A Celebration Society

Category: City design

Blog posts about Celebration Society city state designs, or other model city designs

  • architecture in a celebration society

    architecture in a celebration society

    Recently, a prominent architect informed me that he is an ally of ours. I expect that he will in future help to guide us as we organize teams of people to build the first Celebration Society, either in simulation (as I have proposed) or in physical form. I also expect that he will eventually blog in this space. I look forward to his participation and leadership, along with other thought leaders who have informed me that they are also allies.

    Meanwhile, here are some of my thoughts on architecture. The architecture of a Celebration Society extends far beyond common conceptions of the subject. It includes the integration of natural features of the environment, and possibly even the design of such features. It includes the design of not only buildings but also roads, canals, and the placement, functionality and appearance of infrastructure such as trains and conduits for moving information, resources, products, and waste. (I have envisioned the latter being large, automated underground tubes, containing necessary cables and possibly pneumatics.)

    All of my thinking about the design of a city-state such as Dogun is preliminary, for at least two reasons. First, I am not expert in any of the disciplines that will, together, enable us to create optimally functioning living conditions. Such experts will not direct the consensus of would-be residents, but will advise us to we can avoid as many mistakes as possible. Second, it will be the consensus of would-be residents that makes all decisions about a city-state. I have provided a scaffolding; one upon which many varying designs may be constructed. Mine will be one voice among many.

    I also need to emphasize that this thinking is limited to construction on uninhabited or sparsely inhabited lands. The question of how to retrofit existing societies as Celebration Societies is beyond my capabilities, and I am hopeful that experts such as our architect ally will have the insights and wisdom to develop viable solutions.

    Architecture should combine functionality with strong aesthetics. Aesthetics are often given short shrift, yet they can elevate the quality of life for everyone who comes in contact with them–and even evoke that most precious of experiences, awe. Architecture should also reflect the fact that the needs of society will be continuously evolving, as we are committed to continuous process improvement. Legacy systems, clearly appropriate to a given time, may be hopelessly antiquated and even defective in future. (For example, in Venice, the roads between buildings are too narrow for many of today’s needs. Likewise, the bridges over canals are too low as waters rise. Because of how Venetian structures were built, modernization will not come easily.)

    In designing our buildings and other structures (and hopefully, eventually, our Wonders), we need to keep in mind that technology is not only advancing but advancing exponentially. We already know some important things that can guide our structural creations. For example, just as 3D printing can quickly generate a building, road or other structure, so too will robots soon be able to disassemble such a structure into its components. The components can then be used for other construction or fed into a plasma converter, and reduced to their elemental constituents and some slag for construction.

    Likewise, by favoring renewable, fast-growing materials such as hemp and guadua bamboo, we can build many structures (or substantial portions of them) in a manner that is both lasting and amenable to rapid, non-toxic disassembly.

    By building in a manner that includes ample open space between structures, we can not only avoid the subjective experience of crowding but also leave room for different structures–both buildings and others–to take their place as systems evolve.

    In my view, we need to both acknowledge the emerging capabilities of technologies and also wisdom from the past. For example, the Golden Ratio is a number commonly expressed in the architectural creations of antiquity, and there is evidence that structures incorporating it have a soothing effect on people. I would advocate that it be reflected in designs whenever feasible.

    Conversely, there may be particular ratios and relationships of surfaces that have a jarring or otherwise dysfunctional effect on those who observe them. (I am unaware of relevant research, if any.) Such should be avoided if at all possible.

    One of the great challenges will be finding a balance between individual/family preferences and societal norms. I believe that structuring a Celebration Society as a great condominium association will go far towards resolving these issues, since that is part and parcel of Association Bylaws. (Except, in this case, the city-state as a whole would have a Charter. Villages within it might have individual Bylaws that extend but do not otherwise modify the Charter.)

    I expect that villages within a Celebration Society will have differing architectural themes. For example, one village might favor Hobbiton-style dwellings (such are now available on a modular basis). Another might favor Victorian, or Tudor, or, Elvish, or … Given that 3D printing can generate sturdy, stable structures that serve almost any imagined form, the only questions are architectural soundness and livability.

    I expect that each village will restrict the external appearance of all structures within that village to conform with its own architectural guidelines, expressed in its own Bylaws. Persons not desiring to live that way will find or found other villages more to their liking.

    As the city-state will be comprised of hundreds of such villages, there will be some common features shared by all. I imagine that an underground conveyance system, probably a network of huge, linked tubes, will transport freshly harvested food, products and–in the other direction–wastes, sorted into types of wastewater and fertilizer. It is also possible that this system will convey fresh water, electricity and cables for communications/internet. On the other hand, communications may be wireless and water and electricity may be generated locally, within the village. (Redundancy would seem prudent.)

    I do not favor a rigid order of perpendicular roads radiating outward from the city center, since aesthetics could be better with some variation. This could include curves in roads, parks, and beautiful alcoves scattered throughout, where people might rest or gather to enjoy flowers and wind chimes or street musicians, and listen to birds.

    Roads would serve primarily as walkways, bike paths, and places for slower electric vehicles; probably golf-cart like. Those needing faster transportation would use the trains, which would radiate outward from the city center like dual bicycle spokes. I would favor a set of beautiful, winding canals replete with eddy pools, concentric from the city center, to supplement the trains and add great beauty as well as humidification, ionization and soothing sounds. In this manner, one could reach any area of the city-state by transferring from one canal ride to one train ride, or vice versa. (There could alternately be a second network of trains, radiating outward from the city center as concentric circles. In this manner, with just a single change of train, one could reach any area of the city-state.) Public bikes, electric carts and mini-Segways or hoverboards would be available at points of debarkation, and would automatically return to their stations after use.

    I envision a set of publicly owned blimps that are used to silently hoist large construction pieces into location, and also to move home furnishings that are too large or heavy for transportation in the tube system.

    Obviously, there is far more to consider than the above. The architecture of the city-state alone will be a massive undertaking; both physically and conceptually. It will need to serve not only the intended residents but also as a model system, duplicable far and wide as needed in the decades ahead.

  • A collaborative creation (more thoughts)

    A collaborative creation (more thoughts)

    I’ve always viewed a Celebration Society as a collaborative process. After all, if people don’t collaborate in its creation, how will they feel any sense of ownership?

    When I wrote the book, it was basically the pulling together of a lot of different ideas from a lot of different people. I didn’t really create very much myself. I certainly don’t ask anyone to blindly agree with me, nor do I seek followers. I seek allies.

    So, I was surprised when a Twitter user accused me of creating a cult. When I asked him why he thought that, he replied with a lot of invective and nastiness. Rather than engaging with this behavior, I sat back and thought about what might have precipitated it. I realized that I hadn’t properly understood Twitter culture, and needed to make some adjustments to how I was tweeting. (I was mentioning the book in almost every Tweet.)

    So far, I’ve written most of the content at this website. I’m hoping that’s going to change. Yes, I started the process… But it’s become quite clear in the past few months that there are many other thoughtful and knowledgeable people who share this vision, or who want to.

    As I’ve often said, my knowledge of technology is very wide but shallow. I’ll rely on others with expertise in the many relevant disciplines to shore up my limited understanding. That’s how it should be.

    The collaborative model is increasingly being proven to be a highly effective alternative to pure competition. I’m not saying competition is bad, I’m saying that it should be balanced with cooperation. Each should be used when and as appropriate to produce the best results.

    A woman named Devora Belilove one told me the wisest thing I ever heard. It was, ” we all have the drawbacks of our virtues.” Another thing I have always loved is the statement “we’re all ignorant, just in different areas.”

    If one puts these two statements together, and takes them to heart, the inescapable conclusion is that if anything great is to be accomplished, we really need each other. We need great alliances.

    That’s what I’m hoping to co-create: a great alliance of people with interlocking strengths, and the maturity to each know our weaknesses and seek help from others who are strong where we are weak.

    Little of note happens in the world from the solitary person. As has been said, even Einstein, Edison and Tesla had teams supporting them. Individually, we’re weak. But together, we can be mighty.

    I’ve never cared much for the hierarchical model, though it has its place. In my view, its biggest risk is that the flaws of the person at the top are magnified, and can lead to downfall. (This has happened with both corporations and nations.)

    That’s why I’ve proposed that the Celebrationist government be one in which no one holds power for more than a decade, all power has multiple checks and balances upon it, there is high transparency, and the head of state is a person of great influence but little power (as was the case in the Venetian Republic.)

    Are you an ally of Celebrationism? If so, what do you have to contribute? Where do you excel, and where do your passions lie? Please share that on the forum, so that other Society members can begin to appreciate who you are and how we may all play together.

  • The Importance of Triple Redundancy in Crucial Systems

    The Importance of Triple Redundancy in Crucial Systems

    (I have touched upon this topic in another blog and in the book. I regard it as more important than I have previously been able to do justice, and indeed beyond what I am capable of doing now. This is a topic that we will have experts advising, so the initial residents/founders have as complete an understanding as possible in making design decisions.)

    Modern systems of all kinds are staggeringly complex. The production of a single product will often have thousands of separate steps, and include sub-components that themselves also had thousands of steps in their manufacture. (This may extend multiple levels deep to sub-sub-components.) Extrapolate this to automated systems that run the repetitive aspects of an abundance-based society, and we have a serious issue.

    The good news is that sensors have never been cheaper, and costs continue to plummet. Soon, it will be trivially inexpensive to monitor all critical variables within a system in real time. When such monitoring is by triple sensors, all identical and all expected to produce identical readings at all times, this is known as “triple redundancy”. When any of the sensors produces a reading different than its two other triplet members, it is instantly presumed to be defective, and flagged for prompt replacement. Until such replacement happens, the whole triplet and the systems it monitors are themselves subjected to special monitoring.

    This is how organizations such as NASA have minimized catastrophic failures in environments (i.e., space) where there is no room for such failure, because survival of the mission and even astronauts’ lives depends on avoiding it. Further, there is often neither time to figure out a solution on the fly nor access to resources that would be available had the problem happened on Earth.

    This is why we find movies such as Apollo 13 so captivating, and the actions/successes of the astronauts so heroic. We can easily imagine how horribly wrong things might have gone. And NASA is hardly perfect. I doubt that humanity will ever forget the Challenger disaster; a catastrophe that not only cost precious lives but set the whole space program back by years. It was apparently due to a single faulty O-ring.

    The first Celebration Societies will surely be terrestrial and not built in space. Therefore, any system failures (and there will be such) can be addressed with the massive resources of terrestrial technology, parts inventories, and expertise. Further, such failures are unlikely to be potentially catastrophic. Nevertheless, since the first such society will serve as a showcase for our ideas and their viability, it is essential that the society not experience existential risk of any kind.

    Most such risks can be averted by making all critical systems (those in which a failure would have significant consequences, not easily remedied) redundant, with triple-redundant sensors continuously monitoring important variables to assure that the variables remain within tolerable limits.
    Since much of the automated systems will be, essentially, software, we need not only reliable redundancy but also defense against malware. Obviously, defense against malware is not trivial, and indeed it is expected to shortly become an ongoing battle between AIs, since humans will not be fast enough to either defend or attack successfully when opposed by AIs.

    There are two possible defenses of which I am aware. The first is to quarantine the city-state’s mission-critical systems against any input of any sort beyond very limited, recorded and real-time monitored communications with Citizens. (I can see no need for those systems to have an internet connection though, of course, I may be wrong.) Second, an ally who remains anonymous at this time is deeply experienced and connected in the world of Silicon Valley software. He has informed me that a startup of which he is part has figured out a definitive solution to malware. I hope he proves right.

    We cannot avert all catastrophic risks. For example, a modest sized asteroid could obliterate a Celebration Society either by striking it or striking elsewhere and causing, for example, a tsunami. However, the odds against such an event are extremely high. Further such risks can essentially be eliminated by building a second Celebration Society as soon as possible. This is, not coincidentally, the same argument being made in favor of Martian colonies to assure humanity’s continuation in the event of a planetary catastrophe.

    As I’ve written elsewhere, Martian colonies should be a fine place to build Celebration Societies, just as soon as the planet has been terraformed. Meanwhile, we can automate and monitor the operation of that automation on a continuous basis. In fact, the monitoring can itself become automated—in effect, a second software system that monitors the actual operating system.

    This could potentially be taken a further level deep: a third “assurance” system could run tests of the monitoring system on a regular basis, in effect stress testing it to confirm its proper functioning. By making the monitoring system itself triple-redundant (three such systems, all running separately and continuously, all tested by the “assurance” system on a frequent basis for identical and correct results), it is hard for me to see what could go wrong.

    That said, human failures of imagination are well-known and well-documented. Mine is surely no exception. This is but one reason why I favor the entirety of the Celebration Society’s systems being under the ultimate control of the Citizens as a body.

  • What’s wrong with a Celebration Society?

    What’s wrong with a Celebration Society?

    In this world, however much we might wish it otherwise, there is no perfection to be found. Every beautiful thing has its limitations or deficiencies. Even mathematics has Godel’s Incompleteness Theorems.

    So, too, must a Celebration Society be imperfect. This is not to say that I regard it as falling short of being utopian, for I actually regard utopian societies as being inferior to a Celebration Society. I have explained in another blog entry why I regard utopian thought as misguided, and why a Celebration Society should never be viewed as utopian. That said, there are further problems that people have identified.

    While some critics say that the technology that comprises the Three Pillars of Abundance is insufficiently mature to be reliable, I do not agree with this assessment. Yes, some of the technologies in the book are decidedly speculative or poorly developed. Nevertheless, as stated in the book, we need only one technology for producing abundant matter; another for abundant energy; and a third for abundant organizing intelligence. Those three already exist, in sufficient maturity to be reliable–given aggressive development–in the next decade or two. No serious research questions about them remain. All of the other technologies that might comprise the three pillars should be viewed as backups.

    However, there are two other concerns that have been mentioned and that are not so easily refuted. The lesser of these is the argument that there will remain certain kinds of goods and services that remain scarce even in a context of overwhelming abundance, causing jealousy and other problems. I have written about this here:

    The greater concern is the discrepancy between the potential rollout of Celebration Societies and the likely arrival of technological unemployment. Researchers at Oxford, B of A, Brookings and Nomura have all projected 40%+ levels of job displacement in advanced countries within 10 – 20 years, with up to 85% losses in poorer countries.

    Even with exponential expansion thanks to “pay it forward” cultures, there is no way that we will have sufficient numbers of Celebration Societies up and running in time to deal with such catastrophic changes. My only response is that, if we have a single such society thriving somewhere on Earth by the mid-2020s, then existing governments will likely seek ways to retrofit themselves based on principles of sustainable abundance, out of desperation if nothing else.

    However, that result is by no means assured, and I would be the first to admit that I have no idea how to effect such retrofits given the gridlock that’s plain to see in America and elsewhere. (Indeed, this is precisely why I have proposed Dogun as a first such society, to be created on relatively uninhabited land: no retrofitting is required.)

    Other and better minds than my own will be needed to address such questions, and any further problems with a Celebration Society yet to be uncovered. All that I know is that when people are sufficiently motivated, and the means to fundamentally reshape existing societies exist and have been proven to be physically viable, then such change will be possible.

    Whether it will happen without catastrophic social disruption is another question entirely. But at least we have the chance of averting such catastrophes if we act now to prepare for humanity at least one bright beacon of evidence-based hope.

  • Continuous process improvement

    Continuous process improvement

    Those of us who are old enough will remember the 1950s, when “Japanese import” meant balsa wood trinkets. Several decades later, the first Japanese cars started appearing in the US. They were widely derided as cheap looking, rust-prone tin cans, at first.

    No longer. In recent years, Japanese cars have led the world in reliability and other important design features. I purchased a VCR player near the turn of the century. It had—permanently glued to its face—a simple message: “The Quality of Japanese Engineering”.

    Made in Japan had transitioned from a joke to a hallmark of excellence.

    Many observers credit Japan’s adoption of continuous process improvement for its amazing progress. Continuous process improvement is one of my favorite ideas. It sounds boring, but it has the most profound implications for society. The concept was pioneered by W. Edwards Deming, an American engineer, statistician, management consultant, and thinker. His ideas were largely ignored in his home country, but later wholeheartedly embraced in Japan.

    Once the power of his ideas was recognized, Deming was feted as a hero in Japan. He received numerous awards, and had “rock star” status. Today, Japan awards a highly coveted, “Deming Prize” for organizational excellence.

    According to the Deming Institute, Deming’s message has 14 key points:
    (https://www.deming.org/theman/theories/fourteenpoints)

    In my view, the essence of the concept boils down to this:

    1. Measure everything important, as part of the production process.
    2. Treat people with respect and dignity.
    3. Identify areas where performance or results aren’t up to desired levels.
    4. Welcome all proposed ideas for improvement.
    5. Try something new, and test its effectiveness.
    6. Adopt changes that provably result in improvements.
    7. Repeat.

    It sounds simple enough, but like many such ideas there is tremendous detail and subtlety in the implementation (far beyond my own understanding). The key takeaway is this: don’t strive for immediate perfection. Create something that’s a decent first start, then relentlessly make it better.

    This concept has now been adopted in startups around the world as part of the AGILE development process. There, developers are encouraged to identify, design and build the Minimum Viable Product (MVP). Once that’s accomplished, they are then encouraged to continually refine and improve.
    Toyota’s motto, “The relentless pursuit of perfection” aptly summarizes the philosophy. Note the word “pursuit”. It’s a pursuit; not an attainment. Like a mathematical limit, perfection may be seen in the distance (however fuzzily), but there is the awareness that perfection is only a dream.

    Those who believe that they can design perfect societies seem to always wind up with totalitarian systems, wherein the inherent limitations of the designer’s understanding show up in actual life as unending human misery. We will avoid this by, first recognizing that perfection is a dream, not an attainment, and second, that there are no perfect people or ideas for society. We will have an unending series of experiments, many of which will yield permanent improvements. Those will be celebrated!

    It’s ironic that Deming’s ideas had to travel thousands of miles abroad before, decades later, returning to their shores of origin. However, I am reminded of the adage that Ellis West, the head of Wilson, West & Associates (one of my earliest employers) was fond of saying: “An expert is someone hundreds of miles from home.”

    Applying this concept to a Celebration Society, I see several important understandings:

    1. We won’t achieve a perfect design, now or ever. We will strive for a “good enough” design, then constantly look for ways to make it better.
    2. Utopia belongs in novels. We can’t and won’t build utopia. But we can build something that’s far better than the present “first world” standard of living on Earth. And that’s good enough to usher in a wonderful world.

  • Future solution to terrorism?

    Future solution to terrorism?

    I expect that the US government has already figured out how to end much of the world’s terrorism in the next several decades. This opinion is based on the following facts:

    1. Drone strikes are already being used against terrorists.

    2. A set of technologies will soon converge to make such strikes far more effective, with no unwanted civilian casualties.

    Here is how such a system will work:

    1. Tiny drones the size of insects will be equipped with sensors capable of capturing audio and visual data. Each will be equipped with a tiny stinger, containing ricin or a similarly toxic substance.

    2. The drones will be equipped with wireless communications, tightly linked to satellites. The satellites will also communicate with AI supercomputers.

    3. These drones will be produced in quantity, at very low cost. They will be camouflaged, and be able to hide in all of the places that insects hide. They could be dispersed in huge quantities to saturate any area where terrorist activity is suspected.

    4. The drones will observe communications, recording and transmitting data such as speech and faces.

    5. The supercomputers will translate language in real time, and will use facial recognition algorithms to positively ID people.

    6. When an individual is identified as a terrorist, a strike order will be initiated. The drone will shoot, crawl, jump or fly to deliver a fatal sting.

    7. I also expect that these drones will be deployed against religious leaders who incite terrorism. Each time such a religious leader is killed, another will take his place. After a while, no one will be available to take that place, and there will be the added benefit of conveying the meta-message that “God does not want preachers talking this way, else he would protect them.”

    8. This system has the added possible advantage of deniability. Given that the only residue will be an insect-sized drone, it may not be traceable to the US–or to whatever nation-state deploys these drones.

    9. Since this system relies on orbital satellites, I expect that this development will result in a consortium of nations controlling near-Earth space, and allowing no other satellites to orbit.

    I should emphasize that I am neither endorsing nor criticizing this development. I simply see it as inevitable until the world has permanently left behind its current Scarcity Game-based institutions and mindsets. That said, I do see distinct societal minuses and pluses.

    On the minus side, this increases the prevalence of the surveillance state, and it is possible that such systems will be deployed much more widely than merely for terrorism control. In my view, this is an important reason why we need to move towards “bi-modal surveillance”, such as I have proposed in A Celebration Society.

    On the plus side, the end of viable recruiting strategies for terrorism will be a net gain for the entire world. However, to eliminate the root causes, it will be necessary to end the scarcity that causes (for example) mothers to send their children to madrasses where they are taught nothing but religion, with no useful skills inculcated–all so that the kids are fed one good meal daily. (According to a Time Magazine article, that is the reason many kids are sent; not due to any desire for them to receive such a limited education.)

    While some Muslim terrorists come from educated classes, in my view they are susceptible to such recruiting because they recognize serious deficiencies in advanced Western societies and find reasons–accurate in their view–why those Western nations keep Muslim populations in thrall.

    If Celebration Societies spread into Muslim nations in future years, I expect that there will be significant opposition due to what many will regard as immoral behavior. However, many more will see that there is finally a real chance for their children to have a good life.

    As I wrote in the book, a thousand years ago the Vikings were leading terrorists and Arabia led the world in arts, mathematics and sciences. Arabia has the same potential to shine again, and the elimination of distorting effects of oil on societies should help enable this.

    There are also terrorists associated with other religions, but in my view all can and will eventually be thwarted by the modalities I believe the US Government is now planning to deploy. It may take decades, but I see no good response by those who wish to foment terrorism.

    My wife points out that the lone terrorist who is determined to make a suicidal point will not be deterred by this system. She gives the example of the Oklahoma City Bomber. And yet, I wonder if superior capabilities to track components of weaponry or weapons themselves won’t eventually enable the US and its allies to track down these terrorists as well. AIs and diverse kinds of sensors, massively deployed with redundancy, will present a formidable opponent to would-be terrorists.

    Given that basic needs are universally met, I foresee all of this developing a peaceful world.

  • What Else Have We Lost or Misunderstood?

    What Else Have We Lost or Misunderstood?

    In the book, I spend a fair amount of time examining important aspects of society that appear inverted from their optimum functioning. However, my perspective may not have been broad enough.

    I recently learned that the way we humans sleep is quite different from how we are biologically wired to sleep. I don’t just mean the number of hours, as in sleep deprivation. That’s yet another modern phenomenon, largely a result of people working longer hours to sustain a lifestyle. No, it’s more basic than that.

    A groundbreaking study in the 1990s determined that we humans have a natural sleep cycle that’s entirely different from what most of us experience. Not only that, but it includes a mysterious additional state of consciousness that appears to be the realm from which much of mystical experience emerges.

    Essentially, the study participants lived in the manner of our ancient ancestors. They had no artificial lighting at night. When dusk came, they allowed their natural sleep cycles to manifest and they fell into a rhythm of 8 hours sleeping per night. But not like we do it.

    Instead, they slept for four hours, then “awoke” into a kind of state that was neither sleeping nor dreaming; a state of mystical reverie, that lasted for two hours. This was followed by four more hours of regular sleep. The two hours of sleep nested between the eight hours of regular sleep apparently have a spiritual quality, and participants reported deep peace, and spiritual communion.

    After three weeks, they all experienced this profound change. Whether one is religious or not, such an opportunity to bask in a deeply peaceful state sounds inviting and life-enhancing.

    Apart from the visions and insights gleaned from that mysterious middle state, there were specific and profound physiological changes. Specifically, “While trying to account for the peace and serenity that his subjects reported feeling during their hours of ‘quiet rest,’ Wehr discovered that prolactin (the hormone that rises in nursing mothers when their milk lets down) reached elevated levels in their bodies shortly after dusk, remaining at twice its normal waking level throughout the full length of the night. Prolactin creates a feeling of security, quietness and peace. And it is intimately, and biologically, tied to the dark.”

    You can learn about this research and the experiences reported by participants in the book “Waking Up to the Dark: Ancient Wisdom for a Sleepless Age” by Clark Strand.

    Clearly, this research warrants much further study. Corroborating studies from different cultures should be conducted to see if there are cross cultural consistencies, and if the rate of success in reaching this mysterious state of consciousness remains 100%–as it apparently was in the original study.

    Likewise, and as a very practical matter, what are the consequences of doing this not every night but only on some nights? Is there a minimum frequency or number of nights one must live and sleep this way to retain the benefits? If one skips a night, is there an additional three-week waiting period each time, until one recovers this special gift?

    Though I have long imagined a Celebration Society as having celebrations on most nights, now I am wondering: might we instead do so in the afternoon? (I take it as a given that few of us will have jobs requiring us to work then.) Or might two sub-cultures emerge, the “ancient sleepers” and the “moderns”?

    PS–Certain types of clay, used by Native Americans for healing purposes for centuries, have now been found effective against MRSA and XRSA bacteria, the scourge of modern hospitals and a cause of significant iatrogenic disease. So, too, can a type of European tree bark, when prepared and then applied.

    While quite a bit of native and ancient folk wisdom doesn’t stand up to the rigors of modern testing, enough does that this should be viewed as a continuing source of potential medical discoveries.

  • Transportation Systems

    Transportation Systems

    Transportation systems in a Celebration Society are, of course, important. As I see it, they need to be reliable, largely automated (excepting slow speed conveyances and walking), pollution free, and quiet.

    I imagine curving walkways, divided into sections for slow speed (walking), and medium speed (bikes, scooters).

    As I see it, we will likely have elevated train cars with panoramic windows traveling above the treetops for great sightseeing and photography. (There will likely be tour guide apps as well as live guides.) We may use the Skytran system, which offers multiple attractive features

    Like spokes in a wheel, the trains would take people in and out of the city center. I also envision a set of concentric, winding canals, with eddy pools where electric gondolas can rest for sightseeing, a picnic, or to embark/debark passengers and cargo.

    The canals would be home to beautiful fish, other aquatic life and possibly corals.

    I envision the gondolas and trains as being AI-controlled. The distance to any point in the City would never be more than two blocks from some train stop. For people with mobility issues, there would be a network of robotic electric scooters that would transport people those last two blocks upon demand.

    For hauling large objects into the City, and for construction of buildings, I imagine there being a small fleet of hydrogen lifted blimps. (There is an invention to make them safe.) The blimps would be equipped with electric winches, and tethered to the ground when helping with construction. They would usually be silent and picturesque–unlike present methods of construction.

    Larger, beautifully appointed blimps could offer 6-star “air cruise” accommodations transporting people from one Celebration Society to another. There could also be mile-wide corridors of nature preserve connecting the Cities, with Skytran type elevated travel from point to point. (Thanks to Stephen Belgin for this idea.)

    I also envision a network of underground tubes connecting all buildings in a Celebration Society. These would be used to transport smaller resources: electricity, water (fresh, gray and brown), fresh food/packages/materials/parcel, cable internet, and garbage/waste removal for recycling. They would generally be serviced by specialized robot technicians, but be large enough for people to comfortably and safely enter as required.

    I see fossil fuel engines as being prohibited except in extraordinary circumstances. I see no conventional cars as being allowed inside a Celebration Society, as there would be no roads suitable for them. Instead, people could garage such cars outside the City walls, driving them between points outside the City as required.

    No doubt, others will have improvements to these ideas.

  • Your Oar in the Water

    Your Oar in the Water

    Those of us who appreciate the potential of a Celebration Society can also see that there’s a lot to be done between here and there. It will require many talents; many perspectives–and much energy. But, as the Vikings proved in traveling to North America, even an ocean can be crossed in a well-crafted vessel through steady rowing.

    I invite you to dip your oar into the water. The more of us who row, the faster we’ll arrive. The realization of a Celebration Society depends on a large number of people coming together who want to help build it and perhaps even live there.

    I’ve developed a scaffolding, but it assuredly has rickety features and probably places where important things are missing or wrong. It can unquestionably be improved. One of my many weaknesses is that I’ve got wide knowledge of technology, but it’s generally shallow. Fortunately, there’s a proven way to take care of this.

    We cannot (and should not) depend on individuals, but rather on collected wisdom derived from scientific research. We can build and test systems based on this wisdom. We can gather advice from a cohort of experts in the relevant disciplines. (I ideally see these as being not individuals but panels of experts in architecture, transportation, permaculture, food production, education, healthcare, etc.)

    In my view, a simulation is the most rational bridge between here and an actual, functioning city-state. It would be risk-free for participants, and fun. The basic tools, including customizable “worlds”, already exist. Millions spend hours each week in Second Life, a simulation where they have no hope of ever actually living there. How much more attractive would they find a, “Second Life that could become your real life”?

    A simulation will give us the chance to quickly test all manner of ideas before committing physical resources and money. It will both be the primary advertisement for and attractor to make the concept “sticky”. This will help us to build a community and a movement of people, many of whom will decide that they want to live in a Celebration Society, and some of whom will have expertise that we need.

    While it could be a single simulation, I envision instead a competitive set of simulations, developed and tested in parallel, each backed by a team. There would be a rigorous comparison process, based on established quality of life metrics, and then the “winner” would be further explored and refined by ALL of the players until there’s a consensus that it’s “ready to implement”. Perhaps the winning team would win a prize, or prizes.

    For all that to happen properly, as I see it, we will need:

    • Large numbers of participants (“The Second Life You Can Make Real!”)
    • A business plan, including a budget
    • An advisory board, including all necessary disciplines, guiding the simulation contestants to stay within reality and make use of best practices.

    One way to get a lot of participants would be to do a crowdfunding campaign to raise money to build the simulation, and request every member of the Society to invite their own lists to visit that campaign. There could be some interesting prizes for backers. For instance, perhaps we could allocate 1/10% of the possible 100,000 condominium interests (100 total) for prizes. In this case, those putting up $500 or more could be entered into a drawing to win such an interest.

    Prior to such a simulation happening, we’ll need a significant number of aligned people. Toward this end, would you do me a small favor? If you haven’t already joined, please join the Society, and post a brief bio, including whatever special skills and expertise you bring to the party? (Or, should I say, the forthcoming celebration!)

    I’m trying to move this discussion of a Celebration Society (which is just now entering some surprising circles) from being primarily about my ideas to a wider discussion of how these starting ideas can be corrected/improved/implemented. Toward that end, I’m inviting people with expertise to offer guest blogs for the website. Everyone is invited to participate on the Forum!

    That’s how we’ll make all of this happen; as a network of people with complementary strengths and weaknesses. People who are mature enough to know and then acknowledge their own strengths and weaknesses, sharing a vision and serving it together, can together accomplish anything.

     

  • Perils of Utopian Science for Societal Design

    Perils of Utopian Science for Societal Design

    One of the earliest books that could be called utopian was Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward. It described a future scientific society, devoid of competition, in which everything was run scientifically. It was all to be rational and orderly.

    As a 16 year old, I was captivated by his vision. I later realized, with hindsight, that Mr. Bellamy probably never spent much time with actual scientists doing actual science.

    Science is messy. It is an unending quest for knowledge that the scientists know can never be called certain in the way that religious people[1] crave. They are trying to take snapshots of a complex reality, discerning from careful tests what are generally small truths. Yet they know that whatever truths they may uncover could later be superseded.

    (To understand HOW messy science can be, http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/03/the-quest-to-make-synthetic-cells-shows-how-little-we-know-about-life/475053/ and http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/failure-is-moving-science-forward/)

    In this lack of certainty, science differs from revealed knowledge. It also differs by virtue of being testable and repeatable. Scientists pursue their quest anyway because knowing—even if only partial and conditional—is far more satisfying to them than ignorance.

    Even “settled” science such as the Big Bang Theory could still be superseded by more complete or deeper understandings. As described in my book, a highly respected physicist recently developed a theory that appears to explain the origins and behavior of the cosmos as well as does the Big Bang, but with a cyclic universe. Likewise, scientists discovered evidence that life may possibly only arise in dry conditions and not within water, as had long been assumed necessary.

    Other such examples exist and will continue to be found.  All of science consists of developing testable, falsifiable hypotheses. The experimenters, if good scientists, do everything they can to reduce the experiment to a single variable.  But sometimes it’s the unexamined assumptions that may do them in.

    This isn’t hypothetical. Dr. Bruce Alexander developed his famous Rat Park experiments after examining such an unspoken assumption. He observed that nearly all of the addiction research studies used Norwegian white rats. The rats eagerly consumed all manner of drugs, and displayed addictive behavior.

    While others took this as evidence that the substances are themselves addictive, Alexander asked a different question. Given that these rats are sociable, intelligent, playful creatures, might their lab conditions—essentially, solitary confinement for life—constitute a kind of torture, from which the rats would desperately seek escape?

    He and his team built Rat Park as a kind of utopia for rats. They ran the experiment for many years, with one key finding: they could not induce the rats to consume drugs, even when mixed with favored sugar water. Their conclusion was that the previous experimenters had failed to examine a crucial assumption.

    Again, science is an evolving body of knowledge. That’s what makes it exciting to scientists, and to those of us who admire their work and revel in their discoveries. There is, however, a lot of popular confusion about science. For example, some hear scientists use the word “theory” and misunderstand:

    “… the two words, theory and law, have very different common meanings. But in science, their meanings are very similar. A theory is an explanation which is backed by “a considerable body of evidence,” while a law is a set of regularities expressed in a “mathematical statement.” … A scientific law is not “better” or “more accurate” than a scientific theory. (http://evolutionfaq.com/faq/why-isnt-evolution-considered-law)

     

    What has this to do with societal design? Mr. Bellamy, and more recent advocates of a scientific society such as Jacques Fresco (The Venus Project) share what I regard as a serious misunderstanding. They believe that, if only we were to scrupulously follow a scientific approach to societal design, everything would be fine.

    When Mr. Fresco speaks of a proper system of governance for his ideal society, he proposes to turn over all important decisions to machines. The machines will make decisions that allocate everything rationally, he believes.(Said his associate, Roxanne Meadows, in a February 2016 Atlantic interview, “We would use scientific scales of performance for measurement and allocation of resources so that human biases are left out of the equation.”)

    Once systems are in place, they’re hard to change and harder to replace. Even more seriously, the machines will need to have guiding values. If the values selected are interpreted by the AI in a way that’s inimical to human interests, the consequences may be severe. For example, if an AI with power to rule us decides to minimize pain, it may permanently immobilize all humans in order to protect us.

    This is why a Celebrationist system of governance will be by people, but people who coexist within a very different kind of system than we have now. Celebrationism will encourage cooperation, mutual respect, evidence-based decision making, mutual service, and the cherishing of differences. Further, as I envision it, none of the people in government will have strong individual powers. Likewise, the AI’s will be partners who advise us.

    I advocate a scientific, technological basis for society, but do so in order to create a neutral vessel within which all manner of beliefs and lifestyles, including faith-based practices and revealed knowledge, can flourish.

    Finally, while some such as Mr. Fresco believe that a single model of a scientific society can be perfected, I have no such expectations, and true sustainability requires significant diversity. As I see it, those of us who come together to simulate a Celebration Society will not seek to make a single perfect model, but instead compete in teams to see who can devise the first viable and practical societal design—knowing that it still includes flaws, which will come to light over time. Then we’ll test that design in the real world, with each implementation being locally appropriate, and refine it further.

    When others, inspired by our successes, want to build their own Celebration Societies, we’ll support them and allow them to share the “brand’ if they agree to certain principles. But beyond that, they may well take very different paths to expressing how their society(ies) serve those principles.

    We’ll all learn from each other, because we’re all imperfect beings. So, too, will superhuman AI’s be imperfect, should such emerge. We will ever more closely approach truth and perfection, never achieving either in this relative world. But the journey will be delightful and awe-inspiring.

     

     

     

    [1] I am using the word “religious” more broadly than most do