A Post Capitalism World: Demonetization Of Everything

Jafar

Problem with technological communism is that intermediary elements will still remain as the capital and the capital is always in the hands of capitalists i.e. the holders of capital if we apply Marxist terminology. An example of an intermediary capital is the Internet connection. Yes, the Android diminished price for smartphones yet you still have to pay for the Internet. Even if you use public wifi it is still paid by the corporate structure, which runs it.

Zooming in on Internet now and how it has been demonetized and decapitalized.

Internet or the exact term is TCP/IP protocol was made available in PUBLIC DOMAIN.
No patent, no ownership, everyone is free to implement it.

Which made it an instant success and adoption, putting proprietary / patented rivaling protocol such as IPX, SNA, SS7, RSCS to their early retirement and death. Now everything is carried by TCP/IP whether it's Audio / voice call, Video, Document or Financial Transaction.

TCP/IP is a capital, knowledge capital available for free in public domain. No license fee or patent required.
Everything that run on top of TCP/IP (Audio,Video,Document etc..) is relatively demonetized since no license or patent fee is required.

To convey the TCP/IP signal, a physical medium is still required, whether it's fiber optics or radio wave. There is a cost required to deploy and maintain those physical medium. Fiber optics might be cut and need to be repaired, radio transmitter the same thing. Thus your payment for internet at X Currency are required to maintain those physical medium plus profit for those who maintain those medium.

What if a physical medium is no longer required to convey the TCP/IP signal?
There is no need to maintain a physical medium, the cost will go down and your payment for internet will be near zero. You only need to pay for the cost of the end device. (your phone, laptop whatever)

That is what will happened very soon..
Thus further demonetize the fulfillment of human needs of communication / internet.

Freedom in capital terms is usually percieved as lack of a debt and obligations and that is only possible without intermediary transactions, such as bonds or obligations, which create value before the commodity is even ready. So is with other types of capital, except real estate and the land, the latter is usually used for pawn operations.

Bonds / Obligation is a matter of choice the other choice is to share the equity (ownership).
Bonds / obligations is not required to further develop the TCP/IP since it's equity has been shared to the entire world.

Having said that Direct peer to peer financing has also demonetized the "brokerage fee" for bonds / obligations.

Another problem is the fact that the technological utopianism is oriented towards creation heaven on Earth, with robots doing all the work, if perfected. I remember a famous experiment on the rats, which after few generations of an artificial careless life started eating themselves and eventually died out within the experiment.

Rats? Which experiment is that?

Having said that, Robots / Machines are great at doing repetitive works with 100% precision.
Driving taxi, manufacture a shoe / shirt etc..
But it's very very bad on innovation and creativity due to it's lack of ability to MAKE MISTAKES.
Mistakes is required to spur Innovation and Creativity.
Which only human can do.

Makaveli

Look up the Rat Paradise or the Rat Utopia experiment (Calhoun et al), it is usually percieved as the problem of overcrowding, yet this view is also challenged by another view, which advocates that the problem of its demise was distribution of resources among the population, I personally support the latter since it seems more likely to me.

Robots may not as of yet make critical decisions although some early patterns can be seen in Siri and analogous AI inventions. We will not, however, start using automated cars for at least another 150-200 years if anything, since the biggest objections is not even the technology itself, it is being tested already, but the dominative human nature. People like to drive, outdrive and cutt other drives off because that gives them a sense of domination and freedom. Automatic cabs in big cities is as well impossible since human factor on the road will anyway create difficult and dangerous situations for an automated cab, which will rely on artificial navigation rather than human instincts and common sense. Either everyone moves on auto cars or auto cars will only be limited to special zones, as they already are now.

In the techno-utopian discourse I tend not to take any sides, but would rather support Ted Kaczynski's anarcho-primitivism.

good_logic

Jafar brother, may I point out to you something really important you always miss out
THE SOURCE OF EVERYTHING THAT EXIXTS.
Your philosophy of "some humans are the origin " of certain ideas is false. There is only an original source ,one and only one of all that exists.

No matter who or what ideas are out there, the origin of all ideas/knowledge... is the creator.

you for example, your ideas ,your knowledge , ... are from some source/s. They do not originate from nothing . You have learned/copied/imitated/...someone, or have mixed up source/s. But you are not the originator of what you know/follow.
Similarly everyone else has got their ideas/knowledge from some source/s.

The illusion out there is that some humans are the original source/s of some ideas. No brother. That is a deceit and a lie.
GOD the Creator has taught /created /set up...here on earth all the knowledge that exist now and will exist in the future, but some people are deceived into thinking the "humans" are the cause/source"!!!!

What some humans have done is "corrupt/own/steal/..." the true source and come up with all sorts of systems/ways...some good ,some bad, some dangerous to seek/gain power / to replace the true source...This is the issue with what you keep discussing. This is called "not acknowledging the real Creator", setting up "other gods beside GOD Alone".. .i.e Idol worship" plain and simple.

Like it or not brother jafar, GOD is the sole authority. There are no other authorities . Hence ,in reality there is only GOD s system.
All other systems are an illusion and a false hope.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

Jafar

Jafar brother, may I point out to you something really important you always miss out

Your philosophy of "some humans are the origin " of certain ideas is false. There is only an original source ,one and only one of all that exists.

No matter who or what ideas are out there, the origin of all ideas/knowledge... is the creator.

you for example, your ideas ,your knowledge , ... are from some source/s. They do not originate from nothing . You have learned/copied/imitated/...someone, or have mixed up source/s. But you are not the originator of what you know/follow.
Similarly everyone else has got their ideas/knowledge from some source/s.

The illusion out there is that some humans are the original source/s of some ideas. No brother. That is a deceit and a lie.
GOD the Creator has taught /created /set up...here on earth all the knowledge that exist now and will exist in the future, but some people are deceived into thinking the "humans" are the cause/source"!!!!

What some humans have done is "corrupt/own/steal/..." the true source and come up with all sorts of systems/ways...some good ,some bad, some dangerous to seek/gain power / to replace the true source...This is the issue with what you keep discussing. This is called "not acknowledging the real Creator", setting up "other gods beside GOD Alone".. .i.e Idol worship" plain and simple.

Like it or not brother jafar, GOD is the sole authority. There are no other authorities . Hence ,in reality there is only GOD s system.
All other systems are an illusion and a false hope.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

This is out of topic..
But nonetheless I give out a comment.

Of course God is the source everything.
You were, are and always will be living in God's system.
The absolute power and all controlling such that every events that happened all in accordance to plan.
No human or alien or anything can replace God's system as such nothing can replace it.. since every events up to tiny details all happened in accordance to God's plan.

The act of any entity of "not acknowledging", "Idol Worship" according to you is also all in accordance to God's plan as nothing can go against His plan.
What I write on this thread what you will write on this thread what anyone will write on this thread it's all also in accordance to God's plan.

The revelation of TCP/IP, Quantum Positioning, DNA/RNA, Neural Network Algorithm and Trillion of others is all God's revelation. Only fools will say that God's revelation has ended.

The phenomenon of Demonetization, Decapitalization, Devaluation of Money/Currency or any other phenomenon is all in accordance to God's plan as well.

God is not in conflict with anyone or anything as nothing can do things if it's not in accordance to God's plan, as God is the ultimate source of everything.

But again that is not what's being discussed here..
What's being discussed here is the phenomenon of Demonetization, Decapitalization and how human economical system will next evolve to.

And of course all will happened 100% exactly as God's plan.

Jafar

Look up the Rat Paradise or the Rat Utopia experiment (Calhoun et al), it is usually percieved as the problem of overcrowding, yet this view is also challenged by another view, which advocates that the problem of its demise was distribution of resources among the population, I personally support the latter since it seems more likely to me.

You mean 'scarcity drives aggressiveness and insanity' ?
Then just look how human behavior drastically change on big city metro at rush hour.

But as the capacity of metro get expanded and scarcity gradually lowered, human behavior will also change towards less aggressive.

And scarcity is going against the observable trend..
The observable trend is tendency towards abundance which drives demonetization.

https//gmoschooldotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/evans-adapted-final1.jpg

Graph of food production over time, arable land is constant yet productivity soars.

Robots may not as of yet make critical decisions although some early patterns can be seen in Siri and analogous AI inventions.

Siri or any other machines cannot make mistakes, thus creativity and innovation also non existent.

We will not, however, start using automated cars for at least another 150-200 years if anything, since the biggest objections is not even the technology itself, it is being tested already, but the dominative human nature. People like to drive, outdrive and cutt other drives off because that gives them a sense of domination and freedom. Automatic cabs in big cities is as well impossible since human factor on the road will anyway create difficult and dangerous situations for an automated cab, which will rely on artificial navigation rather than human instincts and common sense. Either everyone moves on auto cars or auto cars will only be limited to special zones, as they already are now.

Human factor on the road is the driving factor to make car travel the most dangerous means of travel as proven by statistics.

Airplane safety has greatly increased after the introduction of Autopilot on Airplane. Statistically the safest means of travel at the moment.

It only a matter of time for autopilot to make it's way to cars which shall also greatly increase the safety of car travel.

In the techno-utopian discourse I tend not to take any sides, but would rather support Ted Kaczynski's anarcho-primitivism.

It's not a conflict per se and nobody need to take any 'side'.

But so far Malthus has been proven wrong and I believe so will be Mr Kaczynski.

Makaveli

There was no scarcity in the experiment, that's the point, the were in abudance of everything, including space. There are other natural processes involved in the demise, but then again first generation lived in prosperity.

It only a matter of time for autopilot to make it's way to cars which shall also greatly increase the safety of car travel.

Cannot agree, because of the points I mentioed, namely

Human factor on the roads, the autopilot in the sky and autopilot in metropolis are quite different phenomenons;
People like to drive themselves, get rid of that and you take away the illusion of freedom and control, which will demand other serious social modifications, which may eventually transpire into technocratic dystopia.

Aram

People will have to like other things to do then, like embracing an interest for technology. Autopilot isn't ruining everything one can do.

Homo sapiens is badly suited to drive automobiles unless changing themselves into more logical and controlled beings, where it is better but yet not as good as a programed computer at precision, although a human is better at improvising. It's the primate traits which primarily make the human a poor driver.

SarahY

Maybe I?m a pessimist but what will stop people from being greedy or even envious? Some people have everything they need but want a better version of it or get bored and want something different. Our society drives materialism so being content with what we have can be difficult.

You?re right in society things are getting decentralised which is good, more power to the people.

Demonetizing of everything will still have costs just less, we still pay for it. So eventually more people around the world will have what we see as luxuries for a lot less. I dont know if it would be completely demonetised. anyway even with technology improving, people will continue to look for ways to improve things. just when we think something is good, something better comes.

I don?t really know much about Anarcho-primitivists though in such a world people will need to compete for their own survival? I don?t see why a hierarchy can?t form or how it will be fair. Ever seen Bear Grylls -The Island?

Jafar

Maybe I?m a pessimist but what will stop people from being greedy or even envious? Some people have everything they need but want a better version of it or get bored and want something different. Our society drives materialism so being content with what we have can be difficult.

Human just like their cousin the Chimps are by nature greedy fellow..
It can be good and it can be bad it depends..
The urge for something better drives innovation, the endeavor to find a way to make things better..

Demonetizing of everything will still have costs just less, we still pay for it. So eventually more people around the world will have what we see as luxuries for a lot less.

Of course, as it's a gradual change.. an evolution... getting less and less and less...

In the past, the holy books such as Torah Scrolls, Bible, Quran was a thing of luxury.
It cost 3-4 years of regular joe's salary.
Owning a holy book functioned as a symbol of social status.
A luxury that can be enjoyed by less than 0.1% of the total population.

Now the "Holy Apps" is virtually free, downloadable to your phone, you only need to pay the cost of data transfer.

I dont know if it would be completely demonetised. anyway even with technology improving, people will continue to look for ways to improve things. just when we think something is good, something better comes.

Exactly and it is called progress..
Nothing wrong with it.. it's actually very very very good.

Makaveli

People will have to like other things to do then, like embracing an interest for technology. Autopilot isn't ruining everything one can do.

It is true, but from what I see in the technotopian discourse is hedonism i.e. the ability to enjoy economic prosperity without the need to invest one's time into final production. We can obviously observe technological prosperity in the post-industrial/post-modern countries, where economy and monetization is for the most part based on services, except for agriculture, but even there most agricultural products are improted and exported and little is provided for the local market, except for dairy products. Production of final commidities is mostly limited to the so called Third World, where slavery is still experienced on a wider scale rather than here, where many people live off of welfare or do some bullshit jobs like running a Youtube channel partnership.

So we are moving towards the economy where even services are no longer demanded. An example would be self-checkout machines in supermarkets where you can pin products yourself and pay for it without the need to wait in long queue. That's obviously comfortable but where does it lead on the wider scale?

Monetization is used as an intermediate transaction between a human time spent on work unit and final production. One has to invest time in order to make a household or national economy work. In case everything is ran by machines the only thing that seems to be left to the rest of the dwellers is maintenance of machines. This will create a strong caste division between those "scholars" aka engineers who maintain the machines and the rest who will either be limited to a limited amount of services or lead a hedonistic lifestyle altogether. That's where we already are headed, and if it won't be for the next major cataclysm I am afraid that's the observable future of the next 40-50 years, not that I wish for the next major war though, however in case people remain confined to the system and they still are, they will keep taking arms for false illusions like the sovereignty of the state.

It's the primate traits which primarily make the human a poor driver.

It is also a trait which makes humans develop means of transport. Not everyone is a poor driver, yet there is nothign spiritual about being a good driver either, it depends on whether or not a driver complies with the rules, respects other drivers and pedestrians and what his aim of driving his, is he trying to show off or if his primary aim is to get from point A to point B, what his motivation for driving is. But even then driving is a collective procedure and cooperation as you never know who creates the dangerous situation or is drunk driving. Wheel was invented by Sumerians and even to this day we still unconsciously, philosophically speaking, share some of their civilizational traits by using conditions to improve our everyday lives. Wheels are everywhere now, on the roads, in the mills, factories et cetera, that's a part of archaic heritage in us. Probably other traits of archaic periods are love for comfort, respect for gracefulness and praiseworthiness, idolization of a fellow human and other civilizational traits.

I dont really know much about Anarcho-primitivists though in such a world people will need to compete for their own survival? I dont see why a hierarchy cant form or how it will be fair. Ever seen Bear Grylls -The Island?

It depends on whether or not humans will learn horizontal cooperation without vertical hierarchy. As of now they haven't learned it nor will learn it in observable future, on the national scale at least. Without learning horizontal ways of life and "caring for thy neighbour" one can't achieve any of the 19th century utopias, be it socialism or various form of anarchy. That's the primary commodity of those socities and this is why they are called utopian, because they require paradigmatic shift.

amin

Demonetization of everything? Dont think it will happen,

"Wealth" is seen here as blessing of God or sign of God in along with wealth we have other needs like health, Skills etc that nature provides us with, as long as nature itself is diverse and measure what one gets what, its not going to happen and here Indian's belief system revolves around this diversity of God's signs and worshiping.

Does healthcare costs anywhere decreasing, or in the business of education does it got any cheaper?

Jafar

It is true, but from what I see in the technotopian discourse is hedonism i.e. the ability to enjoy economic prosperity without the need to invest one's time into final production.

Which is good then? The time can be invested in something else..

We can obviously observe technological prosperity in the post-industrial/post-modern countries, where economy and monetization is for the most part based on services, except for agriculture, but even there most agricultural products are improted and exported and little is provided for the local market, except for dairy products. Production of final commidities is mostly limited to the so called Third World, where slavery is still experienced on a wider scale rather than here, where many people live off of welfare or do some bullshit jobs like running a Youtube channel partnership.

Not entirely correct.
USA, China, Japan, Rusia has their economy strongly founded on commodities (Oil, Wheat, Coal, Electronic Devices, Car etc). Yes cars and electronic devices are commodities nowadays.

So we are moving towards the economy where even services are no longer demanded. An example would be self-checkout machines in supermarkets where you can pin products yourself and pay for it without the need to wait in long queue. That's obviously comfortable but where does it lead on the wider scale?

Automation leads to efficiency, why human need to invest their time to do all of that boring and routine stuff?

Monetization is used as an intermediate transaction between a human time spent on work unit and final production. One has to invest time in order to make a household or national economy work. In case everything is ran by machines the only thing that seems to be left to the rest of the dwellers is maintenance of machines.

Management of machines, improvement of machines.
And do other things that machines just cannot do.. the creativity works, writing novels, making movies / music, explore the universe, creating apps / software to be run on the machines etc..

This will create a strong caste division between those "scholars" aka engineers who maintain the machines and the rest who will either be limited to a limited amount of services or lead a hedonistic lifestyle altogether.

Unless everyone will eventually turned into 'scholars'...
Which infact already happening..

Merely 5 centuries ago in order to be regarded as "scholars" one only need to be able to read or write. As the majority, 80% or more from the population cannot even read or write.

https//preview.ibb.co/g8MxZ8/spu_ea68c8_ogi2_3cwn3bmfojjlb56e.jpgl

With such definition, 90% of the population today are already scholars.

That's where we already are headed, and if it won't be for the next major cataclysm I am afraid that's the observable future of the next 40-50 years, not that I wish for the next major war though, however in case people remain confined to the system and they still are, they will keep taking arms for false illusions like the sovereignty of the state.

And you're not even thinking that conflict / war will actually be fought by machines?
(ie Drones, Guided Missiles, ICBM)
Guided Missiles are basically "Automated Version" of Japanese Kamikaze Fleet or Islamic Suicide Bomber for that matter.

It depends on whether or not humans will learn horizontal cooperation without vertical hierarchy. As of now they haven't learned it nor will learn it in observable future, on the national scale at least.

The trend is already happening on worldwide scale...
Wikipedia, Open Source Movement, CryptoCurrency, Citizen Astronomy just to name a few and many other "Peer To Peer" model of interaction.

Without learning horizontal ways of life and "caring for thy neighbour" one can't achieve any of the 19th century utopias, be it socialism or various form of anarchy. That's the primary commodity of those socities and this is why they are called utopian, because they require paradigmatic shift.

It does requires paradigmatic shift.
And just like any other paradigmatic shift; it might resulted in conflict.
Between the "Status Quo" / "Conservative" vs "Progressive".

An example; as told by history was between the "Nomadic Hunter Gatherer" (The old lifestyle) vs "Sedentary Agricultural Farmer" (The new lifestyle)

Makaveli

Which is good then? The time can be invested in something else..

Yes, as I said, maintenance of technology. What else is left? Hobby? Truth seeking? Watching movies? Hedonism? It's not about doing something productive or counter-productive, this is already here, we can decide in most cases what to do with our lives. The problem is one's place in society.

Not entirely correct.
USA, China, Japan, Rusia has their economy strongly founded on commodities (Oil, Wheat, Coal, Electronic Devices, Car etc). Yes cars and electronic devices are commodities nowadays.

Russia, and China are not post-industrial nations, they are industrial. Industial and non-industrial societies differ in whether services prevail production of goods in economy, or if the economy relates on free market, services and international trade. China is the world's factory and Russia is still addicted to the "natural needle" (an expression when someone is addicted through using a needle to inject a substance), i.e. it's national economy or relative advantage is solely based on gas and oil. Both Russia and China still have awful conditions for international trade with the EU and other "Western" subjects.

Automation leads to efficiency, why human need to invest their time to do all of that boring and routine stuff?

Yes, and that in turn will create a strong social stratification based on those that run and maintain the technology and the rest. It is not just about investing one's time into anything but being a personal economic unit, i.e. having busyness in the economy.

Unless everyone will eventually turned into 'scholars'...
Merely 5 centuries ago in order to be regarded as "scholars" one only need to be able to read or write. As the majority, 80% or more from the population cannot even read or write.
With such definition, 90% of the population today are already scholars.

I think I explained figuratively what a "scholar" is in a technocratic case... someone who has access to a part of the capital (technology in this case) and maintains it, the rest will rely on the final product. Of course it will not solve the currency problem nor will it eliminate a money in a form we are used to it, simply because technological capital will NOT be equally distributed within the economy and among its sectors and economic units, i.e. consumers, producers and conductors. In that case technology and the comfort, which comes of it will not be equally distributed and there will be levels of comfort, randing from a personal robot-cook to an ability to fly to any part of the world just because, not because you brought the ticket.

And you're not even thinking that conflict / war will actually be fought by machines?

It seems you genuinuly believe that it will be the machines that will be primarily targeted/take damage in those wars and not the human population or infrastructure, which if substantially damaged will also decrease the economy and move the nation into a lower state of survival. That will also meas the "cannon fodder" will once again have to marsh in crowds.

The trend is already happening on worldwide scale...
Wikipedia, Open Source Movement, CryptoCurrency, Citizen Astronomy just to name a few and many other "Peer To Peer" model of interaction.

I fail to see how those examples relate to horizontal interaction. Open source IT property and Wikipedia are used for one's own interest, to post or program what one wishes. In fact, in most cases these operations lack any interaction at all. Declaring something open source comes from capital holder and this alone is not horizontal by definition. The same with Apple technology, just because you own an iphone does not make you a special economic unit, outside of consumption. The capital and the key property still remains in the shareholding. Horizontal means

You have the right of a say;
You respect yourself and the other as a unified subject;
Decisions are made collectively and not based on the approval of the higher-standing institution.

I can edit the page on Islam yet the army of Muslims will still prevail in their amount and influence to change the stuff back to what it suits them. Because I do not have the rights to property or capital, religion in this case. I do not judge or establish canon, based on hierarchy of religious ministry. The same can be said over any delegated right, such as use an open source software as you wish, because you was delegated that right, you did not have it innately. Same with the rest of technological freedom. Now they have robots to have sex with, yet based on observable information on it they will turn off automatically if you perform some actions on it which the system will consider a rape or a morally-wrong sexual action. What kind of right, freedom of choice and liberty let alone horizontal interaction it is? You are delegated the rights but your existence remains under strict control. In fact, levels of control were increasing since 1950's when technological growth was rapidly expanding and the level of freedom decreased proportionaly to the increase of technological prosperity.

It does requires paradigmatic shift.
And just like any other paradigmatic shift; it might resulted in conflict.
Between the "Status Quo" / "Conservative" vs "Progressive".
An example; as told by history was between the "Nomadic Hunter Gatherer" (The old lifestyle) vs "Sedentary Agricultural Farmer" (The new lifestyle)

And who will control the "North" and the "South" sides this time (the civil war between the agricultural capitalists and industrial capitalists)? Technocratic corporations. The problem with techno-communistic ideas is its part where it talks about "making people free" and "solving the slavery problem".

Jafar

Yes, as I said, maintenance of technology. What else is left? Hobby? Truth seeking? Watching movies? Hedonism?

Exactly and more..

If we wind back the clock to 10-15,000 years ago.
The innovation of agriculture has freed human from all round the clock work of hunting and foraging for food.
The freed time of people living in agricultural society has resulted them to be able to invest their time to invest in Writing / Reading, Religion, Philosophy, Sport etc.. Which have no 'value' in the perspective on Hunting and Foraging society.

Back to the current time.
The innovation of technology will free human from 9-5 blue collar, boring and routine works. (Taking out trashes, scanning items on convenient store, switching lines on switchboard, assembling shoes etc..)

Russia, and China are not post-industrial nations, they are industrial. Industial and non-industrial societies differ in whether services prevail production of goods in economy, or if the economy relates on free market, services and international trade.

The classical view of differentiating between "goods" and "services" might be irrelevant now.
Given many "goods" will be delivered as "services".
As such the categorization of "industrial" and "post industrial" has also become irrelevant.

Both Russia and China still have awful conditions for international trade with the EU and other "Western" subjects.

And is it bad for Russia and China?

I don't see how the 'awful conditions for trade with EU and western world" has hurt China or Russia.
It's actually the other way around as the shift of power now shifting to Asia, due to their sheer size of resources and population.

Example
Sweden blocked Huawei from entering it's market. Huawei will lost 9.9 Million potential market.
China retaliate by blocking Ericsson from entering it's market. Ericsson will lost 1.3 Billion potential market. 130 X more losses than Huawei.

Yes, and that in turn will create a strong social stratification based on those that run and maintain the technology and the rest. It is not just about investing one's time into anything but being a personal economic unit, i.e. having busyness in the economy.

Does 'having a business' will still be necessary? (In post capitalism context)

I think I explained figuratively what a "scholar" is in a technocratic case... someone who has access to a part of the capital (technology in this case) and maintains it, the rest will rely on the final product.

Is it a problem?
In today's "Post Agricultural" era, the majority has no access to the agricultural farm or maintaining it.
The majority is relying on the final product (fast) food.

It seems you genuinuly believe that it will be the machines that will be primarily targeted/take damage in those wars and not the human population or infrastructure, which if substantially damaged will also decrease the economy and move the nation into a lower state of survival. That will also meas the "cannon fodder" will once again have to marsh in crowds.

The "machine based weapon" will definitely be the primary target.

Taking out human population and/or infrastructure is not beneficial for the 'winner', given those are actually the 'prize / spoil' of the war.

Example
What benefits does it bring to People Republic of China if they conquered devastated, radioactive polluted and human population decimated Taiwan island?

Declaring something open source comes from capital holder and this alone is not horizontal by definition. The same with Apple technology, just because you own an iphone does not make you a special economic unit, outside of consumption. The capital and the key property still remains in the shareholding. Horizontal means

I rephrase that it's actually the Free Software Movement.
And herewith the answer to your criterias

You have the right of a say;
Definitely, you have the right to use or modify as you see fit.
You respect yourself and the other as a unified subject;
You respect other by crediting their work / contribution and other will respect you by crediting you and your contribution on the software's source code.
Decisions are made collectively and not based on the approval of the higher-standing institution.
Not required and even better, You are free to make your own decision of the software's source code that you have obtained. No approval from any other parties is required.

I can edit the page on Islam yet the army of Muslims will still prevail in their amount and influence to change the stuff back to what it suits them. Because I do not have the rights to property or capital, religion in this case. I do not judge or establish canon, based on hierarchy of religious ministry.

There's another option Publish your own Wikipedia.

The same can be said over any delegated right, such as use an open source software as you wish, because you was delegated that right, you did not have it innately. Same with the rest of technological freedom.

See my explanation above on Free Software Movement...

Now they have robots to have sex with, yet based on observable information on it they will turn off automatically if you perform some actions on it which the system will consider a rape or a morally-wrong sexual action.

Really? Then why not create your own robots to have sex with without those restriction?

And who will control the "North" and the "South" sides this time (the civil war between the agricultural capitalists and industrial capitalists)? Technocratic corporations. The problem with techno-communistic ideas is its part where it talks about "making people free" and "solving the slavery problem".

I'm not getting this, please explain more...

Makaveli

The freed time of people living in agricultural society has resulted them to be able to invest their time to invest in Writing / Reading, Religion, Philosophy, Sport etc.. Which have no 'value' in the perspective on Hunting and Foraging society.

It did not free time of the majority as most people still had to work from dawn to dusk in the fields, but the caste and feudalism systems were invented in order for one group of priveleged people to be able to invest their time into anything else and the rest/majority still had to work in argiculture.

Back to the current time.
The innovation of technology will free human from 9-5 blue collar, boring and routine works. (Taking out trashes, scanning items on convenient store, switching lines on switchboard, assembling shoes etc..)

Will it free human from the government? No, because that's not the case as long as the human time is distributed within the society units and also because government and fascio. are methaphysical concepts, this is a part of the / i.e. the system and the point of government is to make the economy work by making human work and dedicate its time to something. Even if it will free from 9/5 it won't diminish the class/caste system or the currency as the standard for one's indicator of social privelege i.e. economic resouce. People will have to do something else to get their robots due routine work, like mine bitcoins, which will prove to be unproductive given the fact that industrial miners who invested hundreds of thousands into the hardware will be able to mine more than an "ordinary" human being. Therefore there will still be some sort of jobs to perform on daily basis for the rest.

The classical view of differentiating between "goods" and "services" might be irrelevant now.
Given many "goods" will be delivered as "services".
As such the categorization of "industrial" and "post industrial" has also become irrelevant.

What do you mean by "goods" delivered as "services"? These are not paradigmatic or philosophical concepts, these are concepts of the matter. There are goods i.e. raw resources or final manufactured products on the market and services i.e. non-materialized investment of one's time to into something demanded on the market. As I said we are already living in the post-industrial i.e. post-production economy where services share the lion's share of the market BECAUSE we allow the third world to starve and people there work 12 hour shifts for a can of rice in order for us to wear t-shirts. That's the prosperity, it's never achieved, it is taken from other societies.

And is it bad for Russia and China?
I don't see how the 'awful conditions for trade with EU and western world" has hurt China or Russia.
It's actually the other way around as the shift of power now shifting to Asia, due to their sheer size of resources and population.

I never said it is bad or not, I never gave it a judgement, I said that Russia and China are not a good example of post-industrial countries, because they still rely on production or resource gathering so to speak, that's the lion's share of their economy, which creates relative advantage for them. Limiting free trade prevents a lot of goods and jobs coming from oversees and that influences the diminished level of life in Eastern Russia.

Does 'having a business' will still be necessary? (In post capitalism context)

If by 'having a business' you mean having a legalized infrastructure or intellectual property in order to generate a unit of economic well-being i.e. "one-eye" then even by now that is not "needed", but is mostly chosen by people who want it, if we talk about free-trade nations. But it seems your vision of what 'post-capitalism' differs vastly from mine. Capitalism is not just having to produce or earn money to spend, capitalism was around for thousands of years and it refers to the system of distribution and deligation of wealth/land/resources/women from an authority who claims wealth/land/resources/women on a particular geographic territory towards its controlled population. And this notion i.e. having technological infrastructure developed to the point that people will not have to go 9-5 does not at all even remotely touch the aspect of CAPITAL-ism i.e. worship of the capital-holders. The technocratic corporations as explained in the cyberpunk genre will still control the rest of the masses who already become mindless consumers. Some 50 years ago it was okay to show self-defense and possess arms, today in most countries you will have to get really lucky not to get jailed even if your family is in danger by a thief, in case you kill him in self-defense. A lot of peaceful demonstrations are already oppressed by suing ultra-sound towers which make ordinary people loose hearing. 50 years ago police had trouble shooting someone unless there is an obvious shooting coming from the target. Today they have the right to shoot you down for dancing around them (a real case, which occured in my country a year ago I believe) The more we dwelve into technology the sooner it becomes apparent that your every move is now controlled to the point that you will start losing your identity and that's where post-humanism is headed, to create a new type of biological organism, a cyborg.

The "machine based weapon" will definitely be the primary target.

Taking out human population and/or infrastructure is not beneficial for the 'winner', given those are actually the 'prize / spoil' of the war.
Example
What benefits does it bring to People Republic of China if they conquered devastated, radioactive polluted and human population decimated Taiwan island?

Taiwan island is already controlled by China and it serves for them as the Japan-US military base and an anti aircraft defense. It is like Crimea for Russia. But devastating an enemy like India or the US during the all-our-war, and its strategic cities will obviously be a priority. There is no logic in machines fighting machines.

You have the right of a say;
Definitely, you have the right to use or modify as you see fit.
You respect yourself and the other as a unified subject;
You respect other by crediting their work / contribution and other will respect you by crediting you and your contribution on the software's source code.
Decisions are made collectively and not based on the approval of the higher-standing institution.
Not required and even better, You are free to make your own decision of the software's source code that you have obtained. No approval from any other parties is required.

None of these examples require any interaction at all hence it's not horizontal, it's substantive.

Really? Then why not create your own robots to have sex with without those restriction?

Capital and infrastructure for "silicon technology" is preserved in universities only, hence why I said about the case stratification between the scholars/engineers and the rest of the "proles (Orwellian term)".

I'm not getting this, please explain more...

See my explanation on hierarchy and capitalism.

Makaveli

Exactly and more..

The quality of writings and intellectural work depends on the level of suffering. In fact, the more hedonistic the society is the lesser is the quality of intellectual creations. Compare books in the late 19th century (Sologub, Le Bon, Leo Tolstoy) and what they write now. Not necessarily the books, the quality of everything is bullshit today while the blind consumers cannot even know what they truely need for themselves, just mindlessly consume everything. The famous formula of the Came Saw Won is now Came Saw Consumed.

https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKGbguoildA

SarahY

I think demonetization is happening to a degree but there are certainly things which are not demonetised and will probably always have a high value e.g. a house with water views in a busy city. Even an ordinary house in a city or the outskirts of a city is expensive. Certain things go down in value and seem more affordable whereas other things seem unreachable.

I think there will always be people in privileged positions. Also I don?t see how horizontal cooperation will work because of ego, competitiveness and greed. People can be taught to care for others doesn?t mean they won?t look out for their own interests.

There?s a saying in Arabic that poverty is kufr because a person who is suffering will do anything and care about nothing but their own needs. It may help people with intellectual creations, different needs can help create ingenuity but desperation can make different people do different things. Besides, don?t you think there are alot of people suffering today?

Makaveli

Also I don?t see how horizontal cooperation will work because of ego, competitiveness and greed.

It won't work, it is against the physics behind the universe and the material illusion of mankind's existence, i.e. experience behind material living, that's what existence is by definition, an EXPERIENCE behind material living or living within the material projection. That is why I strongly emphasize on getting your ego diminished by practicing contemplation and unguided meditations, the latter is not that important actually, this can be achieved without meditation, but concentrating your thoughts may help at some occasions. I also emphasize not to look forward to any -ISM because any social ideology is in essence vicious as it is based on projection of management of material experience. The matter is vicious, that's metaphysics. It is vicious regardless if you believe in it or not. If you fall of the bridge, no matter what you believe in, the law of matter WILL work and you WILL hit the ground/water/whatever is under the bridge. Because that's the law. It will work regardless if a bad or good person will fall off the bridge, that's an unchangeable set of rules, which methaphysically, because any matter is but a projection of the spiritual realm, govern your material existence.

The same goes in regards to social interaction. You can watch the documentaries on Syrian refugees in France and other EU refugee camps. Often there are gangs which form within these communities, which prevent others to leave the borders of the camp without paying them. These gangs in their numbers do not prevail even 5% of the total number of refugees there, yet people cannot do anything about this. Why? Because hierarchal interaction is ALWAYS organized, whereas horizontal is not, this is why a single pastor may lead a flock of sheep with the latter not even questioning the pastor's decisions. That's the law. The only way to evade it partly is to accept the reality and lower your ego, do not join anyone and have no claims on personal ownership, because in essence we own nothing, EXCEPT our personal material experience,but we no nothing of matter. Therefore any claim on the matter regardless of motivation is vicious.

Being close to "thy neighbour" or caring for others does not mean uniting in communities under any -ism. It means to look at the bigger picture, and not to cause harm to anyone, by your thoughts (curses or even small bad wishes may materialize), words or actions. To establish this pattern of life one has to work on his/her own ego, which is who one percieves to be, but in truth is not. There you have your purpose of life. Not to harm and acccept the reality as to what it is, without falling into moral relativism or any other dogma. To do the latter one has to gain knowledge by observation and contemplation, and only then reading. Reading without observation, studying and contemplation is worthless.

good_logic

Peace Makaveli.
I agree with your post. All man s systems are imperfect. One needs to "come out of them".

However if the knowledge is false and biased, the observation will be false and biased and so will the contemplation.
So how does one insure the right kind of knowledge?

For me, the source of all knowledge must be sought to guide to the right knowledge.
One needs to be prepared to undergo a "revolution" to get rid of the doctrines(false knowledge) planted in them by other systems since childhood.
A very tedious and hard task.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

Makaveli

For me, the source of all knowledge must be sought to guide to the right knowledge.
One needs to be prepared to undergo a "revolution" to get rid of the doctrines(false knowledge) planted in them by other systems since childhood.

Yes. And which power or force prevents to do so?