Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - scourge

1 ... 148 [149] 150 ... 157
Metal / Re: What would a metal society look like?
« on: December 01, 2007, 04:26:58 PM »

theme park
A metal/medieval/gothic/renaissance community where employees live on site. Similarly, Disney World, somewhat self-sufficient, also has some housing for its employees.

Cost: tendency to depend on profit not culture and accountability to the surrounding government's laws and taxes. Startup outsider capital investors would want their money back and then some, quickly.

Benefit: cleaner, quicker interface into existing society by being another corporation.

exclusive island
Establish metal townships on an island independent of other nation states.

Cost: economic isolation from limited natural resources and tiny volume of trade exports due to scale. Lack of available island within group's budget. Iron, meat, stone, grain and hardwoods might be very expensive commodities locally. Insignificant military protection. Chronic poverty.

Benefit: autonomy, exclusivity, strong isolation from modernity and crowds

rural pioneer
Buy up adjacent country or ghost town lots in America. Smokey Mts might be a good pick.

Cost: initial lack of work, accountable to surrounding governments

Benefit: eventually agrarian and semi-autonomous, semi-isolation from modernity and crowds

urban pioneer
Buy up cheap inner city housing and populate local government. Many metal bands started in this setting.

Cost: chronic poverty and almost no agriculture, accountable to surrounding governments, high crime environment

Benefit: eventually semi-autonomous, close proximity to metal culture venues and patrons

arcology pioneer
Experimental society design ostensibly for academic research for post-carbon society and sociology.

Cost: reliance on startup grants, engineers, scientists, scholars. Accountable to outsider expectations and surrounding government.

Benefit: living off the land, green tech, localized economy, limited modernity and no crowds. Semi-autonomous.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 30, 2007, 03:41:27 AM »
I would phrase that this way instead: if we are gonna criticize society, we have to know what we would prefer instead or we get more of the same.

You can extend that by saying those who are involved in imagining, prototyping and building the future will own it. Everyone else is just railing against the side effects of past designs, which is usually not as beneficial as creating the future.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 29, 2007, 05:59:57 PM »
Better, if you're over 1.8, over 120 and exceed the Army APFT requirements, you get first pick of the women.  ;D

Interzone / Re: Paganism, Nazism, Satanism
« on: November 29, 2007, 12:46:09 AM »
Nothing neo can be reactionary. Reactionaries are defined as an old order attempting to resist a rising new order. Christianity is/was the old order in our time and many Christians have reactionary leanings.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 28, 2007, 10:27:56 PM »
Good call. Tiny or stubby males qualifying with over 140 IQ should then pass a fitness test.


Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 28, 2007, 08:04:15 PM »
Since we would end up with mostly males, all men under 1.8m must go.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 27, 2007, 01:42:29 AM »
Dunkelheit has the right idea. A little durable, well crafted technology along with good farming practices could take care of the subsistence. Farmers today are each feeding huge numbers of people who do not farm. That accounts for at least some of the extra labor and time spent.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 26, 2007, 05:30:30 PM »
Blitzkrieg is right. No reason a little bit of robotics and a great deal of smart system design can't fill in the remaing gaps. Sorry, but most of the human race is unnecessary, costly in fact.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 26, 2007, 04:26:08 PM »
Buildings do not cause learning, nor are millions of bright people incapable of physical construction for their own purposes. Why do we center the energy and time of our civilization around making things that all end up in landfill today? How about reorienting that center? What I'm finding is everyone attempting to justify having a huge population when 99% of it serves only perpetuating itself, behaviour that does not at all differ from bacteria. The top organism on the planet, unnecessary and now very costly to the rest of the natural structure, is thus far failing to justify its own existence.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 26, 2007, 02:17:55 PM »
Hippocrates's school of medicine would not have been built by those who attended it. Pythagoras and his followers/associates would have had far more difficulty creating their theories while lifting stones for a building.

We value the learning that came about, not the buildings that were created. The learning lasted, is still put to use and expanded upon. Many of the buildings did not last and probably none are put to use as intended by those who commissioned the work. These decay into corruption and dust. Learning, like living things, lives on, grows and assuming appropriately supportive minds continue to exist, may flourish indefinitely.

The reason why such large numbers of the lower class existed particularly in those civilizations is because they all enjoy frivolous things. The pyramids, the Parthenon, the coliseum. All these structures of which those civilizations built many of and many similar to take a great deal of skill, labor and time to create. If you wanted a society of the few and elite you could not have such beautiful architecture, roads and buildings would be small and undecorated.

I'm not so sure these material luxuries highlight the apex of mankind's worthiness as a species. Birds, bugs and rodents are also exquisite architects. But they never uncover the mysteries of the universe, decode its intangible mathematics, predict its Forms, comprehend its logic, structure and cycles.

That's really why we exist, not to make physical luxuries - the output of knowing, not the foundation of understanding - that decay and are forgotten in time. For all our understanding up until this time, what output are we producing for it today?

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 26, 2007, 11:12:29 AM »
Then societies without a bloated underman class have yet to exist. Is this due to a lack of smart design innovation or just the usual physical laziness?

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 25, 2007, 04:22:38 AM »
I'm unclear what our vastly more complex modern society has done to make humanity a more worthwhile species than what the Greeks produced. I'm also noting the sensible polis communities they had at one point, which to my knowledge did not need to rely on a servant class in order to prosper.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 25, 2007, 04:03:06 AM »
The supporting base for the bright people to make humanity a worthwhile species can be made less cumbersome by improving the design.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 25, 2007, 03:35:16 AM »
Its easy to say that smart people should control government and the idiotic should have little power in themselves and i do agree with this, But it is when we actually start to make some sort of plan or present a plan of our own that we must elaborate on.

We have governments in order to manage the idiots. Governments serve no other need.

Who is stupid, what characteristics befall one who is stupid (and it would be best to avoid the tautology here) and why these are unfavorable. All these things need to be explained when someone suggests to cull the population starting at the bottom.

This is similar to the trouble with having a democracy with everyone voting, except we're instead discussing everyone integrated into the same civilization, or inhabiting the same planet for that matter.

Interzone / Re: IQ
« on: November 25, 2007, 12:55:05 AM »
Hmm so nice and fun to see certain people consider themselves as special.

This is an ad hominem.

Iq does not equal aspiring in any meaningful way.

This is patently false.

This guy I know, with a mensa certified iq of 150+, he is a semi-alcoholic bartender who hasn't done jack shit since high school.

This is another fallacy of division.

The general idea of "social reform" over here is just as Utopian as communism which many people here strongly advocate against.

This is a strawman argument.

So you think intelligent people leading as a waste of talent?

This is another strawman.

1 ... 148 [149] 150 ... 157