How does a government, even though unelected, go about impounding or destroying all privately owned modern technology? What enforcement powers have they got?
It was never there in the first place. The first inhabitants of these communities (which don’t include the whole planet; I imagine there are a double handful of them on most continents—the neuros and the genderless kids are more or less universal, though) were volunteers who, prior to joining under the auspices of a rich eccentric individual, were very poor and didn’t have their own personal electronics. There was nothing to take, and joining was an improvement because it came with access to the communal resources.
Of course there could be any number of uninteresting answers, like ‘they’ve got a singleton’ or ‘they’re ruled by an AI that moved all of humanity into a simulation world it built from scratch’.
Nope. No AI.
What do these contended pain-free people actually do with their time?
What they like. They go places, look at things, read stuff, listen to music, hang out with their friends. Most of them have jobs. I find it a little puzzling that you have trouble thinking of how one could fill one’s time without significant economic competition.
Oh. So these communities, and Key’s life, are extremely atypical of that world’s humanity as a whole. That’s something worth stating because the story doesn’t even hint at it.
I’d be interested in hearing about how they handle telling young people about the wider world. How do they handle people who want to go out and live there and who come back one day? How do they stop the governments of the nations where they actually live from enforcing laws locally? Do these higher-level governments not have any such laws?
I find it a little puzzling that you have trouble thinking of how one could fill one’s time without significant economic competition.
Many people can. I just don’t find it convincing that everyone could without there being quite a few unsatisfied people around.
Oh. So these communities, and Key’s life, are extremely atypical of that world’s humanity as a whole. That’s something worth stating because the story doesn’t even hint at it.
I disagree: it doesn’t matter for the story whether the communities are typical or atypical for humanity as a whole, so mentioning it is unnecessary.
I’d be interested in hearing about how they handle telling young people about the wider world.
The relatively innocuous information about the wider world is there to read about on the earliest guidelists; less pleasant stuff gets added over time.
How do they handle people who want to go out and live there and who come back one day?
You can leave. That’s fine. You can’t come back without passing more tests. (They are very big on tests.)
How do they stop the governments of the nations where they actually live from enforcing laws locally?
They aren’t politically components of other nations. The communities are all collectively one nation in lots of geographical parts.
Many people can. I just don’t find it convincing that everyone could without there being quite a few unsatisfied people around.
They can leave. The communities are great for people whose priorities are being content and secure. Risk-takers and malcontents can strike off on their own.
They aren’t politically components of other nations. The communities are all collectively one nation in lots of geographical parts.
I wish our own world was nice enough for that kind of lifestyle to exist (e.g., purchasing sovereignity over pieces of settle-able land; or existing towns seceding from their nation)… It’s a good dream :-)
It was never there in the first place. The first inhabitants of these communities (which don’t include the whole planet; I imagine there are a double handful of them on most continents—the neuros and the genderless kids are more or less universal, though) were volunteers who, prior to joining under the auspices of a rich eccentric individual, were very poor and didn’t have their own personal electronics. There was nothing to take, and joining was an improvement because it came with access to the communal resources.
Nope. No AI.
What they like. They go places, look at things, read stuff, listen to music, hang out with their friends. Most of them have jobs. I find it a little puzzling that you have trouble thinking of how one could fill one’s time without significant economic competition.
Oh. So these communities, and Key’s life, are extremely atypical of that world’s humanity as a whole. That’s something worth stating because the story doesn’t even hint at it.
I’d be interested in hearing about how they handle telling young people about the wider world. How do they handle people who want to go out and live there and who come back one day? How do they stop the governments of the nations where they actually live from enforcing laws locally? Do these higher-level governments not have any such laws?
Many people can. I just don’t find it convincing that everyone could without there being quite a few unsatisfied people around.
The exchange above reminds me of Robin Hanson’s criticism of the social science in Greg Egan’s works.
I disagree: it doesn’t matter for the story whether the communities are typical or atypical for humanity as a whole, so mentioning it is unnecessary.
The relatively innocuous information about the wider world is there to read about on the earliest guidelists; less pleasant stuff gets added over time.
You can leave. That’s fine. You can’t come back without passing more tests. (They are very big on tests.)
They aren’t politically components of other nations. The communities are all collectively one nation in lots of geographical parts.
They can leave. The communities are great for people whose priorities are being content and secure. Risk-takers and malcontents can strike off on their own.
I wish our own world was nice enough for that kind of lifestyle to exist (e.g., purchasing sovereignity over pieces of settle-able land; or existing towns seceding from their nation)… It’s a good dream :-)
It was the first thing.
The exchange above reminds me of Robin Hanson’s criticism of the social science in Greg Egan’s works.