Friday, October 18, 2013
Asylum vs. Facebook
Lets build an online social network committed to keeping the NSA out that competes with facebook for customer loyalty.
C'mon, wouldn't you dump facebook for a social network equivalent dedicated to investing its resources in keeping your content private? it would be expensive, but we could crowdfund it, couldn't we? We could at least crowdfund the beginnings...
We've all heard of public broadcasting, right? What about public multimedia broadcasting? That is, what about a nonprofit, donation-based, NSA-free, public service online social network connecting virtual communities across the globe, solving governments' intractable problems with ease and cost efficiency?
I bet a nonprofit, donation-based, NSA-free public service online social network could end poverty, for example. Certainly faster and more cheaply than government ever will. Government will only end poverty by subsidizing huge corporations to grow nutritionless food which is then distributed via petroleum to the masses of poor who are indentured to a disease-care system designed to profit from nutrition based illnesses while maintaining some kind of population control. yea government.
A nonprofit social network composed of intelligent and compassionate beings would probably just make how-to videos about gardening, for example. Lots cheaper, and more useful.
I bet a nonprofit, donation-based, NSA-free, public service online social network could end war, even. If the bees get saved, we will have social networks and social networkers to thank.
How could government end war? Government depends on war for its very existence. In the presence of peace and the absence of war, central authority breaks down and decentralizes. Our best chance of ending war comes from the private sector, not the public sector.
Of course, its possible for a for-profit, NSA contaminated, privately-owned, lucrative online social network to end poverty and war but the users of such a network are probably not going to stop there. To be consistent, such users would probably organize online to crowdsource the funds to start up competition with the very social network they first organized on, in order to make the social-network economic model less profit oriented and more service oriented.
Because people do not want to be spied on, and people do not want to be lied to, and people do not want to be manipulated, and people do not want to feel betrayed by those in power. There is a powerful economic incentive to giving the people what they want, and the people want truth, and the freedom to choose it.
And the truth is, capitalism doesn't make people happy. Communism doesn't either. Neither does socialism. Materialism fails to make us happy. In order to reveal happiness to the world, we must enter the realm of spirituality. This is the quantum revolution of the 21st century - spirituality is trumping materialism in the field of causality.
a monk in Burma wrote, "people think that lots of money, and security guards with guns,and armored cars and helicopters, is protection. but these things are not any protection at all - we still all die. True protection is wholesome thought, wholesome speech, and wholesome action."
Materialism does not follow us into the realm of death, and spirituality does. Spirituality, then, is capable of answering man's deepest questions in a manner that materialism never will.
And yet materialism is how the powerful maintain their power. Were we to blossom in our spirituality, the materially powerful would lose their empire and their servants, and while it is only then that freedom and happiness would be available, still the powerful move heaven and earth to remain so, and our job is to joyfully wake them up-