(i) AI-controlled nanotechnology makes all goods and machine services as abundant as air.
(ii) Thus, no human beings either produce for profit or work to survive.
(iii) There are no governments, wars or motives for crimes like theft or embezzlement.
(iv) Everyone who wants it has an indefinitely extended lifespan and there is a centuries long waiting list to have children.
(v) Everyone receives a "share" in the common wealth.
(vi) Share is the easiest way to coordinate what people do and to allocate limited resources like land.
(vii) Anyone can save from share and produce goods to sell but there are limited possibilities.
(viii) If naturally grown food became popular, then nanotech would exactly duplicate and undersell it.
(ix) People with indefinitely extended life spans lose interest in collecting authenticated hand made goods that can be exactly duplicated especially since computers continually create new art forms.
(x) The ruling intellects of the world, whether human, electronic or linked (Engineer, Psychologist, Economist, Artist, Astronomer, Sociologist, Administrator), must decide whether to grant a request to resource a human-crewed interstellar spaceship when public opinion favours projects closer to home and when robotic interstellar craft transmit more data than can be assimilated.
10 comments:
I wanted to share this analysis of Thulean economics as quickly as possible. However, I will continue to reread THE BOAT OF A MILLION YEARS and might find new details to add. Discussion is welcome because Anderson addresses such basic questions about possible future society.
Some details have been added. The aim is to summarise Anderson's projected future society as accurately as possible.
Hi, Paul!
Yes, I noticed how you stove to accurate sum up what Anderson wrote.
The mere fact that the eight surviving "natural" immortals felt unhappy in the futuristic "Thulean" society, and that certain others of the "new" immortals felt the same way should be a hint that all is not necessarily well. In fact, the Ruling Intellects who agreed to Hanno's petition for a star ship to be built did so partly as a means of providing an outlet for that unhappiness, to prevent trouble in the future.
In the HARVEST OF STARS books Anderson went into much greater detail in describing how even advanced future society which had basically abolished merely material want still faced problems from a restless, frustrated, increasingly resentful mankind. And GENESIS shows a mankind whose members felt useless and purposeless deciding to slowly die out.
The "Thule" section of BOAT depicted a futuristic society closest to what you seem to desire. And the HARVEST OF STARS, esp. in THE FLEET OF STARS, seems to show the kind of outcome Anderson desired. With GENESIS showing a cosciousness level computer on Earth bringing back the human race from extinction.
Sean
Yes, all is not well in "Thule". It does not necessarily show the kind of society I would want, except in some respects, but I find it interesting that Anderson could anticipate a future society so different from our present one. I envisage humanity collectively playing an active role but I don't know how realistic the speculation about superior AI's is.
Hi, Paul!
It was precisely the ability of Anderson to speculate so boldly, even in his later years, which makes his late works, esp. the HARVEST OF STARS books, so valuable. I esp. liked how he experimented with different results or outcomes in the futuristic societies he speculated about in BOAT, the HARVEST OF STARS series, STARFARERS, and GENESIS. My personal favorites being the HARVEST OF STARS series.
Sean
As I say in an early piece on "Poul Anderson's Future Histories", the HARVEST OF STARS tetralogy is about human-AI interaction whereas GENESIS is about post-human AI, a conceptual sequel. GENESIS in particular is awesome. We would have liked more about the Technic History. However, as Alan Moore said, good writers give us not what we think we want but what they know we want.
Hi, Paul!
Yes, but the post human AI in GENESIS apparently used stored DNA material to bring the human race back from extinction. Because Earth's post human AI found its existence to be meaningless if there was no truly LIVING and intelligent life as well.
Sean
Did she re-create humanity because she found her existence meaningless without them or just because she loved humanity?
Hi, Paul!
Off the top of my head, I would say "Gaia" acted as she did in bringing back the human race from extinction from love. And that was at least partly because far more humans had "downloaded" themselves into the "Gaia mind" than had gone to the stars via AIs sent to explore and study other worls. That made the "Gaia mind" much more strongly affected by human desires and longings.
GENESIS shows two crucial turning points. One being when humans had to decide to accept either an Ice Age or sacrificing real power and autonomy to AI in order to allow it to prevent or reverse that Ice Age. The next was in a future society much like ancient Japan when Gaia intervened to prevent a feud between two rival clans progressing to bloodshed. The AI had only the most altruistic and humane motives in doing so, BUT it revealed to men how powerless they were and their lack of true freedom. That began the slow dying out of the human race.
Sean
Good point about Gaia having more downloaded human minds.
Post a Comment