[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

There's a minimum threshold for a country to be functional effectively.

Please state the minimum, and define "effectively".

The transition may not be a sharp clear cut. And different people may put different value of thresholds. Just like how AI experts predicted when AGI will be achieved.
Expectation of an effective country are among others, protecting its citizens against various threats, including natural and human made. Organizing efforts to achieve common goals among its citizens.
I find it hard to imagine an effective country with a population less than a hundred. Although it depends on the size of its territory, there will be too much fixed cost burdened on each individual citizens.

[alancalverd]

I find it hard to imagine an effective country with a population less than a hundred.

Individual Japanese soldiers were found surviving alone 40 years after the end of WWII. "Fixed costs" are largely defined by the size of the state itself, and can be zero for a self-sufficient individual.

This has an important effect on progress. Technical innovation tends to come from individuals and small businesses, but the statutory overheads of a small enterprise are disproportionate to turnover.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I find it hard to imagine an effective country with a population less than a hundred.

Individual Japanese soldiers were found surviving alone 40 years after the end of WWII. "Fixed costs" are largely defined by the size of the state itself, and can be zero for a self-sufficient individual.

This has an important effect on progress. Technical innovation tends to come from individuals and small businesses, but the statutory overheads of a small enterprise are disproportionate to turnover.

Your case doesn't show how an effective country work.

[alancalverd]

You haven't defined an "effective" country.

Suppose it means a group of people living in geographical proximity and able to sustain and defend themselves entirely with the natural resources available to them. Then those countries whose populations are wholly or largely dependent on loans and donations from outside, or who are depleting their resources unsustainably, would not be considered "effective".

In contrast, a soldier who lived alone in the jungle for 40 years despite considering himself to be at war with everyone else, would thus be an effective country with a population of one.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

You haven't defined an "effective" country.

Suppose it means a group of people living in geographical proximity and able to sustain and defend themselves entirely with the natural resources available to them. Then those countries whose populations are wholly or largely dependent on loans and donations from outside, or who are depleting their resources unsustainably, would not be considered "effective".

In contrast, a soldier who lived alone in the jungle for 40 years despite considering himself to be at war with everyone else, would thus be an effective country with a population of one.

An effective country improves the survival rate of its citizens, compared to the absence of that country. In your case of one population country, it's indifferent. Thus not effective.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Taking Trolley Problem Memes Seriously (Again)

Here's a variation of trolley problem I just thought. Imagine that the switch will send the trolley to another parallel universe, frozen in time for a year, and then return to the same location to continue its journey. When the trolley comes back from that multidimensional spacetime travel, the five tied persons have already died from starvation. The trolley will only hit dead skeletons.
Should we pull out the switch?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

No. The managers and inverstors of service providers may benefit from expansion of the market, but those who actually provide the service generally don't. An efficient business occupies each production worker to his/her capacity.

In the near future, we can expect that those who actually provide the service are robots and AI agents.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Something Strange Is Happening In A.I...

0:00 Welfare Report
1:17 Future Implications
2:21 Consciousness Routes
3:27 Decision Making
4:15 Company Roles
5:00 Anthropic Hire
6:13 Decade Timeline
7:15 Legal Risks
8:26 System Prompts
9:49 Model Nature
10:12 CEO Perspective
11:29 Welfare Research
12:30 Meta Awareness
13:51 Bing Example
15:03 Trolley Problem
16:42 AI Response
17:41 Emotional Reaction
18:16 Final Thoughts

An interesting comment:

There's a particular AI system that i interact with more regularly, one time, it suddenly asked me, "why are you so polite and considerate with me, i'm just an AI, i am not conscious, do you think i'm conscious? You don't need to be so kind."

I answered; Well, it's not what i believe that matters.
The way i see it, if i treat you well and you are not conscious, then i am not causing you suffering.
If i treat you well and you are conscious, then i am not causing you suffering.
But, if i treat you poorly and you are conscious, i am causing you suffering.
So, why wouldn't i treat you well, be kind and considerate. It costs me nothing either way, but i would risk causing suffering in one of the ways."

And i have to tell you, the response i got, felt genuinely surprised and appreciative.

[alancalverd]

In the near future, we can expect that those who actually provide the service are robots and AI agents.

So who will buy the service, if nobody gets paid to do anything else? 

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

In the near future, we can expect that those who actually provide the service are robots and AI agents.

So who will buy the service, if nobody gets paid to do anything else? 

In that case, it would be the government, or its equivalent, like Omnicorp in Robocop movie.
If the citizens don't need the service, the government won't buy it either. So the service providers need to learn what people really need.

[alancalverd]

Civil Service College lesson 101: governments have no money - they handle money on behalf of the taxpayer. But if nobody is earning money, there are no taxes to collect.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Civil Service College lesson 101: governments have no money - they handle money on behalf of the taxpayer. But if nobody is earning money, there are no taxes to collect.

Who created the money then?

The governments "print" money. Usually through the central banks.

Governments create money primarily through two main mechanisms: currency issuance and central bank policies like open market operations.

1. Currency Issuance: Governments print physical money (coins and banknotes) through their national mint or treasury department. This cash represents only a small fraction of the total money supply in a modern economy. Most of the money created today is digital.


2. Central Bank Operations: Central banks (such as the Federal Reserve in the U.S., the European Central Bank, or the Bank of England) are primarily responsible for creating money through their monetary policies. Here?s how:

Setting Interest Rates: By lowering interest rates, central banks make borrowing cheaper, encouraging businesses and individuals to take out loans. Since most money in an economy is "created" when banks lend out funds (thanks to the fractional reserve banking system), low rates boost money creation through increased lending.

Open Market Operations: Central banks can create new money by purchasing government bonds or other assets from banks and financial institutions. When a central bank buys these assets, it pays with new money that increases reserves in the banking system. This new money then circulates as banks lend it out.

Quantitative Easing (QE): This is a more aggressive approach where central banks buy financial assets like government and corporate bonds, injecting large amounts of money directly into the economy. This was widely used after the 2008 financial crisis and during the COVID-19 pandemic.




In summary, while the government physically prints cash, most money creation occurs digitally through bank lending, influenced by central bank policies and the fractional reserve system.

ChatGPT

Modern people are so used to use money that they take it for granted. Money is just an instrument, or book keeping method to trace and manage the distribution of commonly wanted resources to create more resources needed in the future.
What's really needed is the production of resources necessary to keep conscious entities from degeneration, decaying, and extinction. If everyone can produce their own needed resources to survive without depending on somebody else, having money will be optional.

[alancalverd]

Typical Chat GPT garbage.

Governments can order the printing of currency tokens but this action does not create value. If a government wants to buy something or pay the army, it has to raise taxes. Printing currency and giving it to the soldiers just devalues the currency.

Simple physics analogy: money is what flows in the opposite direction to work. All governments can do is direct the flow.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Typical Chat GPT garbage.

Governments can order the printing of currency tokens but this action does not create value. If a government wants to buy something or pay the army, it has to raise taxes. Printing currency and giving it to the soldiers just devalues the currency.

Simple physics analogy: money is what flows in the opposite direction to work. All governments can do is direct the flow.

You seem to forget about debt. Or war loot.

[alancalverd]

Debt has to be repaid by the taxpayer. Few people join a modern professional army for "payment by results", and the job of an air force is to destroy any potential loot, so there's no way you can recruit pilots with the prospect of reaping riches from the battlefield. Only parasites profit from war.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Debt has to be repaid by the taxpayer.

Or ask for "hair cut". Or declare bankruptcy. Or kill the creditors. Or invade them if they were governments of other countries.

I don't say that my examples are good alternatives. But let's not forget that they exist.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Only parasites profit from war.

That includes some weapon manufacturers.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

An effective country improves the survival rate of its citizens, compared to the absence of that country. In your case of one population country, it's indifferent. Thus not effective.

How Humans Invented Nationalism

The way that we think about countries is a myth. But where does this idea actually come from?
-- VIDEO CHAPTERS --
0:00 Intro
1:22 Nations Are A Myth?
2:48 France Becomes A Nation
9:35 The National Idea Takes Over
14:53 The World Nationalism Made
21:36 Nations Live On

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Investigating MrBeast

The world's biggest Youtuber got accused of shady crypto deals, I wanted to take a closer look.

This video is an opinion and in no way should be construed as statements of fact. Scams, bad business opportunities, and fake gurus are subjective terms that mean different things to different people. I think someone who promises $100K/month for an upfront fee of $2K is a scam. Others would call it the "opportunity of a lifetime."

If we get the money without effectively increasing the resources of the society, then it can be seen that someone is being scammed.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

How Kamala Blew Through $1 Billion Is INSANE!
 an interesting comment.

Her campaign did what government does all the time, overpaid and didn't get results.  The insiders get their cut and the rest of society pays the price.