Lorerunner's Forums

The Lorerunner's Forums

Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Keywords

discord  Trek  Star  WArs  game  political  

Latest topics
» Eye of the Storm
Today at 9:23 pm by SilverDragonRed

» Battle of Scales
Thu Aug 17, 2017 1:12 pm by SilverDragonRed

» Discovery Rumination Schedule?
Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:32 am by The Lorerunner

» Turn 9-1068
Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:59 am by The_Wanderer_In_Rags

» Nest of the Koth
Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:21 am by SilverDragonRed

» Star Trek TOS essential episodes?
Tue Aug 15, 2017 6:04 pm by NMdum1

» Turn 8-1068
Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:03 am by FreelanceZero

» The end of a journey (Star Trek: Voyager Rumination)
Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:13 pm by NMdum1

» Is The Federation in Star Trek Fascist?
Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:59 pm by NMdum1

You are not connected. Please login or register

In The Halls (Demo)

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

1 In The Halls (Demo) on Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:11 pm

OOC: There are no stats and few rules, outside the basic ones. You are each in the government, in a position of some control, tempered by the other players. You have to decide what to do, and how to do it. The intention of this 'demo' is to showcase what a truly political game, with no real stats, would function as. I have decided to pull a slice of one of my books, The Primes, for the initial issue.

An emergency session has been called.  The brilliant scientist, Dr. Albrecht, has informed the council that he has developed a new form of energy that could utterly replace the nation's current dependence upon fossil fuels, coal, and the like.  How to deal with this is, of course, at the purview of the government.

This new form of energy, which he has dubbed AW Energy, is small, portable, clean, cheap, and easy to produce. It would utterly destroy multiple industries and likely leave many jobless, nevermind the opposition it would face from the financial sector. It could also, probably, be utilized to create weapons of previously unheard of power.


_________________
The Lorerunner
View user profile http://lorerunner.com/

2 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:23 pm

OOC: Okay, I'm going to be the moderate Senator who is open to new ideas but is wary of the costs.

IC: Gentlemen, this proposal seems interesting but how much do we know about this new technology. Since this AW energy can be weaponized, what safety precautions have we taken in order to keep this under wraps?

View user profile

3 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:41 pm

No technology can be hidden, and progress is always universal. However, destructive potential is easier to fulfil than positive; it took 9 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki to build a civilian nuclear power plant.

Therefore, we should announce the existence of this new energy, so as to start with transformation of the economy, but production should start slowly, until we produce a defensive application of AWE so as to protect against its use as a weapon.

OOC: I will be a technocrat.

View user profile

4 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:06 am

You have a good point, once something have been proven possible, you can't keep it hidden forever. My issue is have long we can monopolize this technology? As early adopters we are taking the biggest brunt of the cost in order to realize the full potential of this tech. We should at least have enough time to replace the economic loss that our current industry have.

View user profile

5 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:14 am

OOC: Im going to be whoever the fuck I want...

IC: I believe Suko is going in the right direction. I believe we should slowly start introducing it into our nation and economy so that we could start using its immense power, but the colossal destruction of multiple industries wont happen all at once. Our real question is: What industries will be birthed and flourish with this machine? That is the first matter we should discover. It could possible allow us to replace the jobs we destroy and could, also, make us BLOODY rich. Opinions?

View user profile

6 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:21 am

Hmm, this technology will certainly make someone rich but the question is... whom? I would like to question the Dr. Why he decided to come to us first instead of revealing it to his collegues and recieve fame, or even patent it for money? We are in essence a regulatory body and we can only stop someone after the fact, not before. Until he answers I would like to point out that greed is a poor subistute for due caution

View user profile

7 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:23 am

If AWE truly is as easy to produce and can be safely generated in large quantities, there is no reason to replace jobs lost.
Free energy can mean free sustainability. If we invest into automation of food and natural resource production, we could run the entire economy without human labour.

We are on the cusp of a move towards post-scarcity, and we should attempt to design a generator of AWE that cannot be misused easily, and then release its plans to public domain.

View user profile

8 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:31 am

Suko, but the problem is that if we have an entire economy without human labor... What will happen to the common man? They will be left jobless. Our economy would still remain capitalistic and the industries that produce food and natural resources would still charge their consumers to buy their goods. Then, with the common man having no way to get an income, they would struggle along, causing an even larger gap between the poor and the rich. That is why we need to replace jobs that are lost.

Also, I am against the very notion of releasing this product to the public. We could design a generator though would not be easily misused, but someone always finds a way. For example, look at Einstein's simple equation, e=mc^2, and look at the destruction that it is able to cause. He designed this equation to solve a problem, but people have taken it and are now able to kill millions of people.

View user profile

9 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:40 am

There is also the irony that the Japanese were the first ones to discover the potential to weaponize nuclear material and thanks to their protoges, they were the first ones to feel the force of nuclear weapons. Who's to say we are not repeating history's mistakes right now? I believe that for now the Government should take possession of this dangerous technology, fully fund the good Doctor's research into it's applications until the point we are able to understand enough about it that we have a tech superiority over our rivals before releasing it to the public.

View user profile

10 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:46 am

OOC: I will also be whoever Wink

IC: I'm sorry for my tardiness gentleman but I would have to agree with mr. Griffinknight. Releasing this to the public would be ridiculous. You don't see people with nuclear reactors in their backyards. I would propose that this technology be devolved purely by the state. The state will decide when and if the expansion of this technology would be of benefit to the quality of life of the populace and to the economy.

View user profile

11 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:48 am

OOC: Lore, what is the goal of this discussion?

View user profile

12 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:51 am

OOC: Come on guys, you can't just be whoever. I need to know so that I can automatically be biased against you dispite having the same opinion and goals, just like real human beings

View user profile

13 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:52 am

OOC: Okay... I'm a conservative that is willing to change, but with heavy restrictions.

View user profile

14 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:56 am

OOC: So it's about around this time where the ppl who are on the most have to go do something else for a few hours and the conversation continues without their input

View user profile

15 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:58 am

I agree that this technology merits further study, but we should make the discovery itself public and start using it in small scale, so the ramp-up and economy transformation would be as smooth as possible, with support to industries tied to this change, i.e. extensive automation of agriculture and industry and technologies before though too energy-intensive.

View user profile

16 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:07 am

I would have to disagree with you Mr. Shinpei. Even the announcement of such an energy source could cause significant repercussions on the stock market/financial sector. I agree about the slow introduction but I believe we should have a safety net already set up before we start Swinging from the Rafters. More investigation should be done before this is made public.

View user profile

17 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:08 am

I, also, agree that this technology requires further study, but releasing it to the public now would only cause problems in the future. Possible weaponization, loss of jobs, explotation from large corporations and the list goes on and on... If this technology is released to the public, there is almost a 100% chance that a problem will arise, but if we keep this information among a few people until we understand the full potential of this technology, the chances of catastrophe are minimized and we will come out stronger from it.

Once we do release it, we must limit how many jobs the device is able to replace. As I stated earlier, corporations might immediately start implementing it into every crook and cranny of their production until millions of people are left unemployed. This should be a discussion for later since the product should not be released publicly anyways.

View user profile

18 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:14 am

This tech will make possible things that we previously abandoned due to the energy shortage but in a public release, only the Mega corps and those rich enough to have a head start will profit off of public disclosure, while everyone else will be unemployed because jobs that they spent decades preparing for will not longer exist and we have no entry level workers who would be knowledgable enough about the tech in order to do proper maintenence on the civilian scale



Last edited by Gollvieg on Sat Jan 28, 2017 2:08 am; edited 1 time in total

View user profile

19 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am

OOC: Now lets vote on how we vote... Very Happy

View user profile

20 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:20 am

I would suggest dividing the issue into short-term and long-term plans.

In the short-term, there is the potential for weaponization of this technology and unemployment.
These are only a short-term issue, as I'll show later.
The primary problem is weaponization, to which we should respond with developing defensive applications of AWE first.
Unemployment is unavoidable and will happen regardless; however, the sooner this discovery is made public, the sooner this transformation can take place.

In the long-term, we are looking at a transformation from capitalism to total post-scarcity; however, I agree this change will be painful and will require sacrifices, but should be pursued nonetheless, as limitless energy, and, thus, all other resources, mean the end to war and crime.

We cannot be deluded like the Luddites - the steam engine is here and it will change the world.
To keep this information a secret is not only practically impossible, but also irresponsible.

Yes, corporations will profit - but so will we all. Who's hurting by Apple's over-pricing? Who was hurt when Ford introduced Model T?
Money and capital will be irrelevant anyway after the economy is fully transformed.

View user profile

21 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:27 am

First of all I disagree on the notion that this will totally solve all of our problems. Also while unemployment is unavoidable, it can be minimized by careful control of the technology and its uses. Further study Without over-speculation by companies or individuals will be best.

View user profile

22 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:32 am

Of course AWE by itself doesn't solve all problems, that's why I put forth the proposition to push towards research into robotics and automation, which, along with AWE, most certainly do solve all problems.

This technology shouldn't be tightly restricted, it should be embraced, so that regardless of how high unemployment rates will go, they will never be an issue out of principle.

To this end, after the initial limited study focused on defensive application of AWE, we should allow private companies and individuals further this wonderful technology by making it open-source.

View user profile

23 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:37 am

Nobody was hurt by Apples over-pricing and Ford's Model T because they introduced jobs instead of destroying them.

You say that unemployment is not an issue, but what happens when people are unable to pay for these products that will be "unlimited"? Big corporations will not allow these products to go free and then millions will starve and die.

Capitalism wont give way to total post-scarcity because 1) we have a limited number of natural resources which will quickly run out with this technology, if not regulated, and 2) big corporations would gain so much power from the release of this technology that they would probably overpower the government if they attempted to stop or regulate them.

Keeping this technology secret might be practically impossible, but not irresponsible. This technology, if revealed, would increase the gap between poor and rich and would ruin millions, if not billions of lives. Third world countries would fall infinitely behind or be bought out by corporation that make millions from this technology.

You say that money and capital is irrelevant once the economy transforms, but if released to the public, the only people to benefit would be the CEO's of major corporations. They would quickly buy out the markets and make it so that they would make much more money instead of benefiting the lives of other people. They would exploit this technology so that they are the only ones that benefit from it.

The biggest problem is weaponization. We could create defensive measures, but just like the cyber world that we live in today, the defense will always be behind the offense. With the potential that this device contains, people with ill-will would be able to make anything they want. Billions of lives could be lost if we irresponsibly release this technology to the public.

My real question to you, Mr.Suko, is that do you really believe the exploitation that the major corporations would develop are really worth the lives of millions, if not billions, of lives? Is it really worth allowing the few to benefit while the many starve or die?

View user profile

24 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 2:04 am

Natural resources aren't a problem. With AWE, we could relatively easily begin mining in space, and transmutation would become viable. This means no mineral would be a problem. Artificial synthetisation of organic compounds would also become viable, allowing us to produce fertile soil, not to mention hydroponics, whose only limitation is water and energy, so even food would become functionally unlimited.

As for your fears of the "evil capitalist CEO's", they too would have no reason to gouge prices or try to "overpower" the government.
By making this technology open-source, we'd also create competition between companies. In my examples - iPhone and Model T - you see two pioneering devices, that have world a better place not just by themselves, but by the competition they brought. iPhone spurred the development of Android, and now there is no real monopoly - in fact, super-majority of smartphones are sold at barely a profit for the manufacturers.
I fail to see a reason this should be any different in early AWE economy.

Capital would become useless gradually. Services and food would become cheaper and cheaper, as production costs went down and supply up, helping the poor the most. Over time, market would soon be reduce to its most basic logistical form, since there would be no real cap, with widespread automation and transmutation.

As far as threats go, you made my argument for me, grifenknight. We would have at least some headstart in the beginning, so as to not be totally unprepared, but yes, threats would emerge.
Just like cyber crime.
And, just like cyber crime, you'd see that most people don't do it (not to mention criminality would also disappear along with poverty and misery), and that the positives far outweigh the negatives.

View user profile

25 Re: In The Halls (Demo) on Sat Jan 28, 2017 2:19 am

As far as arguments go, what are we in agreement upon and what are we disagreeing about?

1) Is this technology important enough to push all of our research and investments into it? I would say yes.

2) Should this technology be immediately released to the public with no regulation and oversight? No, too dangerous

3) How fast should we release this technology to the public should we decide to withhold it from the public for further study. I'm not the expert on this technology so I cannot make an uneducated guess.

4) Should we develop weapons and countermeasures first before switching to commercial like with space technology or should we go full civilian like with dynamite? We all know how great that turns out for Alexander Gram Bell

Secret Action: What concessions are you willing to take for me to swing my vote to your side. (OOC: obviously in a full game I'm not spelling it out like this and would be doing this part in PMs but for the demo it's better for people to see what I am trying to do behind the scenes

View user profile

View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum