Comment by blakeyrat | Hacker News Reader

Comment by blakeyrat | Hacker News Reader

Ok; I want to improve myself by moving into a big house on the shore of Lake Washington.

Oh. It takes money to do that? Well shoot.

EDIT: to actually respond to the video clip, it's kind of surprising how interesting Star Trek got when they threw out some of Roddenberry's ideas during the Deep Space 9 era. The Starfleet people co-existed with the Ferengi and Bajorans who didn't have post-scarcity economies. The Bajorans were also highly religious. Starfleet had a shadowy spy organization willing to assassinate foreign leaders. A Starfleet Captain becomes a traitor to Earth-- twice!

And yet despite that, Deep Space 9 is one of the most beloved Star Trek series.

Related to the clip above:

(Quark is selling an auction of a 1950s baseball card Jake wants. Jake's convincing Nog, a Ferengi, to help him.)

Nog: "It's my money, Jake! If you want to bid at the auction, use your own money."

Jake: "I'm Human, I don't have any money."

Nog: "It's not my fault that your species decided to abandon currency-based economics in favor of some philosophy of self-enhancement."

Jake: "Hey, watch it. There's nothing wrong with our philosophy. We work to better ourselves and the rest of Humanity."

Nog: "What does that mean exactly?"

Jake: "It means... it means we don't need money!"

Nog: "Well, if you don't need money, then you certainly don't need mine!"

The surprise twist to that story, is that after living in a nice house for a while you no longer notice it. If you have to sacrifice something else you do notice for the money to live in a nice place, you're caught in the trap.

"When you positively leave a house and enter into another house your positive action ceases to be positive action at all because you have abandoned one power structure for another, which you will again have to leave. So this constant repetition, which appears to be a positive action, is really inaction. But if you reject the desire and the search for all inward security, then it is a total negation which is a most positive action. It is this action only which transforms man. If you reject hate and envy, in every form, you are rejecting the whole structure of what man has created in himself and outside himself. It is very simple. One problem is related to every other problem." -- Krishnamurti (from Freedom, Love and Action)

The main problems that STNG deals with are ethical, philosophical and spiritual, not technological or economical.

Just as there is "technobabble" about space-time continuums and positronic brains, there is also a bit of hand waving about the specifics of how the economy functions.

Just as it's silly to worry about whether they're calibrating the plasma manifolds correctly, it is missing the point to think that STNG is going to deliver actionable economic advice.

I don't think anyone is saying you suddenly don't need money, because in our current society you absolutely do. But it is possible to imagine one without it, once we get over a certain threshold of technology.

What threshold is going to make prime real estate lots around Lake Washington not scarce?

Asking seriously. Because I have a lot of imagination and I can't come up with anything. Except perhaps we all plug into VR 24/7 like The Matrix. But even in my fake Matrix VR house, I'd envy the guy with the real thing.

> What threshold is going to make prime real estate lots around Lake Washington not scarce?

Warp drive? A thousand habitable planets that make Earth look like dusty, irradiated backwater? An vast frontier to explore, filled with endless new challenges and experiences?

Like I replied to your other comment; portable housing that can move on demand. AI bots that rewire water pipes and electricity etc. It could be a regular event to re-landscape whole cities and towns.

you may envy the guy with the "real thing," but future generations likely won't. if you have fully immersive virtual reality environments, then it won't matter where you live.

as someone who has done a recent job search, i knew i couldn't afford to live in the bay area with my large family, but half og the companies i interviewed with were in the bay area allowing me to work remotely. the technology and kind of work we do (software engineering) is getting good enough to broaden the reach of "the office."

if we had just fully integrated audio and visual environments, for work collaboration, i could see many people choosing to live at the lakeside in montana and work in seattle rather than having to live on Lake Washington.

  if $your_vr_house == $his_real_house
    & you are envious then you are the problem in the equation

Which is why "work to improve ourselves" is important

Off-topic: @hacker_9 just saw one of your recent comments (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13267106) and you seem to be thinking along similar lines to me and akkartik (https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=akkartik). You can read more about our work here (http://akkartik.name/about). Would love to hear any thoughts you have!

Looks interesting, good luck with it. I don't have anything much concrete to add to what I last said, but I do think visual programming is still an unexplored space. I feel like the flowchart stuff is maybe thinking about the problem the wrong way round, putting code in nicely coloured boxes seems a bit redundant.

How does moving to a big house improve you?

How doesn't it? I'm living in an apartment right now bordering a psycho neighbour and it's mentally ruining me. I can only dream of having my own quiet space again. Simply having the mental freedom to think about what you want, not 'juggling' thoughts about managing your lifestyle around other peoples lives.

If you are well slept and content, then arguably everything you undertake will be the 'improved' version.

What's the "self" in improving yourself? You as a human being (humanity)? Or your human condition (comfort)?

Let's put this another way. I agree that having to deal with negative people is draining. However, does fixing that require a big house? From what I know you don't need a lot of money (by Western standards) to find somewhere else you prefer to live. What's holding you back from living somewhere new (whether that's a new country or somewhere with fewer problems in your current country)?

It would certainly give me a much quieter environment to work in, with a far better view. Also would do a ton to help me attract a girlfriend.

But you're right, it's not all the way there yet: I also need to hire someone to do the basic maintenance and cleaning. Or perhaps a robot. But either option takes money.

Money is a sedative. It improves life to a certain point, but past that point it's less effective. There's also the effects that chasing wealth has on your psyche, where accumulation of wealth requires fiscal discipline, and the more money you get the more reluctant you become to spend it, and you're driven towards the accumulation of even more wealth.

Perhaps you don't believe me. If so, how do you think the cultural meme of the unhappy rich person came about? What is it about the lifestyles of the rich that would get in the way of living life to the full?

Well then why don't you give me all of yours. Imagine the good I'd be doing you.

Learn to read. I said it helps up to a certain point, I'm not rich enough to have a home of my own. Plus, I do occasionally give away money when to help those I wish to.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com