However much you like loyalty-based social institutions, they're still burning down to the ground.
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness
If your army is intelligent machines, you have the same kind of task of ensuring their loyalty. If the army is more like present-day tech, the problem's quite different, but not any easier. Reliability of technicians is crucial.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @anomalyuk @Outsideness
And if you do make a system that works, that's cool, but in 20 years it will be obsolete and you need something different. Eventually you get a garbage monarch.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @anomalyuk
Garbage CEOs are far rarer than garbage monarchs, for good reasons.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Outsideness
They happen, but that's not what I meant. The whole system, from owner authentication to actual combat devices, doesn't have a useful lifetime longer than a human generation, and has to be successfully replaced. Perfectly.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @anomalyuk @Outsideness
And remember the CEO is not in charge of maintaining the system. It's supposed to be in charge of him.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @anomalyuk
The CEO is tasked with maintaining the business (or overseeing its maintenance), under final stock-holder control. Supreme executive responsibility does not equate with sovereignty. (You know all this, of course.)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Outsideness
Yes but just think of the auditing requirements to ensure the CEO isn't covertly undermining any single piece of the chain that's supposed to be restraining him. Without the courts, SEC etc that have authority over existing managements.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @anomalyuk @Outsideness
You have to build a large complex system, parts of which are slightly beyond today's capabilities, under adversarial conditions where it's very hard to trust anyone.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @anomalyuk @Outsideness
No part of it is impossible, but I don't like the odds.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It's the only historical game worth playing.
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness
Capitalism is an optimising system: find a path to approach the goal of neocameralism and I will believe it can be done. The existing formulations are too much all-or-nothing, and too inflexible, to be evolved.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @anomalyuk
Capitalism is already engaged in the search procedure, which will take a while, but less time than people think.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.