Discussion What Would The Ideal Society Be Like?

[K9Otaku]

How is this any different from what I said?

You said "The top X number of designers get paid accordingly to how well their designs fit those criteria."

Do you mean that the aircraft designers are going to be paid after 15 years? Because this is when "how well their designs fit those criteria" will be known.

How would this problem not apply to the current system? Tell me how aircraft design works now. How does a private company know whether or not the designer has done a good job without proper testing?

Aircraft designers are paid by reputation, which mean by the qualitative appreciation of their managers, based on their feelings and guesswork. Also, negotiation plays a part. One designer may say "if you don't pay me more, I will quit and go to the competition". It is absolutely not based on objective criteria and yet it is the best method available.

The reason is that the individual performance of the designer is absolutely impossible to disentangle from the performance of other departments in the firm: procurement, for the quality of materials, metallurgy, for the quality of alloys used, the assembly line, the metrology department, which measures how closely the tolerances are kept, and even the sales department, depending on how well they understand customer requirements and feed them back to the design and assembly departments. The eventual performance of a plane depends on all these actors and it is impossible to know exactly how much each contributed to the success or failure.

As a result, managers who decide on designer compensation have to guess and follow their gut feeling. There is no way around it.

Lmfao no you're the hopelessly naive one who doesn't understand how the world that you live in at this very moment works (works the way I described it btw, people have come up with mathematical model for EVERYTHING)

In what bubble are you living?

I have worked in the private sector and government for a number of years and I have seen everywhere that math-based decision making is the exception and guesswork and gut feelings are the norm.

The media and documentaries on Science TV channels like to pretend that "people have come up with mathematical model for EVERYTHING". But it is fake news. Reality is totally different.

Have you ever worked in a company? Even as an intern?

No families. No women. No biological births. Only males who will be cloned, the clones are raised in governmental education facilities until they can enter the economy as adults.

That is what you advocate. But is it wise? The government has always proven to be piss poor at educating people. Government-run schools and universities are the biggest spreaders of nonsense today. All the woke gynocentric crap comes from there. How are you going to prevent this from happening again?

An don't answer "I will forbid them from doing that". Ok, you will make a rule with a list of items that they are forbidden to teach. But then, what prevents them from inventing a new kind of nonsense and teaching that. If gov universities were able to invent gynocentric nonsense, they are perfectly capable to invent another kind of nonsense. There is no way you can prevent that.

Government-run organizations are quick to develop irresponsible behaviors because the state is to big to manage anything in detail properly. Either it terrorizes people like Stalin did (and the results are not necessarily good either) or it becomes lax and workers or professors become unaccountable and self interested. I did not invent this. This negative appraisal of government managerial performance is the result of 150 years of experiments and observation.

No my ideas come from elsewhere.

You obviously don't know where your ideas are coming.

Your ideas <-- Marxism/Anarchism <-- Utopian Socialism (Proudhon, etc) <-- Rousseau <-- Protestantism <-- Monastic thinkers (Saint Benedict, John Cassian, Basil of Cesarea) <--- The Bible (esp. the Book of Acts)

That is how the ideas you present in the OP grew in Western thought. You are influenced by all that even if you do not know it.

 

[BuyingANewFace]

Idea society? All ugly and "average" guys are given all the surgeries they need to be at least a "6" in looks. Then most of society's problems would organically solve themselves, including corporate greed.

 

[Deleted member 35171]

Aircraft designers are paid by reputation, which mean by the qualitative appreciation of their managers, based on their feelings and guesswork. Also, negotiation plays a part. One designer may say "if you don't pay me more, I will quit and go to the competition". It is absolutely not based on objective criteria and yet it is the best method available.

How is that not objective criteria? Their reputation is a direct result of how well their past designs have objectively passed the test of time against other designers.
That could very well be the system used in my ideal society. The word "quota" is very flexible.

In what bubble are you living?

I have worked in the private sector and government for a number of years and I have seen everywhere that math-based decision making is the exception and guesswork and gut feelings are the norm.

The media and documentaries on Science TV channels like to pretend that "people have come up with mathematical model for EVERYTHING". But it is fake news. Reality is totally different.

Have you ever worked in a company? Even as an intern?

In the "bubble" of data science which is the present and future of everything.

That is what you advocate. But is it wise? The government has always proven to be piss poor at educating people.

As is expected of a government where people of different economic backgrounds get to vote with their money
Here's your argument btw: "capitalist governments are bad at something, therefore socialist governments are bad at it too!" when they literally stand in direct opposition in one another.
A capitalism is controlled by a minority and the whole point is to leech off of the majority as much as possible to maximize the profits of that minority. A socialist government is controlled by the majority.

An don't answer "I will forbid them from doing that". Ok, you will make a rule with a list of items that they are forbidden to teach. But then, what prevents them from inventing a new kind of nonsense and teaching that. If gov universities were able to invent gynocentric nonsense, they are perfectly capable to invent another kind of nonsense. There is no way you can prevent that.

[UWSL]The current government, only controlled by a small percentage of men, benefits from keeping the rest of the men powerless and feminized. [/UWSL]
[UWSL]While a society controlled and shared equally by all men will teach what is most beneficial to its survival, which is to not keep the men feminized.[/UWSL]

Your ideas <-- Marxism/Anarchism <-- Utopian Socialism (Proudhon, etc) <-- Rousseau <-- Protestantism <-- Monastic thinkers (Saint Benedict, John Cassian, Basil of Cesarea) <--- The Bible (esp. the Book of Acts)

Marxism =/= Anarchism
You don't know what utopian socialism means. It has nothing to do with how socialism itself functions and everything to do with how to get to a stage of socialism. It stands in opposition to revolutionary socialism. In my post I only discussed how my ideal society would function, I didn't discuss how to get there (whether a revolution is necessary or not..)
The only term I would describe myself with is anti-capitalist.

 

[K9Otaku]

In what bubble are you living?

In the "bubble" of data science which is the present and future of everything.

Ok, that explains it all.

Since you did not answer the question "did you ever work in a company?", I assume that you haven't and that you are currently learning data "science" (undergrad?, postgrad?)

What this boils down to is that you are still a puppy, with some of his mother's milk on his nose.

You have been sold on data "science" by the same people who tell us that gender studies are also a "science", that gender is a "social construct" and that climate "science" is a science. They are the vanguard of the bluepill gyno-worshiping gestapo.

Data "science" is a pompous name for what used to be called statistics. Statistics is not science. It is math and math is not science in the strict sense because it does not tell us anything about the world. Math can be used as a tool in science but is not a science by itself.

For something to be a science, you need two things: a theory (a model of something) and experiments. Without experiments validating the model, the model is worth zero. It is not science.

That is why Climate "science" is not science. They have models all right but they cannot do experiments. Can you recreate a second Earth besides this one to test whether a model is able to accurately predict the climate when you vary the parameters (Carbon dioxide, methane, solar activity, biosphere behavior, ...) ? No, of course. Therefore, the models of climate "science" are not experimentally validated. They are rubbish.

Situations like this one, where you cannot do any experiments, are in the majority. It may be because the system is too complex to reproduce (like in climate science) or because the phenomena observed are too fuzzy to be unambiguously measured (like in anything concerning human behavior). Situations where you can profitably (and honestly) make use of statistical techniques are a tiny minority of all real world problems.

Of course, in Physics, statistics (data "science") can be used and have been used for over a century (statistical mechanics). In the insurance industry, it is also successfully used (to evaluate the risk of large numbers of similar situations like car ownership or house fires). The same is true in manufacturing (quality control) or banking (risk scores). But that is about it.

Most businesses do not use statistics (data "science") at all or to a very marginal degree. The use of statistics in finance has actually decreased over the last decade, after several very high profile fiascos proved its fallibility (LTCM, the 2008 crisis)

Any talk of using data "science" in sociology or psychology is just drivel. And that is where it gets really nasty. Because in these "fields", data "science" is indeed used but not to make testable predictions. It is in fact used to wrap in an aura of scientificity what is really dogmatic propaganda (like in gender studies, CRT, etc). Data "science" has become the handmaiden of scientific fraud in these areas.

So, if you believe the claims of data "science" to be able to produce "models for EVERYTHING", you fit the very definition of a normie bluepiller . What I gave you above is the blackpill about data "science". It is up to you to swallow it or not.

 

[Rotmwrt]

A world sanitized by nuclear hellfire and subsequently reclaimed by mother Nature. Think Chernobyl after the disaster.