Optimization Revealed

[Perfection]

That's stupid. My grandpa should live with his family. And when exactly will my grandpa become so sub-optimal as to require termination?

 

[Chazumi]

Termination is required when someone violates the rules of termination. Post-Optimals are allowed to live off their stored reserves until they are depleted. Some may be able to live five to ten years like this, others twenty, based on how much they saved, although it is mandatory that a post-Optimal account be created. The time an individual has to spend as a post-Optimal may be depleted much quicker if health problems require attention. Since they are no longer part of the contributing body, once their reserves hit 0 and it begins to cost the system money to maintain them, especially since they are no longer contributing, they will be terminated.

 

[Chazumi]

Double Post - Terminated for Optimization

 

[philippe]

I'd die under your system, so I utterly reject it.

 

[bhsup]

If you are unhappy with your position in the Optimized society, you can apply for reassignment. With approval you would be retrained and start at your new assignment, though your percentage of take-home would be severely reduced to repay the retraining costs. Owning land of your own does not exist.

I see. So then, no incentive for performance. No incentive for advancement. No incentive for personal enrichment. Nothing personal, but I am afraid I have to violently overthrow/kill your optimized government now and implement something else.

 

[Perfection]

Termination is required when someone violates the rules of termination. Post-Optimals are allowed to live off their stored reserves until they are depleted. Some may be able to live five to ten years like this, others twenty, based on how much they saved, although it is mandatory that a post-Optimal account be created. The time an individual has to spend as a post-Optimal may be depleted much quicker if health problems require attention. Since they are no longer part of the contributing body, once their reserves hit 0 and it begins to cost the system money to maintain them, especially since they are no longer contributing, they will be terminated.

But my G-Pop is contributing to society, just not via economic production. How do you put a price on wisdom, laughter, and love?

I'd say the right to live is not based on stupid things as economic productivity.

 

[Perfection]

I should also mention the absolute vitality for many people to change jobs. Changing jobs gives people new perspectives on things that is essential for innovation. Different careers have different methodologies and ways of thinking that can be repurposed in different fields, and multidisciplinary folk can make contributions that wouldn't be made by people with one job their whole lives.

Besides, finding a good job requires a lot of trial and error, it's a lot better for people to find the job they want and be happy and productive then to get resentful people to work for you.

People who hate thier jobs almost always suck at them.

 

[Chazumi]

I'd die under your system, so I utterly reject it.

Termination can be a conscious decision by those refusing the system.

I see. So then, no incentive for performance. No incentive for advancement. No incentive for personal enrichment. Nothing personal, but I am afraid I have to violently overthrow/kill your optimized government now and implement something else.

Incentive is to remain in the Optimized society. And violence is a termination offense.

But my G-Pop is contributing to society, just not via economic production. How do you put a price on wisdom, laughter, and love?

I'd say the right to live is not based on stupid things as economic productivity.

The wisdom is passed on towards the end of a career cycle, as a mentor to those replacing him. Laughter and Love still have a place in an Optimized society, but termination is an accepted way of life.

I should also mention the absolute vitality for many people to change jobs. Changing jobs gives people new perspectives on things that is essential for innovation. Different careers have different methodologies and ways of thinking that can be repurposed in different fields, and multidisciplinary folk can make contributions that wouldn't be made by people with one job their whole lives.

Besides, finding a good job requires a lot of trial and error, it's a lot better for people to find the job they want and be happy and productive then to get resentful people to work for you.

People who hate thier jobs almost always suck at them.

Universal training compensates for lack of career exploration, and through a series of testing people are Optimally assigned, almost eliminating job dissastisfaction. The few that aren't, like I said, are welcome to apply for reassignment.

 

[philippe]

Termination can be a conscious decision by those refusing the system.



Incentive is to remain in the Optimized society. And violence is a termination offense.



The wisdom is passed on towards the end of a career cycle, as a mentor to those replacing him. Laughter and Love still have a place in an Optimized society, but termination is an accepted way of life.



Universal training compensates for lack of career exploration, and through a series of testing people are Optimally assigned, almost eliminating job dissastisfaction. The few that aren't, like I said, are welcome to apply for reassignment.

your utilitarian utopia is frankly disgusting.

termination is a sheer draconian measure.

 

[Perfection]

The wisdom is passed on towards the end of a career cycle, as a mentor to those replacing him.

But not to family. Family is important.

Universal training compensates for lack of career exploration

Univeral training is the problem! If everyone is trained the same way, they're not going to think differently.

The few that aren't, like I said, are welcome to apply for reassignment.

Allowing it at the cost of life expectancy, social status and standard of living, is hardly welcoming.

 

[Chazumi]

your utilitarian utopia is frankly disgusting.

termination is a sheer draconian measure.

But a necessary one. Why waste the resources to continue to uphold someones life who is never going to produce enough to outweigh their drain on society, when the landspace and resources can be used to maintain 2 desireables, who WILL contribute to society.

But not to family. Family is important.
Univeral training is the problem! If everyone is trained the same way, they're not going to think differently.

Family is encouraged, but again the family unit accepts termination as much as they accept random death occurances.
Universal training may not be 100% Optimized to begin with, but with trial and error and further studies, it will be the most Optimal way to train the workforce.

Allowing it at the cost of life expectancy, social status and standard of living, is hardly welcoming.

A conundrum indeed for those in this position. Perhaps with counseling and a regiment of intensive drug prescriptions this could be countered.

 

[Perfection]

Family is encouraged, but again the family unit accepts termination as much as they accept random death occurances.

I doubt it, if it was my grandparents, I'd sneak them food so they wouldn't get murdered.

Universal training may not be 100% Optimized to begin with, but with trial and error and further studies, it will be the most Optimal way to train the workforce.

No it isn't. If everyone thinks the same no innovation gets done. Universal training is absolutely horrible. You know why high-tech employers value diversity? It's not because of some lame-ass socialistic credo, it's because they know that people with different backgrounds and different training work better then some homogenous group.

A conundrum indeed for those in this position. Perhaps with counseling and a regiment of intensive drug prescriptions this could be countered.

Or perhaps, you should understand that career change is important in the development of an individual in modern life.

 

[Sharwood]

Even Foundation had the mule, or did it predict him?

They predicted the possibility of him, if not him himself. This was the reason the Second Foundation was created, in order to defend against such mutations.

They didn't predict Gaia however, but that was because they had no knowledge of its existence prior to the fall of the Empire.

 

[Perfection]

Of course, the bigger problem here is that ending human life is worth improved productivity. That's pretty morally reprehensible.

 

[Sharwood]

Won't work Chazumi. Human beings have shown time and again that without incentive, they won't work to their optimal level. People are naturally greedy, they must be educated to be otherwise, and you'll never get them all, it's simply not possible. Even if appropriate technology is developed, new methods of beating the tests will be developed. The polygraph was seen as infallible when it was created, after all. Now, I bet half the people on this board could beat it.

Aristocracies form, usually undeserving, always corrupt and nepotistic. Without outlets, people's creativity finds other ways to express itself, quite often destructive and anti-authority.

Even if people did have the will to lead through the first few generations of your system, it would never be viable. At most it would be a police state with an ideology, a little like the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, an ideology not shared by the weak, and corrupted by the strong.

Humanity always falls into established patterns my friend, it can be kept from doing so by sheer acts of will from its leaders for short periods, burst of brilliance such as Athens, but sooner or later it all turns to ash.

Unless your system of government is established after a few milennia of evolution, it is simply not possible.

 

[Sharwood]

Of course, the bigger problem here is that ending human life is worth improved productivity. That's pretty morally reprehensible.

Morality is not important. Most systems of government aren't moral. Hell, democracy isn't moral when you think about it. What matters is that it simply doesn't work.

There have been societies throughout history that killed their elders and unproductive members; the Eskimos, Fijians, some Maoris. What they all had in common was repeating those same established patterns even moreso than everybody else, because the people that had seen it all before and could point out mistakes were floating in a raft off the coast somewhere.

Ending life to improve productivity only creates its own problems, which Chazumi's system is completely incapable of solving.

 

[Chazumi]

I doubt it, if it was my grandparents, I'd sneak them food so they wouldn't get murdered.

It's not murder

No it isn't. If everyone thinks the same no innovation gets done. Universal training is absolutely horrible. You know why high-tech employers value diversity? It's not because of some lame-ass socialistic credo, it's because they know that people with different backgrounds and different training work better then some homogenous group.

Who is to say there wouldn't be a specific group assigned to diverse thinking in an Optimal way, and then dispersed among all the job cores, I don't know, I probably wouldn't be in charge of such things.

Or perhaps, you should understand that career change is important in the development of an individual in modern life.

In the beginning this would only be a minor problem, once the system is fully Optimized, job dissatisfaction would be unheard of, especially since jobs that are almost always unsatisfactory will be replaced by machinery.

 

[Perfection]

Sharwood, Morality sure as crap is important! Just because a government can't make people stop being complete dickwads a fair portion of the time and can't fix everything doesn't give them the go-ahead to do willy-nilly-kiling!

The government should be as moral as possible and the fact that it isn't means that we should work towards improving government!

 

[Perfection]

It's not murder

you say tomato I say murder, whatevs!

Who is to say there wouldn't be a specific group assigned to diverse thinking in an Optimal way, and then dispersed among all the job cores, I don't know, I probably wouldn't be in charge of such things.

Well, the free market system works really damn good at that kind of thing, mayhbe we should go with that. Then all we have to work on is your mass-murdering of the elderly

In the beginning this would only be a minor problem, once the system is fully Optimized, job dissatisfaction would be unheard of, especially since jobs that are almost always unsatisfactory will be replaced by machinery.

No way, I don't know what the hell kind of job I want to be doing in 10 years, and I'm pretty sure the government couldn't figure it out either.

Let people be for Pete's sake, they're happier that way then when the government is riding their ass all the time, and they'll be more productive.

 

[Chazumi]

Won't work Chazumi. Human beings have shown time and again that without incentive, they won't work to their optimal level. People are naturally greedy, they must be educated to be otherwise, and you'll never get them all, it's simply not possible. Even if appropriate technology is developed, new methods of beating the tests will be developed. The polygraph was seen as infallible when it was created, after all. Now, I bet half the people on this board could beat it.

Incentive is to not be terminated. Not performing to an optimal level will eventually lead you to break a core termination law. Understand that they WILL be educated otherwise, will be genetically pushed in the right direction. Iron fist in the left hand, with a caring mothers hand on the right.

Aristocracies form, usually undeserving, always corrupt and nepotistic. Without outlets, people's creativity finds other ways to express itself, quite often destructive and anti-authority.

Termination solves all unfixable problems.

Even if people did have the will to lead through the first few generations of your system, it would never be viable. At most it would be a police state with an ideology, a little like the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, an ideology not shared by the weak, and corrupted by the strong.

As all are veiwed as an important aspect towards the whole of Optimization, this should be minimized. I don't know how it will be portrayed intially, but after a few generations everyone will be valued at some level, and the "strong" and "weak" concept will be replaced with "Optimized Contributer", no matter the position.

Humanity always falls into established patterns my friend, it can be kept from doing so by sheer acts of will from its leaders for short periods, burst of brilliance such as Athens, but sooner or later it all turns to ash.

Unless your system of government is established after a few milennia of evolution, it is simply not possible.

Always in this case is not a solid fact, always, THUS FAR, it may have done so. the Optimization of the world will have contingencies and cut off points to not allow such dramatic retribution towards the governing body.

Of course, the bigger problem here is that ending human life is worth improved productivity. That's pretty morally reprehensible.

But accepted as a necessity.

Ending life to improve productivity only creates its own problems, which Chazumi's system is completely incapable of solving.

The Optimized system of government finds a way to Optimize all things, all problems will eventually be terminated or Optimized.