Political Discussions for "Adults"

~~jwb~~ · 02-20-2020, 08:10 AM

It's just like to take this moment to thank the DOD for all their wonderful inventions.

~~jwb~~ · 02-20-2020, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater

There's nothing fundamentally more special about a government funded project versus what a company might do under the same conditions. That's why when the government does produce results, it's because they worked with the private sector in some capacity to do so.

There's a difference in terms of incentive structure. The reason the govt does frontier research that private companies don't is because there's not an obvious short term profit incentive but there is some sort of strategic advantage militarily or otherwise. There was a good half a century almost between the invention of the computer and computers becoming a widely available commodity.

Anteater · 02-20-2020, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

There was a good half a century almost between the invention of the computer and computers becoming a widely available commodity.

I don't dispute the government's role in the development of the computer. But if we had left it up to them, I wouldn't have access to most of the technology I use on a daily basis...and you actually hit the nail on the head of exactly why that is.

~~jwb~~ · 02-20-2020, 09:37 AM

I agree that the market made it cheaper and more accessible, largely through mass production and a refining of the technology over time.. but it did sound like you were saying we don't need govt research cause private companies could in theory do that research instead (without taking on a govt contract or subsidies). It's a common sort of libertarian talking point. The problem is that they don't do so largely because the incentive structure wouldn't be there.

E.g. space x would never have existed if NASA didn't pave the way and create the necessary infrastructure through expensive, immediately non-profitable research.

Anteater · 02-20-2020, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

I agree that the market made it cheaper and more accessible, largely through mass production and a refining of the technology over time.. but it did sound like you were saying we don't need govt research cause private companies could in theory do that research instead (without taking on a govt contract or subsidies). It's a common sort of libertarian talking point. The problem is that they don't do so largely because the incentive structure wouldn't be there.

E.g. space x would never have existed if NASA didn't pave the way and create the necessary infrastructure through expensive, immediately non-profitable research.

What precipitated this whole discussion was commentary on the "evils" of private ownership. But that kind of shift would eliminate the market as we define it today and leave government as the sole "power" in society. I think regulation and innovation are great if they come from the government, but at the end of the day all governments are megacorporations. They need pressure of some kind from outside or they won't improve.

Without any outside pressure from something like, say, capitalist market forces, the government would limit and highly censure what actually trickles down to the rest of the population in regards to technology (assuming they developed something that could be utilized by the population as a whole).

I find these discussions interesting though because it's fun to be challenged. I haven't seen a model of society that avoids the consolidation of power at scale, and I'd be interested is seeing what it would take to avoid an inherent problem that, Marx for example, wasn't able to get beyond.

**Frownland** · 02-20-2020, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater

I'll reiterate: unless it was commercialized, you would have never even had the opportunity to use this tech under any circumstances. Why? Because before this tech was commercialized, it was clunky to the point of being unusable by most people. When Bill Gates was a teenager, there were like two or three universities in the entire country with an actual UI to code with. You can thank companies like IBM and Microsoft for having something usable by a regular citizen, not the government. Prior to them, the idea of anyone even having a personal computer was a fantasy. There was never any drive from the U.S. government or any other country to make technology usable or consumable for regular people: those desires came from people outside of government.

Nah there was one and only one cause for modern technology and that is murdering civilians, and that is the only way that technology can ever advance because of that.

~~jwb~~ · 02-20-2020, 11:52 AM

I get what you're saying about where the conversation started but I was really only responding to the paragraph i quoted. The idea that there's nothing unique about govt funded research vs private research is true except for when you look at the incentive structure that drives it, as well as (often) the amount of funding available.

So on the flip side you could posit the argument that the government is also capable of mass production which makes technology more widely available. The problem being that as you noted, the government doesn't necessarily have the incentive to do so.

The incentives and pressures working on govt for a lot of this technology aren't necessarily capitalism or even democratic will... E.G. most of the technologies we're talking about are byproducts of war and/or military concerns. Even NASA is to some extent an outgrowth of the military industrial complex.

But a lot of this is simply historical circumstance. It's impossible to actually say what would've been possible without NASA or the DOD or for that matter what would be possible without market capitalism without delving into speculative counter factual scenarios. All that can be said for certain is how things did happen.

Mindy · 02-20-2020, 08:37 PM

OccultHawk · 02-20-2020, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mindfulness

Just finished watching that. The Democratic Party is so crooked. Worse than the Republicans. Seriously.

Fun watching Warren pistol whip Bloomberg though.

Mindy · 02-20-2020, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

Just finished watching that. The Democratic Party is so crooked. Worse than the Republicans. Seriously.

Fun watching Warren pistol whip Bloomberg though.

I watched it also ...

02-20-2020, 08:37 PM	#4858 (permalink)
Mindy ask me about cosmology Join Date: Oct 2016 Location: Milky Way Galaxy Posts: 9,045	__________________ https://www.instagram.com/shhons_meme_agency

02-20-2020, 08:10 AM	#4851 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	It's just like to take this moment to thank the DOD for all their wonderful inventions.

02-20-2020, 09:37 AM	#4854 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	I agree that the market made it cheaper and more accessible, largely through mass production and a refining of the technology over time.. but it did sound like you were saying we don't need govt research cause private companies could in theory do that research instead (without taking on a govt contract or subsidies). It's a common sort of libertarian talking point. The problem is that they don't do so largely because the incentive structure wouldn't be there. E.g. space x would never have existed if NASA didn't pave the way and create the necessary infrastructure through expensive, immediately non-profitable research.

02-20-2020, 11:52 AM	#4857 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	I get what you're saying about where the conversation started but I was really only responding to the paragraph i quoted. The idea that there's nothing unique about govt funded research vs private research is true except for when you look at the incentive structure that drives it, as well as (often) the amount of funding available. So on the flip side you could posit the argument that the government is also capable of mass production which makes technology more widely available. The problem being that as you noted, the government doesn't necessarily have the incentive to do so. The incentives and pressures working on govt for a lot of this technology aren't necessarily capitalism or even democratic will... E.G. most of the technologies we're talking about are byproducts of war and/or military concerns. Even NASA is to some extent an outgrowth of the military industrial complex. But a lot of this is simply historical circumstance. It's impossible to actually say what would've been possible without NASA or the DOD or for that matter what would be possible without market capitalism without delving into speculative counter factual scenarios. All that can be said for certain is how things did happen.