Under the lens of permanent sustainability, there is far less room for systems that require excessive centralized maintenance to continue existing. Automation is essential. The motivation is community.

Compare this to the world as it is now functioning under the delusional falsehood of permanent growth. Most things will fail, and very quickly, without constant attention. It's profit motivated; individualistic and unpersonal.

This is why the world burns and also how we fix it.

The quickest path to unseating the powers that are driving the world in its current direction is to stop asking permission for everything and build our own infrastructures and technologies. Design everything with the principle of permanent sustainability in mind. Erosion beneath the foundations of these power structures is something we can all bring about without ever remotely needing violence.

@valkyrie Absolutely!

But we’re going to keep running into resource constraints as long as “your property” only exists as lines in some despot’s ledger.

If the feds can seize the bank accounts of any organization they find threatening, how does any organization gather strength to oppose the despot?

@cmdrmoto @valkyrie I don't think "your property" was the point of any of this or even related...

@dalias @valkyrie when The Powers are well-resourced and intent on stamping out rebellion?

Property and the freedom to transact with others, those are the “eyes and throat” (vulnerable points) of any organization that wishes to undermine Empire.

@cmdrmoto @valkyrie The way I read "principle of permanent sustainability" is not creating property that you have to perpetually fight to keep someone else from taking but creating systems that everyone benefits from and individually has only fractional responsibility and need to defend from bad actors who want to ruin things for everyone.

@dalias It’s *absolutely* about property.

Ask some native Americans how that whole “not property but sustainable systems” thing works out when the colonizers come knocking.

@dalias now, imagine a different System of the World, in which every square inch of the planet can be accounted for, via a ledger which is maintained by the consensus of *everyone*.

This is the sort of thing old #cypherpunks like to think about a lot.

For an example of a similar system, actually being implemented in The Real World, you may be interested in the Climate Action Data Trust: https://carboncredits.com/climate-action-data-trust-launch/

Climate Action Data Trust Launched

The World Bank, along with the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) and the government of Singapore, launched a new carbon credit platform "CAD T

Carbon Credits
@cmdrmoto That sounds like a creepy surveillance hell. No thanks.

@dalias I reckon I’m *already* living in a creepy surveillance hell. It’s just unevenly distributed.

If you disagree, then I can appreciate why you might feel threatened by tools which can establish planetary-scale consensus, despite bad actors’ inevitable attempts to split and destroy consensus.

Divide and conquer.

@cmdrmoto @dalias Property is a mutually agreed-upon fiction. All the immutable ledgers in the world won't stop an aggressive force from attempting to seize it. Colonization wouldn't have gone any better for the indigenous peoples of America if they had presented the colonizers with deeds.

@dragora @dalias well, that’s sorta the point of a global ledger.

A consensus-based global ledger would mean that, even if an aggressor succeeds at occupying a territory which belongs to someone else, the aggressors don’t get the deed to any of the territory they seized.

They don’t get to start divvying up that land to their apparatchiks. Their “ownership” is globally identifiable, by anyone who respects The Ledger, as illegitimate.

@cmdrmoto @dalias Lol, they have to care about the ledger in the first place.
@dalias @cmdrmoto it's also not really rebellion. it's a removal of reliance on external and capitalistic entities that don't have any other purpose than money at the cost of literally everything. that's why i spoke about erosion. it's not a violent upheaval. it's not obsession with building novelties. it's a change in reliance.

@valkyrie @dalias We certainly seem to agree that relying on centralized / external / hyper-capitalized entities is dangerous.

It seems like it would be instructive to consider: how did these pesky mini-Empires grow so large in the first place?