The Next Industrial Revolution

Large, centrally-directed systems are inherently fragile. Think of the human body; a spontaneous, unexpected blow to the head can kill an otherwise healthy creature; all the healthy cells and tissue in the legs, arms, torso and so forth killed through dependency on the brain’s functionality. Interdependent systems are only ever as strong as their weakest critical link, and very often a critical link can fail through nothing more than bad luck.

Yet the human body does not exist in isolation. Humans as a species are a decentralised network. Each individual may be in himself or herself a fragile, interdependent system, but the wider network of humanity is a robust independent system. One group of humans may die in an avalanche or drown at sea, but their death does not affect the survival of the wider population. The human genome has survived plagues, volcanoes, hurricanes, asteroid impacts and so on through its decentralisation.

In economics, such principles are also applicable. Modern, high-technology civilisation is very centralised and homogenised. Prices and availability are affected by events half way around the world; a war in the middle east, the closure of the Suez Canal or Strait of Hormuz, an earthquake in China, flooding in Thailand, or a tidal wave in Indonesia all have ramifications to global markets, simply because of the interconnectedness of globalisation. The computer I am typing this into is a complex mixture — the cumulative culmination of millions of hours of work, as well as resources and manufacturing processes across the globe. It incorporates tellurium, indium, cobalt, gallium, and manganese mined in Africa. Neodymium mined in China. Plastics forged out of Saudi Crude. Bauxite mined in Brazil. Memory manufactured in Korea, semiconductors forged in Germany, glass made in the United States. And gallons and gallons of oil to ship all the resources and components around the world, ’til they are finally assembled in China, and shipped once again around the world to the consumer. And that manufacturing process stands upon the shoulders of centuries of scientific research, and years of product development, testing, and marketing. It is a huge mesh of interdependent processes. And the disruption of any one of these processes can mean disruption for the system as a whole. The fragility of interconnection is the great hidden danger underlying our modern economic and technological paradigms.

And even if the risks of global trade disruptions do not materialise in the near-term, as the finite supply of oil dwindles in coming years, the costs of constantly shipping so much around and around the world may prove unsustainable.

It is my view that the reality of costlier oil is set over the coming years to spur a new industrial revolution — a very welcome side-effect of which will be increased social and industrial decentralisation. Looming on the horizon are technologies which can decentralise the means of production and the means of energy generation.

3D printers — machines that can assemble molecules into larger pre-designed objects are pioneering a whole new way of making things. This could well rewrite the rules of manufacturing in much the same way as the rise of personal computing discombobulated the traditional world of computing.

3D printers have existed in large-scale industry for years. But at a cost of $100,000 to $1m, few individuals could ever afford one. Fortunately, improved technology and lowered costs are making such machines more viable for home use. Industrial 3D printers now cost from just $15,000, and home versions for little more than $1,000. Obviously, there are still significant hurdles. 3D printing is still a relatively crude technology, so far incapable of producing complex finished goods. And molecular assembly still requires resources to run on — at least until the technology of molecular disassembly becomes viable, allowing for 3D printers to run on, for example, waste. But the potential for more and more individuals to gain the capacity to manufacture at home — thereby reducing dependency on oil and the global trade grid — is a huge incentive to further development. The next Apple or Microsoft could well be the company that develops and brings home-based 3D printing to the wider marketplace by making it simple and accessible and cheap.

Decentralised manufacturing goes hand-in-hand with decentralised energy generation, because manufacturing requires energy input. Microgrids are localised groupings of energy generation that can vary from city-size to individual-size. The latter is gradually becoming more and more economically viable as the costs of solar panels, wind turbines (etc) for energy generation, and lithium and graphene batteries (etc) for home energy storage fall, and efficiencies rise. Although generally connected to a larger national electricity grid, the connection can be disconnected, and a microgrid can function autonomously if the national grid were to fail (for example) as a result of natural disaster or war.

Having access to a robust and independent energy supply and home-manufacturing facilities would be very empowering for individuals and local communities and allow a higher degree of independence from governments and corporations. Home-based microgrids can allow the autonomous and decentralised powering and recharging of not just home appliances like cooking equipment, computers, 3D printers, lights, and food growing equipment, but also electric vehicles and mobile communications equipment. Home-based 3D printing can allow for autonomous and decentralised design and manufacturing of useful tools and equipment.

The choice that we face as individuals and organisations is whether or not we choose to continue to live with the costs and risks of the modern globalised mode of production, or whether we decide to invest in insulating ourselves from some of the dangers. The more individuals and organisations that invest in these technologies that allow us to create robust decentralised energy generation and production systems, the more costs should fall.

Decentralisation has allowed our species to survive and flourish through millions of years of turbulent and unpredictable history. I believe that decentralisation can allow our young civilisation to survive and flourish in the same manner.

About these ads

93 thoughts on “The Next Industrial Revolution

  1. Interesting thoughts. You forgot to mention the most important part of this future: the necessary shift to decentralized government.

    Take a look at Catalonia, Northern Italy, etc and you’ll see that Europeans are not only fed up with centralized government in Brussels, but in fact with their own domestic versions of wealth distribution.

    Unfortunately, however, a default in the US by big spending California or similar would likely result in the opposite effect: the Powers That Be consolidating more power at federal level in the form of further bailouts of municipal and state debts.

    • I hoped readers would take this a level further, actually. Governments’ (and corporations’) economic domain is fundamentally limited if you have your own property with your own molecular assembly/disassembly, energy generation, food growing facilities, etc. For libertarians who want independence from government, you can’t get much more independent than that.

      (Well, you can get much more independent than that, and I expect that that may be one of the key drivers of humans colonising space, but that is another story for another day).

      • If Governments developed a principles based code of conduct for individuals and corporations and left the decisions up to Judges, Business would not be trying to predict policy changes and other legislation which makes planning your business difficult or risky.

        Australia had a hung parliament for weeks and life went on. If anything at least we knew laws were not going to be passed. We could catch up on learning the laws they passed already!

        These laws are sufficient!

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi

        • Your are in good company with your view of parliament: beloved humorist Will Rogers would say “The nation is in dire peril — congress goes back into session this week.”

    • Decentralized government means there will be many regional lords and wars. Means back to the medieval time when there were thousands princeliness countries constantly fighting for access and roads and lands. No one want to live like that. And if the future Man want they will soon tired of the small surveying space.

  2. 3D printing and nano-manufacturing are promising. Energy is the major limit, and there are alternative technologies waiting in the wings (and would be widely used if not for government-petrol industry suppression).

    See: http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/ and http://www.cheniere.org/

    Check out these two texts:

    http://c4ss.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/C4SS-Desktop-Manufacturing.pdf

    http://radgeek.com/gt/2011/10/Markets-Not-Capitalism-2011-Chartier-and-Johnson.pdf

  3. Lots of promise for a better human future. But let’s not retard and corrupt progress with old political/ideological/envious bias. I know of no “petrol industry suppression” of technology. When I posted a tribute to the Bill and Malinda Gates Foundation for effectively using the Gates and Buffett fortunes to help third world children, the first reply was spiteful condemnation for their making/having the wealth. [Of course it was youthful Gates and Allen who, along with Intel, gave birth to personal computing, which has changed the world for the better].

    John and Alex, keep plugging for free, independent and decentralized progress. Government is force, the enemy of innovation. Of course some government is necessary and, rarely, even helpful, but let’s minimize it; at best it is unproductive overhead, at worst it is the slavery and mass murder of Stalin, Hitler and Mao.

    • DG, that was probably me that made that comment. Here’s why.

      Let’s say you cornered the wheat market and had control of almost the entire wheat harvest. You were able to manipulate prices, contracts, pay-off government officials to “level” your playing field, etc.

      After several years of stifled competition, and much higher than necessary market prices for wheat products, you amass a great fortune. Out of the kindness of you heart, you decide to give half of your fortune away.

      This is the story of Bill Gates and other monopolists like him.

      • I agree with your analogy. But at least they do donate, and probably more effectively than the Government and its welfare program.

        I still use Windows XP. I am comfortable with it, and it is more productive than I can ever hope to be. I can communicate with peers all around the world. Send all manner of Spreadsheets, Word Document send Power Point presentation etc etc.

        I believe after a while Intellectual Property rules would lapse???? So people could freely use this Software.

        That is why Microsoft is a long term sell. Sure be compensated for achieving something tangible, but price monopoly will soon be non existent.

        • Intellectual property [value] is an farcical idea, but not any more so then owning real property. In both cases, it is not the land [nor the idea] that can be owned, but instead, the profit potential [welcome to the casino].

          All real value is derived from human labor. You are not buying the land, you are buying the legal right to keep people away. You are not patenting an idea, you are buying a monopoly in order to derive a profit sans competition. This destroys the free market.

        • What utter bollocks, Impermanence.

          Without IP protection, the world would be China, copying everything and creating nothing. The only innovation is in places like the military, where competition would mean death.

          Would you have as a business model as all risk, no reward?

          Patents coincided with flourishing innovation, or was that all coincidence?

          In Australia, entrepreneurship is dying due to sovereign risk and government interference. It’s simple, if it’s too hard to make money yourself, you go work for someone else.

          No IP laws is sheer lunacy. It’s a ticket to the dark ages and poverty.

        • I am woefully out-of-date on patent law, etc., but U.S. patents used to expire after 17 years, but were often extended with refinements. Other nations’ patent and national/international “intellectual property” law and its enforcement seem to be somewhat porous. “Proprietary” secrets surely have yielded to “reverse engineering”. So I would bet that the only reliable competitive advantage is staying ahead; look at Apple’s record! Microsoft’s Windows cost is trivial for most users, but is it monopolistic?

      • Imp: Sorry, but I can’t relate your hypothetical grain monopolist to Gates and Microsoft. IF Microsoft does in fact “manipulate prices and contracts, pay off government officials, and stifle competition”, the company should be prosecuted, fined, regulated, and its officers fined and perhaps jailed. In Europe, at least, there has been a lot of legal action, some of it, I think, successful.

        But it seems unfair and inappropriate to scorn generous and, in this case, successful innovative personally managed philanthropy.

        • DG, don’t get me wrong, I believe that compassion [in all things] is, “what it is,” but you have to take it in context. In this era where an individual can amass a fortune of USD50B, is only leaving yourself USD25B a great sacrifice?

          Would a slave-holder who [voluntarily] allows half of his slaves to go free be considered a great person?

          Shouldn’t the question be, “How is it possible to for this type of concentration of wealth to occur in the first place?”

        • Surely it matters not what your neighbour earns but whether there is a net benefit or cost as a result of it.

          The only alternative is to have the state run it, which would have cost megabucks for perhaps little result. It is the promise of riches – the reward – which justifies the risk required.

  4. Why keep rehashing the same ideas. Adam Smith in the 18th century said that big firms were inherentlty inefficient, but in the late 20th Century, Alfred D. Chandler Jr. wrote about The Visble Hand of Management that made efficiency in large organizations possible. Get some new ideas. They are around, the 2.0 organization for instance..

    • Where have you been Robert!

      Only Economic hobbyists like me read Adam Smith. But in order for a wider audience to think differently this site’s writing style is easier to digest. Smith’s thinking is very outdated now, and a newer audience would find it difficult to compare with current conditions. Smith talks about raw Corn prices, when today’s audience would only consume corn in packaged Taco’s! How much would you have to pay the average labourer today to produce a labour output? It would have to be priced in Doritos not corn.

      If I had to quote sources for all my thoughts, even acknowledging parents and teachers it would be onerous.

  5. Unfortunately the corporatists have already seen this one coming a mile off, which is why they’ve been intensely beefing up “intellectual property” laws for the last decade or two.

      • Laws only apply if you sell to someone. In theory we can make anything we need. I am sure the plans will be on the internet.

        Indeed, they will. Locked up tight in patent and copyright laws.

  6. State compulsory schooling is designed to create dumbed down workers who work for corporations who serve a homogenized customer who is easily influenced by marketeers. The State is there to keep the status quo and to ensure that the corporate elite continue to dominate. Schooling is the lock and key that keeps the system going.

    Very inspiring post, sadly I doubt if the corporations will allow 3D Printing to be a replacement for their system.

    3D-Printable Gun Project Hits Its Fundraising Goal Despite Being Booted Off Indiegogo

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/09/20/3d-printed-gun-project-hits-its-fundraising-goal-despite-being-booted-off-indiegogo/

    • State compulsory schooling is designed to indoctrinate children to adopt government policy without question. The State is there to keep the status quo and to ensure that the political elite continue to dominate. Schooling is the lock and key that keeps the system going.

      That can be interpreted in many ways. My little kids come home with all the lefty ideas, and accept them as much as they do arithmetic. Liking trees is fine, but it’s getting more and more politically partisan.

      • When I was in Primary School during a school excursion my teacher told me to hug a tree. Then they took a photo of it and published. Boy did I cop flak in the playground!

      • “My little kids come home with all the lefty ideas” – What does that even mean? I imagine they aren’t espousing Keynesian rhetoric so what are these “lefty ideas” that you’re referring to in a disparaging and dismissive way? God forbid they give a damn about Bambi and thumper’s habitat right, or get along with kids who are different. Maybe they should be taught to commodify crayons and skittles(red bag is best) instead? I agree things are overly partisan, and its precisely because people are so sure what their ideology is right. At best some do what you did and say, “oh, those lefty ideas, they’re cute – the kids will grow out of them though.” like it’s believing in Santa. “All I know is that I don’t know nothing” – Operation Ivy aka the Socratic paradox.

  7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Taylor_Gatto

    Main thesis

    What does the school do with the children? Gatto states the following assertions in “Dumbing Us Down”:

    It makes the children confused. It presents an incoherent ensemble of information that the child needs to memorize to stay in school. Apart from the tests and trials that programming is similar to the television, it fills almost all the “free” time of children. One sees and hears something, only to forget it again.
    It teaches them to accept their class affiliation.
    It makes them indifferent.
    It makes them emotionally dependent.
    It makes them intellectually dependent.
    It teaches them a kind of self-confidence that requires constant confirmation by experts (provisional self-esteem).
    It makes it clear to them that they cannot hide, because they are always supervised.[9]

    • I learnt more about fixing and repairing machines (Cars etc) by learning through tinkering, utilising library resources when necessary and having guidance from a father, than any school based system (Trade school)

      Homeschooling and encouraging a child in its natural interest, then sending them to sporting and other association clubs for social skills is by far the best system.

      Provided a parent takes the time to read to a child at a early age, and interact with it, instead of dumping it in front of child TV programs, the child will be a natural learner.

      The school of Deistic thought. Using our God given reason to learn and question. Do you think God has time to listen to all our concerns. We need to take responsibility for our lives and actions. God only helps those who help themselves.

      • Buddy, you have hit the biggest nail of all right on the head! God/nature gives children to mothers (preferable fathers also). There is no other means of saving humanity — not Nazi or Communist schooling/brainwashing, unionized teachers, “the village”, revisionist history from Washington D.C., etc. — parents!!

  8. As interesting as technology can be, it is not going to save us. Thousands of years ago, human beings learned that what is real exists in understanding our relationship to all that exists.

    Looking to science, or government, or [fill in the blank] is simply a distraction from the hard work we must all preform in attempting to understanding our true nature.

    After all, if it were the god, Techno, who could deliver us, then we would not be engaged in yet another paradox, as how might one find their salvation in never-ending improvement?

    Technology is neutral [relative] vis a vis the human condition.

    • Imp: Surely I misunderstand your “Technology is neutral viv-a-vis the human condition.”! Fire? Water purification? Higher-yield and pest-resistant crops? Refrigeration? Medicine? Printing? Electricity? Wireless communication? Weaving? Plastics? Heating and cooling? Power beyond human and animal? etc.? etc.?

      Longevity, comfort, leisure time, long-distance communication, etc. aren’t everything, but they help.

      • Yes, but all of these things have little to do with contentment, i.e., being OK with whatever presents in your life. Life will always be about good things and not so good things, no matter the technology.

        I am not saying that any of the things you have mentioned are not “good,” but instead, that it does not change human reality, which is that we are born, age, and die with a great deal of challenges, difficulty and pain.

        • Imp: You are talking philosophy, which, like religion, is personal. I’m focusing on public policy, cooperative enterprise, progress vs. retrogress — societal factors in the material (and opportunity for spiritual) human condition. Some ancient captured it neatly: only after food and other physical needs are met, can a human pursue the higher potential that is exclusive to humans.

        • Imp, have a look at old photos of your ancestors.

          They weren’t smiling, and for good reason! They kept having children for the ones they lost, worked from the moment they physically could to the moment they physically couldn’t. It was hard. Bloody hard.

          It is the great paradox that material gain doesn’t make you happier in the end, yet we strive for exactly that. The fact is that material gain does make us happier, but it doesn’t last very long, so we keep striving.

          It seems to be in our nature to explore and break the mysteries of the universe. It has never abated, and it never will. Get used to it.

  9. Pingback: Guest Post: The Next Industrial Revolution | TheTradersWire.com

  10. Dear Aziz

    Your writing is beautiful. Far more beautiul is the Galactic Federation, currently in our skies. to assist Gaia, and all Souls upon her, Ascend on or about 21 Dec, 2012. The Illuminati know this and are resisting to their last evil breath. They are being erradicated, more and more every day. God’s will cannot be stopped. Thank God! There are many websites that channel news to us on a daily basis. I shall give you but three the2012scenario; aquariouschannelings; treeofthegoldenlight. I promise they speak the Truth. I promise they come in God’s name. You could do wonders, thru your blog, to spread Love and Light. Peace and abundance will soon be Ours. God bless you. Chris

  11. Dear Aziz

    Some of the wondroas technolgy we can expect, after Full Disclosure, which our Illuminati governments are resisting. Replicators that can produce food. Actually they can reproduce anything we want. Free energy; vehicles that can run 1000 miles on a gallon of water! The Illuminati have underground tunnels, connecting major cities around the globe, inside which travel ‘trains’ at Mach 9. 6,900 mph! Landing on Mars is naught but smoke and mirrors. How about medicine that will cure EVERY disease. Wondrous technology that can restore eyesight, and limbs. All free. of course. Please believe what I say. And please spread the Love and Light. The more we do, the quicker the Dark are totally wiped off the face of our wonderful planet. And the Galactic Federation promise, all will pay for their crimes against humanity. All. God bless you. Chris

  12. You have a kind heart. I, you, and every Soul on this planet, not to mention countless others belonging to other civilisations, are immortal! Many on this planet, Gaia. have lived thousands of lives on just this one planet. I’m 64 and presume, being older, that Im one of those. The Galactic Federation come in God’s name, and cannot tell a lie. What I know comes directly from them, and believe you me, what I know is scant. They inform us that some religions have been corrupted by the Dark, and are not to be confused with spirituaity. The Galactic Federation tells us there are millions of spacecraft in our skies, waiting for Ascension, and curtailing the Illuminati’s evil plans. All nuclear weapons have been disarmed; chemtrails neutralised. They have even neutralised the radiation from Fukijima, another Dark, evil ploy, as was 9/11. I suggest you burn the midnight oil. I promise you will learn the Truth. Then, please spread the Love and Light. Thank you, Buddy. God bless you. Chris

        • Since you seem to acting as a conduit between the otter world and those here on this planet, I thought you might give a little more context.

          And, as an aside, what exactly is it that you believe you can figure out?

        • Good morning, Imp! I am not a conduit, just a mere Soul trying to spread the Light. I assumed you had read my first post, saw the 3 links. and would automatically proceed from there. Those sites, and all others, have channellers that relay messages from the Galactic Federation, as well as Celestial Beings, such as Archangel Michael! And many others. January past, I discovered the first site’ the2012scenario. I did not believe in God. i’m 64, I do now. One only has to read one paragraph to discover they are highly spiritual and love us dearly. Sadly, I’m not the brightest Star in the sky, and much of it is way over my head. Way over. I press on. The first tip, and only tip. because tehre are countless ones, is to pay attention to your dreams at nite. These are us actually experiencing things in another dimension! we will be given subtle messages, some not so subtle. Way over my head. Those links will lead to others. Enjoy. Spread the Light. Chris

  13. Not only would a forced lowering of interest be at best redistributive, but, Locke added, the measure would restrict the supply of savings and credit, thereby making the economy worse off. It would be better, he concluded, if the legal rate of interest were set at the “natural rate,” that is the free-market rate.

    John Locke, a modern man ahead of his times…

    http://mises.org/daily/4702

  14. Pingback: The Next Industrial Revolution « Silver For The People – The Blog

  15. Hello impermanence,

    You wrote, “All real value is derived from human labor.”

    Following on from that then, if a human makes a widget, does the widget now have value?

    And doesn’t my love for another have value to them however was not derived from labor but from thought, emotion and kindness?

  16. It would pay to realise Courts already are financed for profit to produce Law & Order by citizens through taxes. This much should be obvious.

  17. By the way, amigo, it should go without saying that no value is created or received without any human thought; to try and separate the two, the passion from the product, valuable or not as it may turn out to be in the eyes of the intended (or, indeed, unintended) market is patently silly, if you don’t mind me saying so! :D

  18. The panglossian paradigm is a term coined by Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Lewontin to refer to the notion that everything has specifically adapted to suit specific purposes. Instead, they argue, accidents and exaptation (the use of old features for new purposes) play an important role in the process of evolution.

    When visiting Venice in 1978, Gould noted that the spandrels of the San Marco cathedral, while quite beautiful, were not spaces planned by the architect. Rather the spaces arise as “necessary architectural byproducts of mounting a dome on rounded arches.” Gould and Lewontin thus defined spandrels in evolutionary biology to mean any biological feature of an organism that arises as a necessary side consequence of other features, which is not directly selected for by natural selection

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould#panglossian_paradigm

  19. Interestingly, this has led to me buying the book “The Case of The Female Orgasm: Bias in the science of evolution” – I wonder what my friends will think… haha!

  20. Value is intrinsic only insofar as the holder of said value remains alive; I don’t see your point, amigo, I agree with virtually everything you just said. What thought doesn’t create labour? This ostentatious ‘distinction’ between ‘intellectual’ and ‘physical’ labour is laughable. Things are connected, as Aziz articulated in this very sophisticated article.

    Meanwhile, In the Next Industrial Revolution, Atoms Are the New Bits… Decentralization from points of authority spells decolonization like solar panels do for our dependency on Arab oil.

    http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/01/ff_newrevolution/

  21. ps : little fix …**Value is intrinsic only insofar as the holder of said value remains alive deciding not to change his value(s) concerning particular object(s) which is or at least has been in question..

  22. Pingback: The Next Industrial Revolution | TrueNewsBulletin.com

  23. I had an issue with the statement that ‘all real value is derived from human labor.’ This is classical economic thinking that was not able to solve certain paradoxes until Carl Menger, the founder of Austrian economics, solved the idea of marginal utility with intrinsic vs. extrinsic values by the individual and not the collective. Interesting topic:

    http://voices.yahoo.com/carl-menger-individualism-marginal-utility-the-266176.html

    Why is this important? Because of human greed for money and power with an unquenchable thirst for more and more never being enough in the search for value outside oneself. If we are to advance as a species, we might get our heads screwed on right firstly.

    Loved the article and agree with the future of tech being more distributed and robust as better for humanity long term.

    • Economics is the study of human decisions in the context of resource acquisition. Human psychology drives these decisions. It is irrational and in the context of Billionaires (workaholics) who can’t switch off due to a psychological defect, and derive no utility from greater and greater wealth.

      This is why we need a diverse economic system based on a free market, with no regulations which create barrier to entry. It is akin to a diverse rain forrest and a mono-culture crop. Fragility as espoused by Taleb and Aziz is crucial to the future Industrial Revolution.

    • To all: Economist and more John Mauldin is a priceless treasure. His unmatched prolific and diverse global repertoire of outlets includes his free weekly newsletter and a free weekly “Outside the Box” contribution from another author.

  24. What gives a particular state the right to exercise jurisdiction and enforcement power over a particular territory? Why does the state of Denmark have rights over the territory of Denmark, and not over the territory of Sweden, and vice versa? Anna Stilz of Princeton University explores these profound questions in the below linked analysis. Prior to joining Princeton University:

    Anna Stilz received her Ph.D. in Government from Harvard University in 2005.  In 
    2005‐2006, she was a postdoctoral fellow at the Berlin Program in Advanced 
    German and European Studies at the Freie Universität Berlin.  From 2006‐2008, she 
    taught in the Political Science department at Columbia University.

    http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=5884500

  25. C’mon Aziz, I was certain your understanding of Complex Systems and Systems Thinking was much higher than this Panglossian hokum.

    Were you at an Ascended Master Teachings weekend indoc? Were you imbued in the Galactic Federation of Light? Hope you haven’t been probed by McDermott yet.

    Question: What made the scaling up of the PC Revolution of the mid 1980s-1990s possible?
    Was it A) His Holiness Saint Reagan. B) Her Holiness Saint Margaret Thatcher. C) Reaganomics. D) Neoliberalism. E) Crude reserves found at Prudhoe Bay and North Sea tapped into production. F) Political Manipulation for crude to remain at $10/bl for more than a decade. G) Name Your Own Panglossian Wetdream.
    ( combination of one or more is compatible with higher Complex Systems thinking…)

    • C’mon Simon — give us some arguments, not just pointless ridicule and mud-slinging! If you’re not already there, you should hire on at the Obama campaign.

    • Question: What made the scaling up of the PC Revolution of the mid 1980s-1990s possible?

      C’mon Simon. You missed some of the most important factors. Heavy DARPA funding. Demand from business. Hunger for profit.

      Peak oil is much less of a factor than most people think. And pure peak oil gloom-and-doomerism isn’t just annoying — it’s incompatible with a robust understanding of complex systems.

  26. There is a link between emotional and economic value as the latter springs forth from the former. That’s why advertisement agencies play on emotions to get people to buy things that suppliers have produced. If a product provides a certain solution to a need; Maslow’s hierarchy, which is based on an emotional need for comfort, love, happiness, etc, that is perceived value.

    This is why so many are fooled into thinking that value is found outside themselves and they search for happiness by buying stuff they don’t really need because they confuse intrinsic value vs. extrinsic value. Nothing outside ourselves has intrinsic value. That’s my point.

  27. Pingback: The Next Industrial Revolution – Decentralisering | Peak SWE

  28. Sorry Impermanence. Posted wrong youtube.

    There is a link between emotional and economic value as the latter springs forth from the former. That’s why advertisement agencies play on emotions to get people to buy things that suppliers have produced. If a product provides a certain solution to a need; Maslow’s hierarchy, which is based on an emotional need for comfort, love, happiness, etc, that is perceived value.

    This is why so many are fooled into thinking that value is found outside themselves and they search for happiness by buying stuff they don’t really need because they confuse intrinsic value vs. extrinsic value. Nothing outside ourselves has intrinsic value. That’s my point.

    As you watch this crowd trample others they care nothing about but would rather buy a trinket, you might get a better idea of how people value what’s important. They know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

  29. What about jobs? Can 3 D printing create more jobs for the ever growing population? Or will it just good for those who are savvy in tech and the smart few? And if so then we are indeed heading back to the future of neo-feudalism: few rich lords and the rest of serfs. In the future one must be either very smart creative or one must be work hard to take orders and serve the few creators. There will no room for half smarties half wits so called middle class.

    Anyway back to the most important point – how to invest rightly into such scheme? Do you think HP will be part of the 3-D printing revolution?

    Mothlyfool sending out news letter about how to investing into this 3-D Revolution. They mentioned 3 top dogs (leaders) 3 D printing companies. Do you know what are they? what are your opinions?

    http://www.fool.com/fool/free-report/18/sa-3dprintingaudio-ext-184238.aspx

  30. What about jobs? Can 3 D printing create more jobs for the ever growing population? Or will it just good for those who are savvy in tech and the smart few? And if so then we are indeed heading back to the future of neo-feudalism: few rich lords and the rest of serfs. In the future one must be either very smart creative or one must be work hard to take orders and serve the few creators. There will no room for half smarties half wits so called middle class.

    Anyway back to the most important point – how to invest rightly into such scheme? Do you think HP will be part of the 3-D printing revolution?

    Mothlyfool sending out news letter about how to investing into this 3-D Revolution. They mentioned 3 top dogs (leaders) 3 D printing companies. Do you know what are they? what are your opinions?

    http://www.fool.com/fool/free-report/18/sa-3dprintingaudio-ext-184238.aspx

    REPLY

  31. Given our growing industrial needs, to save Gaia we cannot merely rely on our star’s radiance. We must be able to make use of the radiant matter available within her grounds. Because the process of converting our coal plants and decentralizing our energy grid on a planetary scale will take too much time, which is what the many species of Earth don’t have as we are already in the midst of a planetary extinction.

    Tax the fossils, extract the uranium! Save Earth.

    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/fasbre.html

  32. Pingback: The Next Industrial Revolution « azizonomics | Dispatches From The Front

  33. My blog is to help novice traders to trade the stock market.
    I recently added CommentLuv (via IntenseDebate) to my blog because I think
    it is a win-win relation. Feel free to stop by and leave me a
    comment.

  34. Pingback: The Downward Spiral | azizonomics

  35. Pingback: A STORM IS COMING: OBAMA FORMERLY ORDERS DEEPLY DESTRUCTIVE CUTS AS WE’RE HEADING TOWARDS A JAPANESE-STYLE DEPRESSION. OBAMA WON’T FINISH HIS SECOND TERM WITHOUT THE BOTTOM DROPPING OUT | sreaves32

  36. Pingback: Of Bitcoin & the State | azizonomics

  37. Pingback: The Long Run | azizonomics

  38. Pingback: Ben Bernanke Is Right About Interconnective Innovation | azizonomics

  39. Wonderful weblog here! And your web-site so much way up quickly! What exactly hosting company will you be using? Can I get those online website link to your host? If only my website jam-packed up as quickly seeing that your own house lol

  40. I have faith that is one of the a whole lot information personally. And i am satisfied understanding ones content. Even so would like to discourse for basic things, The web page design is extremely good, the particular posts is within point of truth outstanding : D. Excellent exercise, best wishes

  41. Interesting section of material. I just became aware of your website plus in accession money to say we get actually treasured consideration your blog site posts. Anyway I’ll be opting-in on the enhance and in many cases I personally achievement you access routinely promptly.

  42. Marvelous paintings! Here is the kind of facts that you should shared across the internet. Shame about the find machines with no lengthier placing this upload top! Come on through and also talk over with my site. Cheers Means)

  43. Pingback: On Depressions, the Structure of Production & Fiscal Policy | azizonomics

  44. Fairly part of articles. I recently discovered your site and in accession capital to express which i purchase in fact experienced bill your blog site threads. Anyway My business is signing up on your provides nourishment to or simply My partner and i accomplishment you receive entry to consistently quickly.

  45. I’m glad to read this post, here I got good information about maintenance of the property. After reading your blog, I got an idea that how to maintain home and how to add value to our property. I hope this blog will helpful to everyone. Thanks for sharing such an informative post.

  46. Thanks for your comments Alister.

    I would also argue that it’s not silly to separate the two. Value is created in the mind and then projected onto things. The distinction is important for investments in that value is a fickle thing that is held in the minds of people who are themselves fickle.

    If my plastic widgets were over produced and no longer demanded because a better widget came along, where has that value gone if it was intrinsic in the thing? It did not magically jump into the other widgets but was rather a value judgment made in the mind of consumers.

    There is no intrinsic value in the world other than what people place into things. Thought creates value where labor is dependent on value judgments. This is where Mises got it wrong.

  47. I seem to have replied to myself, quite amazing, really, even for someone like me so disposed to pointless chatter….Please forgive me, Amigo! My answer is as follows

    Value is intrinsic only insofar as the holder of said value remains alive; I don’t see your point, amigo, I agree with virtually everything you just said. What thought doesn’t create labour? This ostentatious ‘distinction’ between ‘intellectual’ and ‘physical’ labour is laughable. Things are connected, as Aziz articulated in this very sophisticated article.

    Meanwhile, In the Next Industrial Revolution, Atoms Are the New Bits… Decentralization from points of authority spells decolonization like solar panels do for our dependency on Arab oil.

    http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/01/ff_newrevolution/

  48. Economic value is created when a consumer is willing to pay a producer [for a commodity]. I believe you are attempting to make a link between emotional and economic value.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s