Reducing Safecoin inflation over time

A.I. isn’t free, neither is robotics. Neither is what they process. You want a 3D printer to replicate something? It needs software to run, it needs some kind of goo to use as “ink”, it needs energy, and it needs the raw materials that make up the hardware of the printer. Even if you don’t charge for profit on top of that none of those resources are free. Tanstafl @Anders.

Also have you considered the environmental cost of producing technology? Do you know what the cost is to mine rare earth metals to produce computer chips? Do you know the physical and environmental cost to mine all those metals to build your robots? What about the energy costs to power all that tech? Are you factoring in those costs when you calculate what may or may not be “free”?

Anders I’m not arguing about jobs. I’m arguing that it takes RESOURCES to build things. I don’t give a damn about jobs. I do care about the finite number of resources on the planet and how that is reflected by the finite number of resources on the SAFE network. There will always be a need to fullfill and there will always be something else someone else has more of that someone else has less off. People have been trading abundance of one kind or another for centuries. Sex for emotional fullfillment we call that romance, power for a belief system, we call that religion and politics, attention for a message, we call that marketing and entertainment. Abundance for pleasure, we call that prostitution. These are concepts as old as humanity itself. They are not going to go away because we create a new bunch of tools.

Did we get rid of these things when we invented fire, or the wheel, or gunpowder, the printing press, or the atomic bomb, or computers themselves? Did these things go away when we created the internet? No. I very much doubt porn and prostitution will vanish with the advent of A.I. People will always want to buy something.

But no jobs aren’t the problem. Nor are they the issue. No the point is that the SAFE network is a resource economy. Just like nature is a resource economy. So to try to say that machines will replace jobs and everything will be “free” is a false analogy because they’ll only be “free” in that the machines won’t ask you for a wage. But the machines do cost resources to create and there is also an environmental cost in the harvesting of those resources. So those robots and your A.I. are not free.

2 Likes

Machines will gather the resources, recycle resources, clean the environment, and machines will build machines, maintain machines and so on. It’s a fully automatic production. It’s a HUGE “economy” yet no need for money.

Cryptocurrencies will still be useful for a long transition period, and Safecoin is needed to make human farmers wanting to farm, but actually even farming done by people can later on be fully automated.

There’s no such thing as “produce stuff for free”. Everything takes energy. In fact, it takes energy to fight entropy.
You can have a society where the cost of living a decent lifestyle is so low that it looks like free. And there are examples of where that’s been the case. But then people want more - more entertainment, more art, more healthcare … and it all has a cost. So, will technology including robotics and AI get to the point where the entire world can live at a current US middle class level or above with only a modicum of work (maybe 10 hours a week or less - but not zero)?
Maybe. But then we will most likely want more. A trip to Mars, perhaps. And that will require work and energy. And so far, it’s not been shown that “anything we can do, machines can do better”. Maybe in the domain of production … but in the domain of creative efforts - inventions, art, creating anything new - man has the edge for the foreseeable future. Now some of the AI work coming out of Google such as AlphaGo from DeepMind is pretty impressive … but I don’t personally consider neural net learning to be creating … yes, AlphaGo won against some of the strongest human Go players - but I put that in the domain of production - not the domain of creation. Sorry, I believe a lot of this is off-topic from Safecoin :frowning:

Bandwidth is clearly priced in. Both the user and the farmer pay for their bandwidth to their hosts - the pipes are paid for. This is external to safe net costs.

The cost of storage on safe net then subsidises what the farmer receives for delivering the data in the future. This is internal to safe net costs.

There is no free lunch here. No one needs to use an ISP or safe net, unless they feel they are getting a reasonable deal. A free lunch suggests someone is getting something for nothing - that is not occurring here, which should be blindingly obvious to anyone.

3 Likes

Again with the word games, you know what I said and stop with the misinformation. I know you are not so illiterate to not comprehend "a package deal’

Your paying to browse would mean people are paying twice for the same thing (any cost on bandwidth, even if for most its incrementally free)

And your attempt to belittle what I said actually makes no sense. If something is free and you place a charge on it then you are simply profiteering and that is illegal in many parts of the world too.

You are arguing for argument sake.

Even if no energy was consumed or the energy was free, time always carries an opportunity cost.

Costs may be driven down to approach zero, but I doubt they will ever reach zero. While prices are more than zero, a market of some sort will be needed to prevent abuse (spam, hoarding, etc). Whether this take a traditional form (stuff is priced) or more subtle forms (reputation impacts on future trades, violence, etc), something is needed to meter out anything which had a cost.

Whenever I hear someone arguing that stuff will be free in the future or X reason, I suggest they wait for it to happen first. They should concentrate on much ‘cheap’ instead, which also happens to use similar mechanisms as ‘expensive’ to resolve.

2 Likes

Or it is to spread FUD and misinformation. We all like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but sometimes a spade is just a spade, IMO.

2 Likes

It is appropriate to seek and consider alternatives to the way things are done. Like adding a data type that is capable of being deleted and MD will do that or maybe a new data type similar to Immutable data. But to maintain the core goals of SAFE there would still need to be a persistent Data type (immutable Data). But renting removes the ownership and persistent data aspects. So its really a no brainer if it is to be embraced or not.

Also when a suggestion has been shown to be not suitable then continuing the discussion so the topic can continue will usually result in the one trying to continue the argument having to say things that are plainly wrong so that others have to correct the misinformation and thus continue the topic while claiming they are trying to explore alternatives. Often ignoring the parts that are shown wrong while they move onto other misinformation. Its a common technique - a word to the wise.

2 Likes

I agree. Time, energy, “frictional” costs (i.e. the costs of exchange, administration, etc.) - Even when you have total commodity pricing which can get very close to the price of production, there’s still no “free”. Robots may be more efficient than humans in production tasks, but the robots themselves cost money to product, run and maintain. AI may make other production tasks (and perhaps some day even help with creative tasks) more efficient - but again, it costs something to develop the AI and then to run it …So, yes, cheap (and ubiquitous) are the tests.

3 Likes

To digress a bit, entropy is a statistical measurement, and with femtotechnology or perhaps even with nanotechnology it will be possible to extract energy from the vacuum of space, so-called zero point energy. Maxwell’s demon made real kind of. And I believe “cold fusion” is actually a zero point energy effect and that it’s possible to extract it without intelligent technology. It’s basically about making the random quantum fluctuations in the vacuum of space less random.

And the technological progress is exponential. It’s speculative sure, but many people are taking the idea of an intelligence explosion seriously:

The intelligence explosion is a possible outcome of humanity building artificial general intelligence (AGI). AGI would be capable of recursive self-improvement leading to rapid emergence of ASI (artificial superintelligence), the limits of which are unknown. An intelligence explosion would be associated with a technological singularity." – Technological singularity - Wikipedia

The time for this is estimated by some experts to happen already within a few decades from today.

“At the 2012 Singularity Summit, Stuart Armstrong did a study of artificial general intelligence (AGI) predictions by experts and found a wide range of predicted dates, with a median value of 2040.[7]” – Technological singularity - Wikipedia

Only when used as such. There are so many types of “entropy” today, its getting hard to keep track of them.

Stargate fan I see

You would be wrong too. “Cold Fusion” is exactly as it sounds. No need to create things. It is a fusion reaction that occurs at room temperature OR can be fusion reaction without the need for external energy pumped in. The fusion of two atoms into one giving off energy.

Thought I’d add a bit of education here.

1 Like