Freedomain Radio

Stef

You may reach a wider audience if you were to demonstrate how a functional DRO would work in something like:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/10/061017-second-life.html 

 

Other FDR members with time on their hands might consider trying to use mediums like the one in the link above to test other FDR concepts.  If Rebecca Nesson of Harvard can teach a class in a virtual medium, why couldn't other FDR people who are so inclined?

Just an idea.
 

Cheers. 

The way the board shortens thread titles, it almost looked like this one was going to say : "FDR could impregnate virgins."

All fair comments..... You've got me thinking.....

I have to wonder what Stef's business model will be.  Perhaps he will have enough investors/funding to consider creating a game like Second Life.  It may seem a bit removed from his current approach, but given the numbers of people that do much of their learning via video games such as Civilization III, Second Life, etc., I can't help but wonder if a game created using some of the DR concepts that Stef has fleshed out would help to make such ideas more "real" for more people.  Creating a new paradigm, peacefully, will probably take generations.  Infecting people's minds with powerful memes via games may be a very powerful tool to consider.

Any idea how much it costs to develop a game like Second Life?  I've read about Sid Meier's Civ development, that they use Korean designers due to lower costs, etc.  If FDR were to ever incorporate, and if I were to become a large shareholder, I'd probably do some leg work (I live in Asia and I work with offices in Korea and China, thus I'd have a pretext to visit said countries and stop off at game developers there to check pricing structures, etc.) to help the company grow. 
 

 

The problem with trying to promote anarcho-capitalism on the Civ-series or Age of Empires model is that those models necessitate command--"people" are naturally lazy, ignorant, and directionless in those games. Thus it is possible for central planning to work, because it is possible to know enough to be successful. A game like that trying to demonstrate an-cap ideas would necessarily be low-budget, and probably wouldn't go anywhere, because the only way to "win" would be to not play at all. You might put up an ironic "Ruin the world" game, i.e. with the goal to cause as much human misery as possible (a kind I've actually seen, but not making a point about the State) but you couldn't produce it on the scale of those other games because it would necessarily be a one-pointed gimmick.

I'm not really a game person, but I could imagine a game around the podcasts. All players start at podcast 1 and you draw cards. You win if you get to podcast 1000. In the middle you can draw cards like:

-Go back to podcast 1

-20% of your possesions have been confiscated, go back 3 podcasts

-You have been drafted, go to podcast 210

-Your DRO fines you for minarchism go to podcast 672

-You defood, move forward 10 podcasts 

Well you get the idea, optimally there would be some question and answer in there to direct the flow, related around the podcast you are on.

Nasikabatrachus:

 I'm not sure about how much demand there would be for a DRO in Second Life.

I don't think there is any demand for a DRO in SL in the context of the SL society and culture for the reasons you outlined above. However there are regions of the game that have been bought out and turned into a micro-virtual reality within the game. For example I once visited a small community of role players that tweaked the rules to be similar to World of Warcraft. You could buy some armor and swords and walk through their forest and get to slay some beasts. The game was boring and hard to play, but perhaps a stateless society run by DROs be made as a subset of the wider SL virtual reality where you are subject to the game conditions of the stateless society? (This would be analogous to the Amish society in RL)

A virtual stateless society simulation has some serious limitations, but at the very least it would be a good way to spread the ideas and garner interest, maybe some media attention, but would never be accepted as proof that a stateless society would work. I do think SL might be a good resource center for people to visit in the game, they could visit and read Stef's books, listen to podcasts, and be directed to the website. The social aspects of the game would be the primary benefit to going into SL. There are lots of people who really get into SL; maybe if the ideas are put out there they would run with the stateless simulations.

I think SL already demonstrates a lot of an-cap and  free market ideas.

Prince:

I think SL already demonstrates a lot of an-cap and  free market ideas.

True, the ideas are there, but the actual mechanics seem far from reality.

I kept imagining something like Sim City 2008: Free-Market Economics Edition! or The Sims 3: Libertarian Property Rights! Essentially you'd just turn on the game and then do absolutely nothing whatsoever - just sit back and watch the emergence of a prosperous virtual an-cap society. You'd receive -1000 pts for an 'evil government move' if you tried actually clicking stuff or interfering in any way whatsoever with the lives of citizens!

:-D

City sims encourage command economics. Like I was playing pharoah, and my citizens never knew how much limestone they needed to import to keep all of the peasents employed and finish the pyramid on schedule. Simply propaganda.

 

JK. Or maybe I am not.

 

Agape:

I will mention EVE Online.  In-game, it runs fairly fluidly and largely by player-content. 

A friend of mine who plays EVE told me that the outer rim unpopulated by computer security (0.0 space, I think) is well-reputed to be safer than most computer-secured zones. He said that the corporations in that space have good security, as well as the added advantage that  they can have a "KOS"-style order on you (unlike the computer, who apparently leaves you alone after they down you in one scuffle).

I found that to be a pretty appealing idea, kinda like how you mentioned that the player-run markets also undercut the game creators' npc markets.

 

 

fingolfin:

I kept imagining something like Sim City 2008: Free-Market Economics Edition! or The Sims 3: Libertarian Property Rights! Essentially you'd just turn on the game and then do absolutely nothing whatsoever - just sit back and watch the emergence of a prosperous virtual an-cap society. 

 

I always had a problem with Sim City's premise that central coercion was necessary for the emergence and development of a city. Even as a kid I knew that many cities had historically sprung up naturally, and that the government had come afterward--not the other way around. Also, it bugged me that if I cut the taxes to zero and got rid of regulations, the economy crashed and people left. In the game manual it said some confusing garbage about property taxes increasing property values or something--a complet load of crap--taxes are a liability, not a value.

Since a game based on reality couldn't work with central control, that kinda means that there is nothing for the player to do. I think it would be cool to create a game in which there is already a government in place, but the player is not part of that government. Then they can practice non-violent means of bringing down or minimizing the government (something like 'A Force More Powerful' http://www.aforcemorepowerful.org/). Or it could be a free society and the player could invent new things and run businesses, or talk to other players and explore (like Second Life, but without the 'Linden Reserve').