File[a-designingthefuturee-book.swf] - (1.17 MB)
[_] [L] Anonymous 05/04/12(Fri)20:59 No.1671123
Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 05/04/12(Fri)23:27 No.1671235
A fucking PDF? Really?
Fuck you.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/04/12(Fri)23:30 No.1671238
Why must buildings of the future look ridiculous?
>> [_] Anonymous 05/04/12(Fri)23:58 No.1671258
never expected to say tl;dr in /f/
>> [_] Anonymous 05/05/12(Sat)00:31 No.1671286
tl;dr? I didn't even get past the picture of a building so badly designed even Sim City 2000
turned it down.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/05/12(Sat)01:59 No.1671345
Everything exists for reasons Zeigeist dudes, it's not a giant conspiracy that makes people
loathe dramatic change, it's the fact dramatic change 9/10 makes things worse. Sure you can point
to specific instances of people deliberately trying to retard progress for various reasons, but
that's hardly evidence of anything. There's always people who want new stuff too, you can't
generalize so broadly the way you guys do.
Geninue techological and scientific progress takes centuries to occur. Some get further than
most, and there are always visionaires, but you cannot drag the entire system forward into the
future at once because it doesn't have the energy to do that just because you decided so.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/05/12(Sat)02:00 No.1671347
Take cars. The Egyptian pharoahs could, in theory have built a car if they plowed all their
resources into doing so and if they had the plans. But fundamentally, that time was not ready for
the technology of cars.
Then you might say, if we make the system more efficient in different ways, then technological
progress will more quickly lead to revolutionary new tech,
Bingo. That's why so much time and energy is spent in making markets efficent.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/05/12(Sat)02:01 No.1671349
Protip: Capitalism has only existed for 300 years. In some ways we're already in a revolution
from a historical perspective. For the majority of human history, GDP growth was about 100 times
smaller per year, than it was in the last 300 years.
The Scientific Method, while I respect its ideas, is not the key to generating wealth and
distributing it. SM has existed for thousands of years since the Greeks...
tldr; The world is fucking complex and there is no simplified model that explains the entire
thing. Zeigeist is extremely naive about pretty much everything because it reduces every
potential solution to a change in technology in pretty much every sphere of human endeavour.
There's a mammoth jigsaw piece missing in your puzzle there.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/05/12(Sat)02:06 No.1671351
>>1671345
>>1671347
>>1671349
fucking this.
