Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
"Meat demand is associated with higher incomes and a shift - due to urbanisation - to food consumption changes that favour increased proteins from animal sources in diets."
MarkNorfolk wrote:The media are going by 'per capita' - the average amount eaten by a person in a year and the more affluent First Worlders score high on that chart. 'Total meat consumed by nation' seems harder to find...
The chart is above yours.
If only those Western Developed Nations like Paraguay and Uruguay would leave meat for those poorer countries that consume less, like the collective 28 nations of the EU.
"Meat demand is associated with higher incomes and a shift - due to urbanisation - to food consumption changes that favour increased proteins from animal sources in diets."
WTH Israel? Do people eat anything besides chicken over there? :p Anyways, I would like to propose that any country that consumes more than 30kg of any kind of meat per person per year takes drastic measures to reduce such extravagant consumption. It surprises me that the EU doesn't consume more meat. Coming from Russia to the Netherlands, the much larger amounts of meat people eat here I definitely noticed. Here you often get a big hump of meat with every meal, whereas in Russia meat is usually only served as a component of specific dishes. I think the high meat consumption of the north-western countries in the EU is pulled down by the lower meat consumption of Eastern European countries which have culinary traditions similar to Russia and Southern European countries like Italy where afaik they also do not eat a lot of meat.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/07 15:41:12
Well my vegetarian friends talk about 16 pounds of grain can be grown for 1 pound of meat. Yet almost all good agriculture land is in grains or other fruiting/vegetable crops. For the most part the animals are in small contained areas or in open pasture that has horrible conditions to grow much of anything. So the animals do not take up valuable land resources.
The current practices feed those grain crops to the animal herds. That is where the abundance of grain stores are diverted.
Still when the average family in Indonesia is 17....there is something definitely wrong.
In the 80's there was a glut of mountains of wheat in the USA. Meanwhile European farmers were producing about 2 to 1 or better in yields per acre. Now the USA farmers have managed similar yields....but there is a shortage of Wheat except for in Russia. Why....Field Corn is being grown instead and sold for Ethanol and far less wheat is grown the world over. No more mountains of left over food.
Fun Fact: 90% by volume of food produced in the USA is a grain/vegetable type....only 10% are from flowering fruit (ie tomatoes and almonds) So the crisis on honey bees will be pushed aside if food shortages get bad worldwide for the consideration of pure volume of foodstocks. Supply and demand will give variety to the rich and a mono diet to the unfortunate.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/11/07 19:43:38
koooaei wrote: We are rolling so many dice to have less time to realise that there is not much else to the game other than rolling so many dice.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Skinnereal wrote: Is it the 3rd world eating us out of house and homeworld?
By all accounts in the news, it is Western meat-eaters taking up lots of the land for animal feed, and leaving little for actual food.
Yes and no.
There is a lot of misinformation regarding meat production out there. You really shouldn't trust most of the information that comes from the anti-meat side of the aisle. They use data that is ancient or outright lies. like propaganda about Chicken Growth Hormones, which haven't been used for over 60 years, yet they'll claim they still get used. Or a general distrust of medicating animals for anything. yeah, lets withhold medical treatment from these animals, thats humane and healthy...
First off, not all agricultural land is created equal. You also need to differentiate between Arable and non-Arable land. Arable land is land you can actually grow crops on, but non-arable land can still be used for food production. Namely grazing, which produces meat and milk. So its not a case of Either/Or production. There are plenty of places you can graze livestock which is utterly useless for anything else.
The real inefficiencies, if you are talking about theoretically producing the maximum possible food, is when you're feeding stuff like grain to cattle instead of grazing them. Cows have a rather inefficient feed conversion ratio and they are slow to mature. You can speed the process up by feeding them high calorie corn. but Corn itself is a very inefficient food crop, its high in calories, but it takes way more space to grow an equivalent amount of food than with other crops.
Pigs and Chickens however are much more efficient producers of meat. While Cows have a feed conversion ratio of roughly 6:1(6 lbs of feed per pound of weight gain), Pigs are around 2.44:1 while Chickens are 2:1.
So really. Heavy meat consumption isn't really an issue in and of itself. Its that we largely prefer the "wrong kind" of meat. We like very tasty beef.
Of course, this is if you are artificially viewing the world as a single homogeneous entity and disregard logistics of moving food from one place to another. Realistically, you should divide the world into food systems. Treat each portion of the world separately and diagnose their food problem's on an individual basis.
Lets just go by continent.
Africa is the main problem child here in terms of food production. Large growing populations, but no means to sustain them. This is actually largely to blame on the physical attributes of the area. Africa has poor availability of good arable land. There simply isn't good crop production potential. Africa doesn't have enough landmass in the Temperate zones to provide good soil for crop production. This has led to Africa importing a lot of food, namely cheap grain from North America. Sure, they need it badly. However this has led to their local food production being out competed, so they haven't developed any self-sufficiency.
North America, and Europe to a lesser extent, on the other hand, has the opposite problem(if you can truly call it a problem). Being largely in the temperate zone of the world means we have huge quantities of good arable land and fertile soil. This is largely which led to western civilization being so successful in the first place. In some ways, too successful. We have to artificially limit crop production, paying farmers not the grow crops. We use so little of our potential crop land, we have the luxury of being able to devote crops to raising vast quantities of better tasting, but energy inefficient, meats while letting land lie unused. So its not really a squandering of resources to devote stuff to inefficient meat production, its simply a product of having the best resource distribution and having the excess resources to devote to better quality things.
The logistical constraints of moving food around the world means that even though all the food which gets wasted by western civilization could theoretically be used to feed areas of the world which are starving, it's practically speaking not possible to actually drive out those inefficiencies. The food we waste is usually food which spoils quickly and couldn't get shipped over to africa in the first place. The food which we waste less of, grain products, is stuff which does actually get sold to places in Africa.
Africa is also not helped by having massive corruption problems. Civil wars, tribal conflicts, corrupt governments, and other sources of conflict serve to keep Africa from developing the infrastructure and stability needed to be self-sufficient. Socially, many places are still in the stone age, but trying to grasp modern developments and as a result having massive social issues.
Ethanol is of course total cancer. It artificially drives up the price of corn, and is even less efficient than growing beef. It drives up the price of meat, dairy, and general transportation costs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/07 20:21:18
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
kronk wrote:Human cybernetics. Eye implants that all normal vision from semi- and full blindness. Eye implants that allow a soldier to see in 50x magnification, IR spectrum, and with HUD to determine friendlies from not-friendlies without a visor or helmet.
I can't find it right now there was a twitter rant about AI/neural nets and how easily it can be deceived to miss-categorise (with tiny changes that are not visible for humans but confound neural nets) and why killer drones should never be automated and one can't rely on those for decision making. The soldiers might think they see friendlies or not-friendlies and implicitly trust the system but end up killing their own buddies without knowing why they were categorised as enemies.
admironheart wrote:well the mathetician giant Isaac Newton spent most of his time on the end of the world and it is supposed to be in that very decade by his calculations.
interesting.
As a Farmer I an told by the industry that the world will have a population of about 10 to 11 billion by then.
As a person that understands basic math and history I think the industry is way way off.
So lets see...almost a doubling in 100 years then 75 years, then 40 years....
Yea....I think more like 15 billion during those future dates and there is no way we can feed that many even if GMO's triple our food supply. Sorry 3rd worlders...you need to stop the breeding us into extinction.
So lets see...almost a doubling in 100 years then 75 years, then 40 years....
Back of the envelope calculations like yours are not a good way to dispute actual studies on population growth. Because people who do this for a living track not just the current growth in the population, but also the rate of change in population growth and the factors causing that change. Their figures are better than yours.
Yea....I think more like 15 billion during those future dates and there is no way we can feed that many even if GMO's triple our food supply. Sorry 3rd worlders...you need to stop the breeding us into extinction.
We could have 20 billion people if we lived like many in the third world do. We don't want to live that like, which is fine and good, but we should stop pretending that sheer population numbers are the problem - resource consumption by wealthier countries is at least half the problem.
I always got meat in my Chinese and Indian and Thai and Russian food... am I doing it wrong?
Go to China, go get a meal outside of Beijing or Shanghai, and sit there expecting something like the food you get in a western Chinese restaurant. You will get quite a shock
admironheart wrote: Still when the average family in Indonesia is 17....there is something definitely wrong.
There is something wrong, with your stat. In Indonesia there is 2.44 children per woman. Miles below the figure you gave.
For what its worth, this number has dropped from close to 6 in 1960. The reduction in rates like that is precisely why the rate of population growth is falling.
In the 80's there was a glut of mountains of wheat in the USA. Meanwhile European farmers were producing about 2 to 1 or better in yields per acre. Now the USA farmers have managed similar yields....but there is a shortage of Wheat except for in Russia. Why....Field Corn is being grown instead and sold for Ethanol and far less wheat is grown the world over. No more mountains of left over food.
Actually its because global trade negotiations and internal government reforms stopped the nonsense of protecting over supply of wheat. The idea that we shouldn't produce double the wheat we need seemed like a no brainer.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/11/08 06:06:08
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
I always got meat in my Chinese and Indian and Thai and Russian food... am I doing it wrong?
Go to China, go get a meal outside of Beijing or Shanghai, and sit there expecting something like the food you get in a western Chinese restaurant. You will get quite a shock
Or New Delhi. Consuming beef is illegal in many parts of the country.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Or New Delhi. Consuming beef is illegal in many parts of the country.
You can get beef in Delhi, you just have to go to the Tibetan quarter. I went there just for the sake of saying I'd eaten beef in Delhi. And there I discovered momos. And they are glorious.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
sebster wrote: Go to China, go get a meal outside of Beijing or Shanghai, and sit there expecting something like the food you get in a western Chinese restaurant. You will get quite a shock
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Or New Delhi. Consuming beef is illegal in many parts of the country.
You can get beef in Delhi, you just have to go to the Tibetan quarter. I went there just for the sake of saying I'd eaten beef in Delhi. And there I discovered momos. And they are glorious.
And at the Canadian Embassy, but sssssh it's a secret.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: And at the Canadian Embassy, but sssssh it's a secret.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
sebster wrote: There is something wrong, with your stat.
A couple points from those posts. It Assumes that the population growth will fall in line with his model. over 30% of the population in the developing world are under 15 and will reproduce at the rates that explodes the population.
In the one chart he makes a critical error. He states there is an expotential growth from 1900 to 1960. That is really incorrect. There has been real linear growth for a couple hundred years now by actual numbers. He says since 1970 we have been linear.....I say we have been linear since by actual numbers.
Example of his numbers as false: 10 million population thru 1 billion. He said the actual surviving children were 2 for each parent set. This is a flat line scale. Obviously it is more like 2.5 or 3 at the very least. So don't take everything he says as fact.... 'the experts' have a knack of distorting the truth to prop up their arguments to make themselves more important.
Some unlikely conclusions of the speaker. First, history showed that India had a consistent famine and death cycle for a long long time. Then in the 1920's modern Fertilization and Farming practices were introduced and there was that 'population explosion' the speaker spoke of. Same number of kids...they just did not die now as often.
China and India at both in a race to keep the title the most populace so there has been encouragement to grow their numbers
The speaker 'assumes' that INVESTMENT will happen. That will be shoddily done at best. Humans for the most part have never proved to be altruistic to look after each other long term. We are too concerned with our own cultures. So there will always be peoples that will never move out of the 'shoe' box. Those will continue to grow our population.
Cultures like the Asian sub continent and Africa have VASTLY DIFFERENT experiences than the western world and to assume they will become as educated and consumeristic as us is a long reach. Why do westerners always think others will behave like us. That is elitist thinking and an insult to other cultures.
Wars and Food will determine if we stay at 9 billion or surpass 15 billion in the next 40 years.....not this guys' boxes of assumptions.
Automatically Appended Next Post: fun fact:
China is one of the worlds greatest producers of food
They are number one in Apples, Pigs, Rice, wheat, potato,Grapes, Sheep, Goat and many more.
20% of the worlds food supply on 10% of the worlds agriculture lands
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/11/08 21:21:50
koooaei wrote: We are rolling so many dice to have less time to realise that there is not much else to the game other than rolling so many dice.
admironheart wrote: A couple points from those posts. It Assumes that the population growth will fall in line with his model. over 30% of the population in the developing world are under 15 and will reproduce at the rates that explodes the population.
Look at all the stuff you posted, without ever admitting you were miles wrong about Indonesian birth rates. Happy to have a conversation about this, but there's no point when you'll claim stats that are wrong by a factor of 7, and then when corrected you'll just switch to other stats without ever acknowledging the error.
In the one chart he makes a critical error.
What chart? Later on you refer to 'a speaker' who made false conclusions - what speaker? Who are you addressing the rest of your post towards?
Cultures like the Asian sub continent and Africa have VASTLY DIFFERENT experiences than the western world and to assume they will become as educated and consumeristic as us is a long reach. Why do westerners always think others will behave like us. That is elitist thinking and an insult to other cultures.
No-one is assuming anything. Countries like China and India are rapidly expanding their education, and developing strong consumer cultures. This transformation is happening right now, in part it is directed by government policy, in part it is a natural result of ecnomic development. There's nothing elitist about recognizing the reality in front of us.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Grey Templar wrote: Ethanol is of course total cancer. It artificially drives up the price of corn, and is even less efficient than growing beef. It drives up the price of meat, dairy, and general transportation costs.
Whole heartedly agree with you. My state is a major producer of corn, and so of course is home to a huge ethanol lobby, but ethanol is a really gakky scam that just shifts gas costs elsewhere.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sebster wrote: for the sake of saying I'd eaten beef in Delhi. And there I discovered momos. And they are glorious.
Was it beef, or water buffalo? And if it was water buffalo, can you (or anyone else) say what it tasted like? I bet it's just like beef.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/10 07:41:58
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Ouze wrote: Was it beef, or water buffalo? And if it was water buffalo, can you (or anyone else) say what it tasted like? I bet it's just like beef.
It said beef on the menu, and I was told they are allowed to sell beef in the Tibetan quarter. But it might have been water buffalo. I mean, it might have been dog for all I know, once you mince it, wrap it in dough, steam it and eat it with chilli sauce it could be damn near anything
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Ouze wrote: Was it beef, or water buffalo? And if it was water buffalo, can you (or anyone else) say what it tasted like? I bet it's just like beef.
It said beef on the menu, and I was told they are allowed to sell beef in the Tibetan quarter. But it might have been water buffalo. I mean, it might have been dog for all I know, once you mince it, wrap it in dough, steam it and eat it with chilli sauce it could be damn near anything
Soylent Green?
Speaking of food, anyone have any thoughts on the state of water resources in 2067?
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
Ouze wrote: Was it beef, or water buffalo? And if it was water buffalo, can you (or anyone else) say what it tasted like? I bet it's just like beef.
It said beef on the menu, and I was told they are allowed to sell beef in the Tibetan quarter. But it might have been water buffalo. I mean, it might have been dog for all I know, once you mince it, wrap it in dough, steam it and eat it with chilli sauce it could be damn near anything
Soylent Green?
Speaking of food, anyone have any thoughts on the state of water resources in 2067?
Water is a funny thing. The truth is that Earth has the same amount of water as it had at the dawn of time. Water never runs out or gets used up. Its just a question of having it at the place where it's convenient for you.
I think you'll see a lot more dams and other water storage systems get built to compensate for loss of snow pack in areas where water is becoming less abundant. Certain areas of course will enjoy the opposite. They'll get more rainfall.
A good technology to look into would be ways to channel surface water directly into aquifers. Either by lakes which you drill a large pipe to allow the water to directly go back into the ground, a reverse well if you will.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
For water there's going to have to be a #$%^ load of desalination going on. Rising sea levels will turn a lot of deltas into undrinkable swamps and we're already exhausting ground water that took epochs to form.
Plus changing rain patterns, less snow etc.
That leaves the seas. Desalination. Israel and the Gulf already rely on it.
1. Food supplies will be fine - mobile, scalable indoor farming is having a breakthrough at the moment due to new high-efficiency LED lighting which can be optimised for individual plant types. See: http://www.hortidaily.com/article/24546/Belgium-Urban-Crops-opens-largest-automated-plant-factory-in-Europe amongst many others, stacking food vertically and in controlled environments frees up land and mitigates much of the effect of climate issues. Vertical / indoor farming is also 97% more water efficient, releasing huge amounts of potable water for the rest of humanity. Bung a few of those on huge ships with desalination or truck convoys and you have rapid disaster relief globally as well.
2. The political pendulum will keep swinging back and forth. The US will start on universal healthcare in the next 8-12 years or so as a result of demographic changes and adjusting tolerance, which will ultimately have very positive knock on effects for the country as a whole. If I'm optimistic but improbable, it could go as far as an anti-corruption drive like the trust busting of old that lubricates a lot of tech.
3. Google, amazon and apple will grow in power and be too big to dismantle. Facebook will fade as people continue to migrate away from its core offering, as it pursues revenue at the expense of experience until it gets replaced by a competitor.
4. Some country will team up with one or more of the big data companies from (3) and be able to generate crime probability rates for people based on their location, their friends, known reported crimes and times, facial recognition from photos, etc. Crime rates will dramatically decrease as people call for it to be used and dumb and opportunistic crimes will become rare. People will be casual about their 'freedom' being taken away as they will think that they can leave their phones at home (even though facial recognition on CCTV and other photos in the area will still get them).
5. Some countries will be inspired by China's 'social credit system' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System and will team up with big data to make an even 'better' version. People will generally be happy at their positive scores and it will lead to heavy gamification of the social / govt part of people's lives. When people get negative scores, a small minority will ragequit society and we'll see a bigger punk/cyberpunk cabal then any time in the past. Most will not want to rock the boat as they will be rewarded with govt backed mortgages, accelerated places in queues when interacting with the govt (getting passports, driving licenses, etc), tax credits, and so forth. It will be a big net positive for society as a whole but many will moan about the lack of independence that they used to have (credit report on steroids!)
6. AI will make large swathes of middle class jobs much more efficient, and therefore reduce the number of people that need to do them. Most working class jobs will be made obsolete by the 40-50 year mark as robots take over many industries like construction, transport, etc.
7. Household robots will be common place, with humanoid forms very common due to their ability to efficiently interact with everything and everyone. People will no longer have to clean their houses or hire cleaners as their robot will do it. A whole industry of sex robots (you buy them for cleaning but they have 'other' functions) will lead to very different social experiences and a broad liberalisation of attitudes over time with the expected anti-robosexual protests. Humanoid robots will be able to play live music, give therapeutic massage, clean and tidy, guard and patrol property, etc.
8. New classes of antibiotics will be developed and there will not be an antibiotic crisis. New ways to treat viruses and other diseases will evolve, and the first steps to curing aging will occur, but will not be ready in 50 years.
9. I agree that some countries will split into multiple countries, but the nation as a whole will be less important than ever. There will be more minor conflict as countries manufacture wars to unify their population against a common enemy.
10. Dakka will still be battling spambots
Check out our new, fully plastic tabletop wargame - Maelstrom's Edge, made by Dakka!
Water is a funny thing. The truth is that Earth has the same amount of water as it had at the dawn of time. Water never runs out or gets used up. Its just a question of having it at the place where it's convenient for you..
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/11 13:43:44
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Kid_Kyoto wrote: For water there's going to have to be a #$%^ load of desalination going on. Rising sea levels will turn a lot of deltas into undrinkable swamps and we're already exhausting ground water that took epochs to form.
Plus changing rain patterns, less snow etc.
That leaves the seas. Desalination. Israel and the Gulf already rely on it.
Here in Western Australia we're expanding desalination every year, and pushing down the energy use and price year on year. Still uses a lot more power than other methods though, so expansion of desalination is going to either rely on societies accepting that's the price they gotta pay, or people doing some clever stuff with cheaper future solar power.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/11 14:54:40
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Water is a funny thing. The truth is that Earth has the same amount of water as it had at the dawn of time. Water never runs out or gets used up. Its just a question of having it at the place where it's convenient for you..
I'll admit I was being hyperbolic. Those articles admit that Earth's water today is practically a closed system. We're not losing water at any appreciable rate.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
No but we're losing potable water in accessible places. While in a geological sense we're not losing water but in a ' can I water my crops, bathe myself, feed my kids' sense we are.
All I need to see in the next 50 years is for some nation or company to finally get round to building a nice sized base on the moon.
With the main components of the ISS getting very old I forsee it getting decommissioned in the next 20-30 years if not earlier. That will get the ball rolling and hopefully we will end up getting a small operation getting set up on the moon operated by a nice selection of the planet's nations.
It would be a good starting point for a proper lunar colony which would be totally doable (if not a little uncomfortable) with our current technology. With so many predictions of our inevitable doom in this thread alone it seems a necessary thing to do simply so that the human race has a backup plan should everything get a little spicy down on Earth...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/12 14:38:45
legoburner wrote: 5. Some countries will be inspired by China's 'social credit system' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System and will team up with big data to make an even 'better' version. People will generally be happy at their positive scores and it will lead to heavy gamification of the social / govt part of people's lives. When people get negative scores, a small minority will ragequit society and we'll see a bigger punk/cyberpunk cabal then any time in the past. Most will not want to rock the boat as they will be rewarded with govt backed mortgages, accelerated places in queues when interacting with the govt (getting passports, driving licenses, etc), tax credits, and so forth. It will be a big net positive for society as a whole but many will moan about the lack of independence that they used to have (credit report on steroids!)
That is fething insane. Do you WANT an Orwellian dystopia? Because that is how you get an Orwellian dystopia.
legoburner wrote: 5. Some countries will be inspired by China's 'social credit system' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System and will team up with big data to make an even 'better' version. People will generally be happy at their positive scores and it will lead to heavy gamification of the social / govt part of people's lives. When people get negative scores, a small minority will ragequit society and we'll see a bigger punk/cyberpunk cabal then any time in the past. Most will not want to rock the boat as they will be rewarded with govt backed mortgages, accelerated places in queues when interacting with the govt (getting passports, driving licenses, etc), tax credits, and so forth. It will be a big net positive for society as a whole but many will moan about the lack of independence that they used to have (credit report on steroids!)
That is fething insane. Do you WANT an Orwellian dystopia? Because that is how you get an Orwellian dystopia.
Right now as a corporation I can buy access to all the data to make such a system, but it would be expensive as a lot of the lookups are not automated. As those services automate and decrease in cost, a private company is going to step up and do this, and a govt is going to to find it useful enough to encourage it and start the snowball effect towards it being widely implemented somewhere.
Check out our new, fully plastic tabletop wargame - Maelstrom's Edge, made by Dakka!
The reason the Chinese are implementing their social credit system is not to create awesome freedom and joy. It's the same reason you can't publish books or software in China, or vote for anyone except President Xi.
Such systems have been imagined in novels like Charles Stross's Accelerando. The thing is that the author expects that the people who rise to the top will be intelligent, engaging, helpful and all round jolly good human beings. In reality, if we look at social media now, for every "Bill Nigh Science Guy" there are a dozen Zoella teen fashion icons.
I've got nothing against Zoella in herself, but she isn't going to invent a cure for cancer. She entertains and informs a generation of teenage girls on how to do makeup. If that's the future of humanity, most of us are going to opt out.
legoburner wrote: 5. Some countries will be inspired by China's 'social credit system' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System and will team up with big data to make an even 'better' version. People will generally be happy at their positive scores and it will lead to heavy gamification of the social / govt part of people's lives. When people get negative scores, a small minority will ragequit society and we'll see a bigger punk/cyberpunk cabal then any time in the past. Most will not want to rock the boat as they will be rewarded with govt backed mortgages, accelerated places in queues when interacting with the govt (getting passports, driving licenses, etc), tax credits, and so forth. It will be a big net positive for society as a whole but many will moan about the lack of independence that they used to have (credit report on steroids!)
That is fething insane. Do you WANT an Orwellian dystopia? Because that is how you get an Orwellian dystopia.
Right now as a corporation I can buy access to all the data to make such a system, but it would be expensive as a lot of the lookups are not automated. As those services automate and decrease in cost, a private company is going to step up and do this, and a govt is going to to find it useful enough to encourage it and start the snowball effect towards it being widely implemented somewhere.
I reject your claim that it will be a net positive for society. It will be an authoritarian nightmare that will hand over complete control of society to Governments.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/12 20:15:57
There was also recently an article about some digital billboard that crashed and people could identify bits and pieces of the facial recognition code (Sweden, I think?)
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Right now as a corporation I can buy access to all the data to make such a system, but it would be expensive as a lot of the lookups are not automated. As those services automate and decrease in cost, a private company is going to step up and do this, and a govt is going to to find it useful enough to encourage it and start the snowball effect towards it being widely implemented somewhere.
I reject your claim that it will be a net positive for society. It will be an authoritarian nightmare that will hand over complete control of society to Governments.
I don't think the claim was that it'll be positive for society, just that it's already somewhat feasible and it'll be useful soon. Useful for governments and companies (the people in power), not for you (we are fethed).
There was recently also an article about CCTV tracking in China and it was really comprehensive. They are/were willing to spend the money on stuff like that.
