Capitalism is often hailed as a driver of technological innovation - and to some extent it is, when the system is working as-intended. Venture capitalists risk funds on technology research in conjunction with government funding where available, and they fund the projects they suspect will be valuable in the long-term.
However, disruptive technologies are often embattled, with large corporations and wealthy investors fighting to retain the value of their investments in existing infrastructure for as long as possible.
They do this for several reasons:
1. As the value of their equity in infrastructure drops, they are less able to leverage that equity as loan collateral to secure credit.
2. As competitive technology takes away business, their profits fall, also affecting their access to credit.
3. Employees of older-technology businesses may resist technological change for fear of losing their jobs - which under current capitalist systems can lead to homlessness, destitution, and the breakup of marriages and families.
Capitalist old-tech companies may resort to all kinds of methods, including criminal acts, out of fear. They've bought and supressed patents, run intimidation campaigns, killed technological innovators, sabotaged property, and all other sorts of nefarious activities.
Another way capitalism inhibits innovation is by gobbling up massive blocks of time from the brightest and most capable workers in this age of "shove as much work as possible on as few people as possible." Only the best and brightest workers have managed to stay employed the the endless stream of corporate layoffs and outsourcing. These workers are prevented from networking and starting up with any ideas they might have by abusive patent agreements in order to remain employed, and exhaustion and severe sleep deprivation from being overworked.
Additionally, the current patent system is expensive and combative, making it very difficult for average individuals to take advantage of the new system and stifling creativity.
Techism would change this invseveral ways that promote innovation and research to achieve maximum technological evolution:
1. Workers would be garaunteed a secure home, food, clothing, basic health care, communications services, and transportation as a human right. If they were creative and wanted to take time away from work to develop a new idea, they would be allowed the time, raw materials, work space, and collaboration tools needed to try it.
2. Workers in production sectors would have the same garauntees, and retraining on new technology as technology evolves. No one would lose their means of existence or status in order to bring new tech online.
3. Without a money-based system, there would be no need for patents to protect financial interest in a new idea. The originator would bw credited on record, and anyone could participate in development and deployment.
4. Non-hierarchal artificial intelligence and consensus management systems would bar the "fiefdom" effect, removing territorial human instincts from most of the process.
This is far from an exhaustive compariaon on this subject, but it gives one a good basic idea of the differences in the two systems.
The Universe is waiting for us.
Dan
No comments:
Post a Comment