Ideas on changing the system?

This is a small explanation of what i mean

"Cybernetics had its origins in the early 1940s, when a group of distinguished scientists was
gathered together in Mexico to deal with various assignments associated with the second
world war. It is well-documented how they discovered that -- precisely because of their
eminence in different fields -- they found it difficult to talk to each other about anything
serious. So they decided to choose a topic that was nobody's speciality, but of interest to
everyone. And their eminence was really important for another reason: they had nothing to
prove. They decided to discuss the nature of control."
(cont)

"It took a long time to get anywhere, because each specialist had an idiosyncratic view of the
matter. We have already seen how popular misconceptions arise 60 years later; at the
beginning, there was nothing to go on. What did control actually mean? An astrophysicist
might think about laws of gravitation and cosmic repulsion as controllers, whereas a
neurophysiologist might think about brains. The concepts, and certainly the vocabulary, do
not coincide. I shall focus on one famous and fully authenticated incident, because it seems
to embody both the form of interdisciplinary work, and also the excitement it can generate.
Two members of the group had been designing a machine which would enable the blind to
read with their ears. A bank of photocells would scan a line of print. As each letter passed,
it would sound an audible group of notes. It is not difficult to imagine that a common word,
such as the definite article, would sound a short chord that would soon be recognized as
such. The main difficulty would be to cope with different sizes of print. After all, the snag
already encountered with Braille, whereby every book has to be reprinted in a special
format, needs to be avoided if at all possible. What these two scientists were discussing was
the prospect of having the machine adjust itself automatically to the appropriate print size.
They developed their idea by arguing through a schematic diagram -- not an electrical
circuit -- which they left on the common room table when they went to bed. The next man
to come into the room, who was a famous neurophysiologist, picked up the diagram. He
asked: "Who is trying to draw a diagram of the fourth layer of the visual cortex of the
brain?"
(cont)

"If you do not already find this story exciting, then consider the sequel. Any scanning
process will have a characteristic cycle time for its periodic sweep. That will depend on its
input rates. The great mathematician Norbert Wiener asked if anyone knew the rates at
which the occipital lobe of the brain registers visual information from the retina. It is a
complicated question, because several minicomputers operate between the two as the optic
nerve is transversed. But the brain people knew the answers, and the mathematician was
able to calculate the scanning rhythm. So the question was: if the human brain actually
worked like the schematic diagram, what would its rhythm be? The answer was ten cycles
per second -- which is of course the resting rhythm of the brain. If the whole story leaves
you unmoved, it's possible that you may never acquire an interest in the subject of
cybernetics."

No I'm white...

The elites think they know that people are a system because they're delusional bureaucratic central planners who believe in radical behaviorism.

This seems irrelevant to you calling society a system.

The story described a huge discovery:

Biological and mechanical systems are comparable when you talk about control. After that, a lot of information theories from Shannon and biological ones, like Humberto Maturana, and later Niklaus Luhman has allowed to the development of a system theory that speaks about the transmission of information, amplifiers (like memes or advertising), reductors (like aggregation and statistics), time for reaction, and a bunch of other concepts that are applicable to an engine, a CPU, or a society (in advertising/marketing).

And is not even dependable on "psychological behovoirism", just on certaing laws that apparently are shared in systems in terms of the response time, the dynamical balance (homeostasis), and more importantly, what does a stable system needs to be destroyed or reformed.

"As above is below" has been shown to be true, at the cybernetic level (information and control) at least.

texas got its own flag now?

please stop eating doves mr puerto rico peru guatemala or something

But that's all just bullshit theories. Nothing useful has actually come from that line of thinking because it's wrong.

GoogleX didn't fail to grow rice and wheat, the problem was that rice and wheat are too space intensive (vertically)

That's also really REALLY questionable, because a lot of GoogleX's methods have been legitimately questioned by more knowledgeable farmers.Also, there are several SEAsia firms offering Hydroponic high density rice-growing setups, and those would ostensibly be as easily automated as anything.

the BLTrobotics thing is pretty cool though.

Also look into tower/vertical farms, those can be easily automated and grow plants at very high densities.

fuck feudalism, but I'm all for the millennials-to-the-fields. I can't speak for you bongs, but us burgers have something of a demographic crisis in the farming sector.

Oh, it is ok if you want to dismiss it, but it is very far of being useless. If you spend some time researching on it, you will notice that is a sound theory, with clear applications now specially related to cognitive science, communications and advertising.

The internet is not called "cyberspace" by chance.

fuck this sounds like a ton of verbal ballet and other intellectual masturbation.

It sounds like it, before you learn some of the names of the people that participated on these meetings. All eminences on their fields. It is all on Wikipedia and books around the net.

They really went into something. And discovered a common language to speak when talking about the natural and mechanical processes and how to read them and control them (information and control).

If you think this is a worthless endeavour, ask yourself this rethorical question, and the consequences of your answer:

"Do you think God knows the difference between physics and chemistry?" (a quote from a british scientist)

Getting in charge of your food could be a first step on democratization of society. Of course you can grow this by yourself, but is more efficient if you have this in communities.

I see this in preparation for a better future where we might have to take care of ourselves instead of leeching from a government or putting ourselves in debt for basic needs.

For clothing, i think we will soon see machines able to build shoes and garments from textile materials. This could be the 2nd step.

Medicine, another basic need, will need more tech not readily available now, but i see it feasible.

I totally agree, I already have a compost tower setup in my house. have 150 plants growing in less than 100 sq. ft of space, mix of high nutrient density greens (Kale, Chard, trying out collards), Vegetables, and a couple of cereals as an experiment.

as for the clothes and shoes, shoes are a bit tough, but clothes are a breeze if you could farm appropriate fibrous materials.

Not sure if anybody has ever tried to do cotton in a hydro setup - would be pretty interesting to try. hemp obviously works,. but hemp clothes suck dick.

once you get those things however, doing fabric making, patterning, and cutting in your house is a breeze, and several steps of that process have already been automated within reach of the average hobbyist. actually sewing is simple as shit, and if people don;t know how to do that then shame on them.

I plant some things in home, carrots, lettuces, tomatoes, chard ... I am moving to an apartment now so i am looking into hydro to continue with this.

But the issue of freedom from money and government, even if it is somewhat related to technologym has more to do with people. People are apathic as fuck and cares only about money. We have become a lazy bunch that thinks that being a citizen means only to vote and ask for shit.

It is sad, but i think that a political platform is valid if there is some technical base, which is automatically superior to any purely ideological one, because is not based on promises, but on actual things and products.

Bump

Final bump. Good night all