Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tack]

Would it?
I guess 'ends justifies the means' is a great philosophical hook to have in a book.

[Amperzand]

I was thinking that if it's a big interstellar society, they might legitimately strip the ecosystem of a planet to produce biomass for their industry, but if the society's entirely based on one or two planets, they're less likely to build a massive bio-exploitation industry solely to provide startup for a new technology, then simply abandon it. After all, having built huge arcology-farms, why not keep them around for food production? For that matter, it's possible they'd already have the farms in place, then simply use some of their output for nanite production until the nanite supply stabilized where they wanted it.

[Tack]

Because the brilliant nanites made oldschool food production obsolete.
With their tiny spinerrets they synthesise nutrients out of kelp and dirt.

[Fniff]

Well, the society is the same one I was mentioning earlier.  It is one-planet (In fact, it's just Japan built up to an absurd degree) Originally there was an overpopulation consuming a lots of food, creating the need for the arcologies for the arcologies, but most of them transferred to holodecks and are thus essentially comatose. I assume the resources required for keeping a person on an IV drip is much less than a solid diet. Especially since, as Tack said, their nanites can probably make food anyway.

Besides, the leader of the society is the sort who would look at an arcology filled with boneless chickens and crops, and wonder "Hrm, if I fill the place with cameras and let this ecosystem do its thing, can I make a holovideo show about it?"

[Tack]

Heh. "Sick of how technology is ruining communication between people? Wishing for a better time?
Make a holo-visit to one of our Four biospheres, including the new "Triassic Jungle" biosphere, so you can truly get in touch with your history."

"Tune In On Tuesdays when 4 contestants must band together to take down an adolescent T-Rex!"

[Grimlocke]

Well if nuclear fusion and genetic manipulation make just a couple more leaps of progress then growing crops in stacked up, artificially lit greenhouses would be an option. This would in turn free up all that land used to grow crops in sunlight for other purposes.

Japan's current population almost only lives near the coast, if the mountainous inland area could be covered in the same population density the coast has right now then a ten-fold population increase wouldn't be unfeasible.

For that their population would have to actually start growing, which it is kind of failing to do right now. Mass-immigration is probably the most feasible option, but you could always get creative with other things like cloning or whatever you call the progress of out-of-body pregnancies.

[Rolepgeek]

We could also just build down, rather than up. *shrug*

[Grimlocke]

I imagine artificial daylight windows would become popular if we did that, living underground would do funny things to people otherwise.

Might be best to stick robotic greenhouses and other largely automated industry underground and let people live in place with fresh air and sunlight. Of course someone would still have to build and maintain these subterranean industry parks, but its not like anyone cares about the fate of maintenance personnel even today...

[Rolepgeek]

Well, sprawling over the surface of the earth has side-effects that typically result in more downsides than SAD. We could totally have shafts running down the centers of semi-subterranean hexagonal living facilities, that concentrate human population over area without necessarily ruining volume. Parks and what not could be located on the surface, or build up as well as down and have even more space, with balconies and terraces along the sides. Build into the sides of mountains, and there's plenty of vertical area to carve into nice outdoorsy stuff.

[Amperzand]

I'd say there's little reason to allow massive population growth, at least beyond what we have. If everybody has high-quality education and resources available to them, in a world with advanced robotics, basically all menial labor would be handled by machines. The equivalent of boring maintenance jobs would be keeping the menial-labor robots running when they inevitably begin to break down.

[Rolepgeek]

I'd say there's little reason to allow massive population growth, at least beyond what we have. If everybody has high-quality education and resources available to them, in a world with advanced robotics, basically all menial labor would be handled by machines. The equivalent of boring maintenance jobs would be keeping the menial-labor robots running when they inevitably begin to break down.

What reasons are there to disallow it that overcome the protests that population control laws would inevitably bring up?

[Tuxfanturnip]

Resources, probably. And if current trends wrt general prosperity hold out, population control measures in an automated utopia would probably consist of active encouragement of reproduction simply to maintain population. Scaling back such a program would be a lot less controversial and noticeable than, say, forced sterilization.

[Rolepgeek]

Post-scarcity, what reason is there not to have kids? Like you said, all the menial labor's basically done with. And if I remember right, there's a few/more than a few sociologists and the like who think that the demographic shift will go back up. The whole reason birth rates go down is that kids become a drain on an individuals resources in a city, rather than an extra hand in the fields. But once you're fine either way? We're biological machines. We may have birth control, but having kids is still what we're programmed to do. I don't think maintaining population will be that difficult, once it's not an economic hazard to raise children.

[Fniff]

Well, our primary motivators to have children are sexual gratification (from sex) and emotional fulfillment (from the kids). When both of those can be simulated with the society's technology (Why bother having sex with a disgustingly biological human when you could have an impossibly beautiful sexbot? Why waste time raising shitting pissing babies who'll probably turn out disappointing anyway when your virtual children always respect and love you?), population growth is going to take a hit.

Yep, not a pleasant setting. Love the discussion guys, do keep it up. When this is complete you will be credited for your ideas that I stole borrowed.

[NullForceOmega]

Besides the fact that those people who don't want to have children will die out and those that do will contribute to the next generation?  Evolution is an ongoing process, but that does set up some very interesting political and social possibilities.