Probably disagrees with the human on top narrative we grow up with. That and our general xenophobia which appears in cultures all over. That can be educated out, but I don't see it happening before AI technology actually works out.
Hear of this? Blue Brain Project. IBM scientists are recreating the brain of a rat at the molecular level on a computer. Amazing.
Perhaps, though I credit the Civil War more to the Enlightenment hitting the US. It was a war about slavery, pretty cut and dried, despite what people say. It's possible that the revolution occurred at a point when cohesion was less than guaranteed and it contributed to the fracturing, but only in a limited capacity.
As long as robot does not mean synthetic intelligence. If they're sentient/sapient, then they deserve all the rights we have, since they'd be people, too.
Oh. I was confused. Thought you were talking about the J-man. My apologies. sweatdrop I suppose you could draw parallels between the two empires, yeah.
The Americans were impatient. Ah well. I can't blame them for doing what they did when they didn't know if freedom was coming, I suppose. Especially considering they didn't give the Irish representation until much later.
And no, communism wouldn't work now. But assuming we had actually had empathetic leadership across the board from the get go, we might be close. This of course assumes that the technologies that are derivative of war tech would have come about some other way. A lot of the tech we rely on is derivative of war. Problematic.
You could look at it as a form of social darwinism on a big scale, where we don't actually value to success. Survival of the fittest. Either you're really good at not getting killed (the Swiss, the Chinese and Japanese to some extent) or you get really good at killing everyone else (British, French, Spanish, American, the Chinese and Japanese to some extent). Many societies found early on that diplomacy is great when it goes your way. When it doesn't, rather than accept it, fall back to war, where they might stand a better chance of winning. That belief exists to this day, and will be the hardest to get rid of, because it is the linchpin to peace.
I think you mean the Romans. Granted, Greek democracy was limited to a small percentage of the population, since slaves, women, poor folks, et cetera, could not vote, so they aren't the best champions of freedom. Also, the Spartans had differing views from the Greeks on authority, so they were much more authoritarian than the Greeks, in some regards (they even fought the Peloponnesian War, against each other). The Greeks also violently colonized areas and drained them of resources, so they are somewhat of a good analogue for the early US.
Some are of the opinion that the taxes the colonists were complaining about weren't really all that bad. Now, I support their belief in suffrage, but it would have been perhaps a little more optimal for them to have revolted after slavery had been abolished, but that would probably have been undone in some or all states, and the US would likely not have won the war at any other time. The war should be nicknamed "The Serendipitous Revolution," because they seriously got hella lucky.
That's how most history seems to be. And we've known it for quite a while, too, but are resistant to change. Society is hardly all that different from 2000 years ago. Yes, people like to blather on about how we have so many more rights, but seriously. If social progress happened at the same rate that technological progress does (and I see no reason why it shouldn't were people actually logical actors, instead of emotionally invested ignoramuses, which is the key reason it is so slow), we'd very likely be socialists by now, if not communists. Great global wealth, et cetera, barring calamity. The world would be miles better off if people would simply endeavor to attempt to understand others. Empathy is learned around age 2.5-3. It's unlearned shortly afterwards.
View All Comments
Hear of this? Blue Brain Project. IBM scientists are recreating the brain of a rat at the molecular level on a computer. Amazing.
I think I tried it once and it died. Most people disagreed with me and it sputtered. THEY'RE MACHINES, NO RIGHT TO VOTE.
Perhaps, though I credit the Civil War more to the Enlightenment hitting the US. It was a war about slavery, pretty cut and dried, despite what people say. It's possible that the revolution occurred at a point when cohesion was less than guaranteed and it contributed to the fracturing, but only in a limited capacity.
As long as robot does not mean synthetic intelligence. If they're sentient/sapient, then they deserve all the rights we have, since they'd be people, too.
The Americans were impatient. Ah well. I can't blame them for doing what they did when they didn't know if freedom was coming, I suppose. Especially considering they didn't give the Irish representation until much later.
And no, communism wouldn't work now. But assuming we had actually had empathetic leadership across the board from the get go, we might be close. This of course assumes that the technologies that are derivative of war tech would have come about some other way. A lot of the tech we rely on is derivative of war. Problematic.
I think you mean the Romans. Granted, Greek democracy was limited to a small percentage of the population, since slaves, women, poor folks, et cetera, could not vote, so they aren't the best champions of freedom. Also, the Spartans had differing views from the Greeks on authority, so they were much more authoritarian than the Greeks, in some regards (they even fought the Peloponnesian War, against each other). The Greeks also violently colonized areas and drained them of resources, so they are somewhat of a good analogue for the early US.
Some are of the opinion that the taxes the colonists were complaining about weren't really all that bad. Now, I support their belief in suffrage, but it would have been perhaps a little more optimal for them to have revolted after slavery had been abolished, but that would probably have been undone in some or all states, and the US would likely not have won the war at any other time. The war should be nicknamed "The Serendipitous Revolution," because they seriously got hella lucky.
That's how most history seems to be. And we've known it for quite a while, too, but are resistant to change. Society is hardly all that different from 2000 years ago. Yes, people like to blather on about how we have so many more rights, but seriously. If social progress happened at the same rate that technological progress does (and I see no reason why it shouldn't were people actually logical actors, instead of emotionally invested ignoramuses, which is the key reason it is so slow), we'd very likely be socialists by now, if not communists. Great global wealth, et cetera, barring calamity. The world would be miles better off if people would simply endeavor to attempt to understand others. Empathy is learned around age 2.5-3. It's unlearned shortly afterwards.
the pay isnt that great though is it?