

Comment Re:Machines replacing bank tellers? (Score 1) 281

The mob does a lot of idiotic things and eventually these things turn around and bite it in the ass while restructuring everything around. Restructuring is going to happen now, that the outsourcing and automation will remove the power from the mob and will ensure that the people who actually produce stuff have their proper say in this world.

Comment Re:Dilemma Solution (Score 1) 380

Correct, it may be running at a reduced efficiency but who says that as a business you have some sort of a right not to have competition? Nothing says that. Be innovative, come up with businesses that are required and are not there yet, not with businesses that are well established and whose operating costs are so low you cannot compete on the price (if your entire point is to compete on the price).

Compete on something else. It is probably even possible to compete on the fact that you hire humans, not robots, who knows. The point is that with the government rules, regulations and taxes not there, people will invent businesses and automation is not an immediate thing, new businesses do not have clear cut processes, they are fluid and changing until they find their way, automating that is not possible until we have a full fledged human like AI available in a human like body. But that is not going to be cheap, with no regulations people would be able to compete at the very least on the initial price of the capital investment vs the operation costs of a wage labourer.

Comment Re:Dilemma Solution (Score 1) 380

Automation is the key to freedom, including freedom from people who believe they are denied something because they represent no value to somebody else.

Do you or do you not provide value? If you provide value to others then what is your worry? You are needed.

If you do not provide value to others and your only value is in not robbing / not killing them as long as they slave for you then you do not represent any value, you represent an unnecessary added cost and you are subject to an efficiency restructuring.

Comment Re:Makes sense (Score 1) 380

if you really believe that manifesto you're exactly the kind of person everyone else should be looking to lynch

- I already addressed this in the comment you are replying to. That's the point of full self protection and the interim steps to achieve full independence.

because that attitude leads to a few people hoarding and the masses starving.

- actually this attitude is what leads to progress by increasing productivity of those who are looking to be free. This attitude is the only attitude that actually allows the so called 'society' to progress further in the first place. Everybody who ever searched for a profit by building/providing/selling some products/service to the rest of the mob is the person who pushed the mob further as a consequence of his search for freedom. We have billions of people today in the world, who are only alive because of the search of profit by the few who want to be free.

Not everyone starts out with equal means or opportunity, you know.

- yes, I know, that is 100% irrelevant, completely irrelevant because the point is not to equalize everybody's beginnings, the point is to achieve personal freedom.

Again, the fact that people are different and come from different backgrounds is a demagogue's tool to collective theft and nothing else.

Comment Re:Dilemma Solution (Score 1) 380

Society as you know would not exist

- where is the issue? Society as I know it is not the society I believe should exist.

And it ain't stealing pal, taxes are a fact of life,

- so are diseases (a fact of life). Taxes and diseases are detrimental to the individual, to 'quit moaning and pay them' is about as good as to 'quit moaning and suffer keep being sick'.

Comment Re:Makes sense (Score 1) 380

Productivity is literally the ability to produce. The people who produce are the people that build the productive capacity (own productive systems, factories, land, mines, farms, whatever).

Automation increases the productivity of the people who own the productive assets, not of people who are not the owners. The owner is the one whose productivity grows, not somebody who has nothing to do with the productive asset in the first place.

The entire point of running a business is to be productive enough to stop being dependent for other productive people for survival. The most desirable case is to achieve full self reliance.

Full self reliance = full independence from every single person out there.

Full independence from the people, full independence from the systems that are not under your own private control.

Full Self Reliance = Full Independence = FREEDOM. Freedom from people and from systems, freedom from the desires of the collective, freedom from anybody who has an opinion.

That's the point, so when somebody aiming at achieving full independence, full self reliance and full freedom be forced to give up that freedom in the name of 'morality' the only correct response is to work harder towards Full Freedom, which includes Complete Self Protection.

Full reliance = full independence = full freedom = complete self protection.

Complete self protection from the opinions, from the desires, from the collective will of the masses. That is the goal. In the interim using charity and government manipulation is an acceptable solution to the problem of the collective force that can be used to take away the tools, assets and the productive output of the productive individual.


In reality everybody should be aiming towards the same thing, being fully self reliant, fully independent, fully free and completely self protected. That's a good goal, try and do it for yourself.

Comment Re:Dilemma Solution (Score 1) 380

I disagree. I do not believe in stealing from the few to subsidise the many and there is no reason to trade with people who are not producing anything in return for the trade (and no, paper money is not a thing that is relevant, the only relevant thing is productive output of an individual).

I think the only correct response to any form of job loss is removal of all government involvement in the business, labour and money. The chips must fall where they may, people without the past jobs can work for people who start new businesses but the only possible way to start new businesses in the automation environment is to remove government oppression from the equation entirely.

Comment how about tunnels? (Score 1) 327

If we are going to smoke some serious weed here, I propose this idea: tunnels.

Dig a bunch of tunnels, airplanes can land onto a shorter strip and go underground. You can have as many tunnels pointing in as many directions as you want and the cool part is that all you have to worry about is ... floods and the under ground zombie people.... but it will look cool

Slashdot Top Deals

You cannot have a science without measurement. -- R. W. Hamming