One thing to note is how vulnerable the old X.25 networks are.
Birds regulate their use of airspace quite well. There are rarely any crashes, excepting human error. Aerobots should emulate birds rather than try for some sort of central control - imperfect attempts at control only produce chaos.
Currently you can carjack delivery vans in front of your house if you just want "free shit" and have no moral virtues. What's holding you back?
Why does the market bear so much?
Because it's a bear market. And Microsoft is a has-been who can't make anyone want to "upgrade" to their newest OS even for free. So their future, if they are to have any, is in acquiring other, possibly relevant companies, and that's best done in a bear market when they're cheap.
Yes and that video must ONLY be viewed by Americans for some reason. Now that you've admitted to what is clearly a felony, prepare for extradition.
What good does it do them sitting in an offshore account? Something doesn't add up here.
It does the CEO a lot of good, since having it on books earns him a bonus, and "they" don't matter. Selfishness is good, amirite?
With any hint of self interest (enlightened or otherwise), and the system eventually breaks down.
So has every other system so far. Capitalism itself only managed to survive it's previous near-fatal crisis by taking a huge step to the left. And it seems to be undergoing a slow-motion collapse of ever worse conditions for ever greater amounts of people stuck at the bottom as those at the top confiscate all the resources for their own use.
The point of a basic income is to get power over those receiving it.
How do you use unconditional, inalienable entitlement to wield power over someone? You can't revoke it because it's unconditional and inalienable, after all.
If anything, basic income will make it harder to wield power over anyone, especially the poor. And that, of course, is the real reason why it's opposed.
The idea that its purpose is to help the weak is propaganda for suckers.
"Sucker" here meaning anyone who cares about the fate of the weak, or entertains the notion that they might ever be one.
Of course, in a more socialist society - such as one with basic income - it just plain doesn't matter as much whether you're a "sucker" or not, because the consequences of losing aren't as severe. You'll have a roof over you head, clothes on your back and food on your table no matter what. And that'll make it harder to use FUD for propaganda purposes, like you're doing here.
So you're telling me I can get ~everything~ I want and need to consume. Even if I put the bare minimum effort (or no effort.) However no matter what I do, I can not become more than "middle class."
No, you'll get a guaranteed minimum share of the whole pie. If you want that share to be larger in absolute terms, you'll have to grow the whole pie. You can't benefit yourself at other people's expense, you can only benefit yourself by benefiting everyone else as well. On the other hand, all effort you put into growing the pie actually grows the pie, rather than get confiscated and moved to a tax haven by a fat cat.
You can't become more than middle class, but you can make "middle class" mean "my own star system".
In the long term, no one will work, and the whole thing will collapse on itself. As socialism and communism always does.
Russia seems to be failing at capitalism and democracy just as hard as it failed at communism, or perhaps even harder since at least the Bolsheviks did succeed at industrializing the country and beating the Nazis. Should we declare those things hopeless pipe dreams too?
What if I plug you into the matrix? You'll have everything you can possibly dream of.
Isn't that the premise behind the entire entertainment industry - and, for that matter, daydreaming: to let people leave this world behind for a while?
Money is NOT "control over other people", and it differs from a whip and shackles in that I can tell you to take your money and stuff it.
Of course you can tell your slavemaster to take his whip and shackles and stuff it. You'll simply get whipped for that. In the case of chattel slavery the whip is made of leather, in the case of our glorious capitalist system it's made of poverty. Either way you'll keep your mouth shut and do what you're told, after a few sessions at the whipping post if not from the start.
Countries covered with snow a large part of the year have an annual reminder that sloth leads to death, and it's strongly ingrained in the cultures of many It's harder to destroy their work ethic, but nevertheless it's still happening.
I live in Finland, and I've never even heard of this association. No, the reason for Nordic work ethic is simply that society is seen as a shared project where everyone does what they can for the common good. If you're lazy and do just the bare minimum you must, you aren't stiffing just your employer, you're stiffing your country and everyone who lives in it. That's also why Nordic countries are relatively non-corrupted.
And yes, this work ethic is dying, not because of socialism but because intrusion of the right-wing idea that everyone is responsible only for themselves, not for other people or for their society.
Oh really? So Joe gets paid $500 on Sunday as wages from his job. He spends $300 on booze and lobster at a strip club on Monday. He then gets mugged attempting to by weed on Tuesday and loses $200. He's starting to get pretty hungry by Thursday, and on Friday his landlord is getting pretty anxious about his rent. Question: do we let Joe go die? No? Then letting people make economic choices is a pipe dream.
Fixed that for you.
Pass UBI without the backbone to let people Darwin themselves and Joes might come out of the woodwork. Hell, I might be one.
Right. So how comes you are not dead yet? Or do strip clubs only admit people on welfare where you live?
If given a choice between sitting on your ass and getting paid and working and getting paid, the _majority_ will sit on their ass.
Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that that's true. Let's further assume that it makes a difference, that the economy needs these unmotivated people to do jobs they hate and will do worse without them. With those assumptions made... Which one is more important, Freedom or economic efficiency? Because you can't have them both.
"Summit meetings tend to be like panda matings. The expectations are always high, and the results usually disappointing." -- Robert Orben