| As nice as your list is, I have a few issues with it: 1 - "World police" tends to stick around, or soon comes back. (depending on how encumbering you define the "world"): US, British Empire, Rome, Ancient Persia, Chinese Dynasties. All have sought and won control of major parts of the world because it was beneficial to them and their trading partners. 2 - Sharing control of the internet with whom? China? Russia? Iran? Saudi Arabia? Cuba? The internet is fragmenting and soon each country will have their own local control. No need to share. (unfortunately) 3 - War is about power. As long as one person wants power, there will be war of some kind. 4 - Politics is also about power. As long as politicians have that power, they will seek to keep it (see also #3). See Venezuela for a current example of how sad this can get. 6 - Status, attention, and ego are just a few things that cannot be automated away. If your point were even remotely true, then the difference between a typical underpaid school teacher and Elon Musk (or Larry Ellison, or Donald Trump, etc.) would be trivial after the 100+ years of automation we've experienced. Finally, collapse of empires tends to be followed by periods of lower economic output and higher violence; not to mention significant loss of knowledge. I'm not happy that we have one, but seeing it disappear could easily be worse. |
2. What if, like blockchain, we build a DNS model that is server agnostic? People are already working on this, if you think it's not possible you should learn more.
3. That's not valid logic.
4. That's not valid logic.
6. [There seems to be no 5?] Historical fallacy.