Wombaticus Rex wrote:slomo wrote:I also wonder about this in the context of Magnasanti, the in-silico (Sim City) dystopia created by Vincent Ocasla that could in theory last 50,000 years. I wonder whether the longevity of Magnasanti is made possible only by a constant and large energy subsidy? If Magnasanti is impossible without the subsidy, then our own Ahrimanic civilization will be ultimately self-limiting. If Magnasanti is possible without such a subsidy, then Tainter's model is wrong (at least in certain highly artificial circumstances) and humanity may be doomed after all.
The longevity is possible because it's a computer simulation that doesn't deal with real humans at any point. You cannot design a human-proof environment -- God tried, it didn't work out for It, either -- and this is also why Jacques Fresco's Venus daydreams won't amount to much more than pretty paintings. All of these engineered solutions are great, unless you plan on putting humans inside of them.
(BTW, I tried the Tainter, couldn't get through it...just don't know enough to evaluate WTF he's talking about, nor did I trust the sourcing on his numbers.)
Well, yes, clearly Magnasanti is a theoretical construct. My concern is that intelligent humans at the top of our present pyramid are certainly paying attention to all theoretical models (note the interest in large-scale simulations, as recently detailed in several places including Cryptogon). The Second Law is inevitable, but that does not mean that social engineers are incapable of vastly extending the longevity of the coercive state (or at least trying to do so). At heart I'm an optimist, in that I think the energy subsidy will run out and all of the coercive technologies that depend on it will become obsolete, though I have no romantic illusions about the systems that might replace the current one.
As for Tainter, which numbers do you not trust? He does not get quantitative until Chapter 4. The data he presents mostly demonstrate that, past a certain point, there are marginal returns on investments in most or all areas that support complexity. The data are cherry-picked for sure, but do you disagree that investments in agriculture and in R&D yield decreasing marginal benefits?