The Blinding Effect of Money (or why we need to become producers)

We live in a society where access to almost everything is gated by money. On the low side you can of course do the basic things, be outside, walk, breath. You could even dumpsterdive but food is where freedom stops. But even there you can’t have food if you don’t have money. You can’t grow it reliably without land and you can’t own land without initial and running cost.

Slowely ownership in society has evaporated in society but for a few. Most people owning a home also have to work in some occupation

On the other end of the spectrum, so the side where you do not try to live at the fringe but live the life of your dreams, you will be stuck to the neck in debt and financial dependencies. You will have a mortgage, have to pay for childrens education, medical care, branded clothes, expensive holidays all the stuff and money will always be required to get any of these things. There are two ways of thinking about this, one is the commonly promoted thing : This is wealth, we are consumers, we have choices and enjoy luxury. The other is this is capture, we are slaves, we have to choose between a few options, the only difference with hard communism is that products do actually give enjoyment, and there are a lot of them.

Money has become the gatekeeper to life, and we no longer care to understand anything else

We agree with the idea that a lot of our current average home inventory is making our lives better. Soft couches, bright TVs, central heating etc. all these things are fine, however there is an effect of this luxury that is paralyzing our politics. We have gotten so used to the utility of money we don’t know or care about anything else anymore. When politicians talk about money our mind goes blank, we know money is a good thing. What else do we need to know? This is a fundamental problem because it means society no longer focusses on the engines of wealth but has shifted to focus on its trading token.

You can have a million dollar in the bank, but if your ATM is broken and nobody knows how to fix it you are lost

This conditioning to money is a problem, because anyone that can convince you of having influence over your liquidity now has power over you. You will start worrying about other people having money, who takes money, who deserves it. Your mind is spending its cycles on really abstract and useless thoughts, because what can you do about (for example) the Pentagon disappearing billions, or some millionair making $300 billion on his/her stock options? The amount of useless information we are exposed to is enormous.

Actual things you should know are the rules to get what you want, so you can think about how to get it. You are mistakenly accepting a first rule, which is : accept money as your master and a second which is : don’t stick differ from the others

One social rule is devastating for innovation and development of interesting personalities : Peer pressure. Social media have brought peer pressure into everyone’s life to the exact degree people are socially involved. There is no need for most things people do and own for social reasons. People will reject others because they compete to look a certain way or live a certain way, but that is all completely useless and not relevant to their actual ability to live.

We live because someone makes the stuff we need. That requires skills, materials and energy

Instead of constantly looking to each other and wondering how to look yourself, or wondering what new habit you need to be accepted, you could look into what you need, what it takes to make what you need, what is currently involved and then get shocked into the realization you may not be able to make any of it. That’s fine, that’s what economics teaches us, that you don’t have to be able to do everything. But if you can make delicious dinners, you don’t need to go to a restaurant. If you can make furniture, you don’t have to buy it. Sounds stupid and simple, but it is true. And it is a lot harder to do so it may be an interesting challenge. The economy will rush in telling you this is home-grown, hobby stuff, or cottage fabrication whatever, but in reality there are many small innovative companies that make specific high quality things that nobody else can make (I used to work for one that made a device that monitored industrial networks for failures). That started with somebody not watching a Netflix movie.

We need to focus on what is already there. On what we can do with what we have

So there are two sides to how the economy is disabling us, it is blinding us with money, it is bombarding us with products we could make ourselves, it is wasting our time with stories that serve a world view that is usually conflict oriented and/or bad for our self esteem. Meanwhile we don’t notice the challenges closer to home.

Covid has reduced shipping volume all over the world. That means shipping cost have gone up (because the fuel price remains the same but the ships carry less cargo). This could mean products don’t even make it to your local market anymore. The so called ‘price elasticity’ may not be there. You think you are set if you have money, but if prices suddenly explode because the product you wanted to buy is running out you discover the money you had offers no protection against shortages. Being the producer definitely would give you a better chance.



 

Dystopian RoboBosses

We have noticed it a couple of years back, when the Nintendo Wii was introduced, that it is now a matter of time before algorithms will control much of our industry. The fact you can sense the posture of a person means you can record how long and when a person is in a specific posture. This means you can see if someone is stacking boxes or not, if someone is next to someone else talking or not etc. Build a simple feedback loop with some audio commands “Get back to work!” and you have an autonomous slavedriver.

Robots can analyze what you are doing

The trap our economy creates is that we lack empathy for other people because we don’t see their suffering or effort. We see products, and the product just appears in our reality out of nowhere (or we like to think it does). Anything that happened before the product arrived we don’t know about, we can’t care about and we are not invited to care much about. On the other side a person looks at our wallet, thinks “ah, there’s money in there I could have” and tries to take it as if we have no other plans with it. From that side too there is blindness created by the economic risk taken (running a business). This means in terms of protection of humanity our society is infested with a dangerous visitor : economics. Economics itself is an AI that mesmerizes us and uses our brains and senses as its substrate.

Meet your new boss

Economics and the mental islands it creates inspires blind exploitation of the opportunity to make profit, even if it means using AI and robots. Of course we all know we use methods to measure and optimize performance in every part of industry. Even we ourselves constantly look for ways to make it easier to do chores. This can be an improvement, because humans are easily distracted and skills vary, but it can also create risks if we hand our lives over to algorithms.

“The big caveat here is we need ethical oversight of this,” she says. “If you have AI being the boss, a piece of software with decision-making ability, that for me is extremely worrying, and I think it could lead to quite a dystopian future (Shivvy Jervis).

The question is not what would happen if we do this, its happening. Your purchasing is guided by marketing, Netflix programs your imagination, banks restrict your movements and you throw all your social info (your motivators) online for everyone to mine and analyse. The question is how do we get out of this? Because there is no real reason to be super efficient robots or worker drones in offices other than to support cashflow in an economy that exists only for banks and fossil fuel companies (you should read our stuff about carboncredit).

Industry does not have to be massive in scale and global in reach, that’s just to maximize bank cashflow

Our economy is so damaging to the planet because it’s a bonfire of fossil fuel facilitated by banks getting rich of making it happen. Economics is the philosophy that has been tweaked for maximum fossil credit cashflow and Roboeconomics is nothing like it! In short, if we automate our every day existence including what we focus on at work and how we go about doing our job, then we will do that forced by banks and the fossil industry. All the while we could take an easier route towards offloading tedious tasks if our economy was based on renewables, because then there would be no forcing factor from first owners (of fossil fuels) to sell their product (oil).

In the fossil credit economy people compete with machines for the same resource : fossil energy. People are waay less productive, so the economy does not desire too much of them.

It is clear from almost every big country’s energy policy that the energy sources are what controls states. With renewables this control will shift more locally, and this means the need for optimization of use of humans is no longer there. Only if you have to manage with dwindling fossil resources and want to cling on to power you promote AI control of people, this is because people are useless compared to industrial machines, yet they consume an exorbitant amount of fossil energy you’d rather put in making more stuff. In short the economy doesn’t like people, it likes consumers and it will optimize the nr of consumers to maximize profit.

Islands of luxury in an ocean of drabness.. The high value consumers make it so cheap products need to suck

The answer is not to hate the rich or automation, but to start detaching from the fossil credit economy. They way to do that is to start by generating energy on your own, with your own home, city, region. This will mean production of goods and services will become cheaper for local producers, take for instance a pizza place that generates its own energy to bake pizza’s, that will cut the cost.

Beauty in branding

The secret weapon of companies like Starbucks and Uber is endless credit. They can lose money for decades because the banks financing them are big enough and their control over investors large enough. They in fact create a little ecosystem for desired consumers to exist in, checking iphone messages in Starbucks with your branded clothes etc. etc. Its not that its bad, its just an island of comfort specially created as if the rest of the world doesn’t exist. By doing stuff more locally you drain cashflow from the economic system and gain experience and control over your life and local society.

Beautifull cities where build in times when people where still appreciated

The mistake often made, or forced upon independent initatives is to make it cumbersome, ugly, disgusting. Who does that? Those that like the system and will infiltrate your organization to sabotage it. So make things beautifull and attractive, promote it with beauty and style, make it cool and easy to use. There is no monopoly of Silicon Valley on anything, not even Silicon. There is no reason why industry should be the only ones automating to fortify their dominant position over humanity. You and the people in your region can band together and grow the local economy, with local energy and locally developed robots and automation (of you can’t source them elsewhere or banks don’t help out). That future is better than the one designed for you by Wall Street and fossil credit banks.



 

A First Application of Roadbots : Potholes?

Roadbots will be an integral part of the Roboeconomy.com. What are roadbots? They are road wothy robotic platforms. The current Tesla cars are coming close, although their only function is to transport people, navigate and provide gaming apps. But if you take the base of a Tesla (they are similar for the Model S/3/X/Y) and view it as a platform to put robots or any automatic system on, a world op possibilities opens up. Any service now provide in vans can be offered autonomously. It is only a matter of time before the first applications show up.

The first Roadbot platform

If you can rely on autopilot you can get roadbots anywhere there are roads, and if you heighten the suspension and add remote control you can even go offroad. One great application would be to fix potholes in roads.. The only thing needed is the base frame plus some tar/concrete pooring system. A robot arm that can possibly drill out some asfalt. Another arm that can scoop up the debris. One with inspection cameras or to put the pilons on the road.

Pothole repair robot..

We actually found a piece about a pothole repair robot under development. Others are working with drones..

Another application could be ambulances or emergency evacuation vehicles. How about medical cabins showing up in some disaster zone able to onboard victims, cooling them, sedating them and rushing them to a hospital without having to stop (or catching Corona).

The Spot robot of Boston Dynamics is by far the most agile at the moment. Yet it has no AI, but lookup tables (Cerebellum functionality). How about that arm on a car?

Robots can take all shapes and sizes. Its amazing how long we stick with the below image of a robot. This is probably because designers are minimizing complexity to achieve functionality instead of exploring the complex challenges and finding a way to make an attractive product.

Robots designed by uninspired people

The other end of the spectrum is still reviled (although booming). Silicon sexbots are not real robots yet, even though AI is creaping into the heads. But what is wrong with attractive robots that are not meant for sex? The roboeconomy will not only see functional and really cheap but able robots, but also social bots and ones that do stuff while looking attractive. Male abuse of humanoid robots is likely to become a thing (but that’s another matter).

The Boston Dynamics humanoid robot can navigate uneven terrain autonomously. Soon it will be recreated from cheaper lighter parts and someone will reduce the size of the generator which is now gas powered if we’re correct. The image of a large battery or power unit in the back of a robot may come true.

Boston Dynamics cracked the challenge of predictive control so its robots can self correct while executing programmed movements



 

Elon Musks Climate Challenge

Elon Musk is “in the money” at the moment. His cash position is about $205 Billion probably due to the stellar rise of his stock and growing trust in his multiple endeavours. He makes cars, batteries, solar panels, roof tiles, starships, tunnels, flame throwers, short shorts and promises to make planes, supercars, neural implants, colonies in space, efficient mining operations. The proces is simple realy : Want something doable and then dig in until it is done.

His primary motivation for all his actions was to do good to humanity. He wondered how this could be done and his conclusion was to try to spread (human) consciousness over more than one planet, so as to be redundant (consciousness is super rare in space), his other idea was to try to keep Earth safe, and to create cathalysts for change, for example the electric car. We and he was immesurably lucky to make enough money to start trying to do both things, and it is really thanks to his persistence that we can feel confident the entire car industry is switching to electric, and that the cost of batteries will drop so low that even flying electric at scale will happen soon.

This is just amazing. This is incredibly rare. We can’t stress this enough.

You would think there world if Ayn Rand or Jules Vernes in which some man can invent a new sort of revolutionary steel is long past, but it isn’t, it just depends on how much and how many people try. Due to fossil economic reasons (serving the fossil and bank interests) we have been stuck with a lot of half baked solutions that stay that way just to secure fossil fuel cashflow and bank control (through ever recurring costs for fossil fuels mainly). It is a dependency trap and banks have been the wardens. We have written about this often. Now, due to someone having $160 million in cash (Elon Musk) this is changing.

Still this is not going fast enough. We need faster innovation and scaling of carbon capture solutions. The reason is that CO2 is escaping to the higher atmosphere. There it can stay for ages out of reach of trees or other capturing devices. It is like throwing ink in a swimming pool, right after it drops in you can still scoop it out, but after a while it is diluted to the point where it is invisible and you have to bleach every liter of pool water to get it out. CO2 takes about 20 years to mix, so today we can at most reverse the CO2 PPM to 20 years back, if we where reducing it. It is in fact still increasing!

So what about Elon Musk (and his brother Kimbal)’s challenge? Elon says about it

“This is not a theoretical competition; we want teams that will build real systems that can make a measurable impact and scale to a gigaton level,” Musk said as he announced the competition as part of the X Prize charity initiative that encourages technological developments that can benefit humanity. “Whatever it takes. Time is of the essence.”

True to form the Musk Charity website has not cost much. It reads in plain text

Musk Foundation

Grants are made in support of:

– Renewable energy research and advocacy
– Human space exploration research and advocacy
– Pediatric research
– Science and engineering education
– Development of safe artificial intelligence to benefit humanity

No application form, no fancy office. We think you just have to have an inspring idea, maybe something already in the works, then you can recieve an anonymous check from the Musks (by some mysterious courrier who arrives in a Tesla). If your goal is to achieve, you don’t motivate people to beg. Let the strong ones get help, and those who can’t get started probably shouldn’t get started.

“To qualify for victory, solutions must be able to extract one ton of CO2 per day, and be viable in a scaled, validated model at time of presentation, with the ability to scale it to “gigaton levels” in commercially viable ways in the future.” (source)

That said it is cool that you can be sure that if you invent and develop a scalable carbon capture technology you can feel confident that you get support. We hope the foundation discourages patents (as is the case with Tesla for basic electric car stuff).

Elon is quoted as saying

“For now, by far the top priority is accelerating the transition to a sustainable energy economy.”

We call that the Roboeconomy.com one in which renewable energy is used to power robots and automated systems both to generate a wealth of products and services but also to restore the ecology where humans would not be capable fast enough.. Dedicated carbon capture facilities or a growing carbon capture industry (combined with humans prospering of them and living with them) would be part of that vision. In dat it makes total sense to look for a way to capture carbon that can be a basis for a small village or city, after all you will be generating a lot of usefull energy and many usefull products are made of hydrogen and carbon (plastics).

We will be on the lookout for projects that get funded. Maybe Musk is interested in kickstarting the Markermeerzonnecentrale.nl, the biggest floating solar power plant that can warrant development of new thin film panels.



 

On Being a Dick

This title does refer to the writer of this. I am a dick about some things. It is a weakness, because it doesn’t help with communicating ideas. If you try to communicate an idea you generally have a hard time, because you have the idea, but everyone else is thinking about totally different things. So generally your idea needs to be an answer to a question that is being asked. If not then it is either ignored, not heard or misunderstood.

Well, Steve Jobs was a dick..

What then if you think your idea is relevant to increase awareness of the situation so good decisions are made, meaning ones that do not lead to damage (for instance to our climate). Then you may be writing pieces like I do about climate change. There is a 100% guarantee you are distracting people from ideas they have themselves, from visions of the future they have and from their feeling of comfort that everyone can develop in almost any situation if we’re not being actively tortured.

To disturb such tranquility with messages about climate change or global warming you have to hate people, or at least think their little coccoons of comfort are not important, you need to be a dick. You will be considered a dick (or a c&nt if you are female). The truth is you where talking to the wrong crowd, you are using the wrong language and saying the wrong things. This is shown simply by the fact you get a negative response. If you get a negative response, stop! If you don’t hear a question you might as well shut up.

I am a dick in many situations, which is because I have not been spared in the past and because I base my opinions on what I know to be evident and with consideration. I don’t borrow them from others or repeat them. I am not sure if that is because I simply can not remember the opinion of others or that I don’t care about other people or that I too easily come up with my own reasons. It is not the way most people choose what they say, but then again most people don’t look to speak truthfully, most people don’t think about what they say at all. They just want to stay out of ‘harms way’ socially.

A true dick also raises his voice, which happens when the facts in his/her perception are vandalized, stated incorrectly. A great way to anger a dick is by doubting something he/she works very hard on prove true. So if you are calling a dilligent person sloppy or cast aspersions on someone trying hard to help. A dick has no problems doing that him/herself though. It seems the comfort not felt by the dick becomes the standard. That is why it is necessary to feel good and have an organized life if you want to communicate ideas as a non-dick. The risk of that is that you sink into a coccoon of comfort where you no longer care about the truth. The truth is served by discomfortable people.

I would like not to be a dick, and most of the time I am not. However I will not avoid stating facts especially when they are challenged by mythical ideas or lies, fake news, false priests of economics or the fossil industry, or simply commercial interest. It is just a matter of social conscience that those lying or being incorrect matter just as much as those they may harm with their ideas, and as a consequence you might as well expose them to the other reality that they do not believe, ignore or deny its existence of.

How not to be a dick? For a dick that’s not that easy, but judging by the first paragraph the secret lies in evoking questions, not giving answers. This would be my guess. Then if people ask “Do we have enough oil?” at least there is an opportunity to say “no” (if that’s the case) or “yes, but”. “Can we keep on cutting down trees like this?” is a great question. How do you get people to ask it? Maybe the role of a dick comes into its strenght most if he/she states something that evokes the question the answer to which he/she wants people to know. So “We can cut down all trees in the woooooorld!!”. That is a (virtual) event, not a fact, not an accusation.

Maybe I as somewhat of a dick sometimes try to do this more I achieve more. I will.



 

Virgin Hyperloop Vision

Virgin is taking the hyperloop idea seriously. The idea being that you travel at great speed through a tube with rarified or no air (vacuum). This of course is a strange notion, you would be in a sealed capsule going at 800 km/hr through a tube where you could not breath. If it gets stuck how would you escape? But this goes for trains and planes and busses as well, if your plane breaks down in mid air or you train derails or your bus runs off a bridge.

We’ve written about glass tubes for hyperloop here. If hyperloop tubes where made of laminated glass you could make them super strong yet transparent and super smooth. Virgin is however going with a propulsion system that requires systems mounted in the tube, but maybe even those can be integrated and added during the “tube rolling” process.

Modern rail is advancing towards faster trains, but these require enormous amounts of energy to push themselves through the ever denser air in front. Planes go to altitudes where air is less thick but rail connections are usually at ground level, where air is denser (the densest air you find near the Dead Sea for example as this lake lies 400 meters below sea level). Pushing through no air is way easier.

We hope funds are diverted to Hyperloop projects, and that these project don’t get stuck (by fossil lobbies) in endless research from universities (as is the case with thin film solar for example). We need them now. In the vision of Virgin Hyperloop the tubes are covered with solar panels. They make the propulsion free of cost. We could apply such ideas elsewhere, also in logistics. Why not have a silk road that self propells? Food for thought!



 

Herstel de Verzorgingsstaat Roboeconomisch

Rutte is opgehoepeld. Helaas zijn VVD stemmers niet al te snugger dus de kans dat hij weer premier wordt is groot. Zoniet dan komt er misschien een club aan de macht die wel hart heeft voor nederlanders, niet alleen voor bedrijven. Maar hoe ga je in een wereld die zich aan moet passen aan de klimaatveranderingen en de schadelijke gevolgen van gebruik van fossiel meer welvaart creeren voor mensen met weinig eigen middelen of capaciteiten? Heel eenvoudig : Roboeconomisch. Waar de huidige economie continu vereist dat we opnieuw energie kopen kan hernieuwbare energie een keer gekocht worden en vervolgens decennia lang het creeren van weelde faciliteren. Dit is het geheim van de Roboeconomie hij is ‘cashflow lean’

Als gedachten experiment bedachten we de Markermeerzonnecentrale.nl Dat is een grote drijvende zonnecentrale op het Markermeer. Die kan als het de helft van het meer bedekt alle centrales van Nederland vervangen. Dat betekent dat alles wat we in Nederland produceren dan met stroom uit die drijvende centrale geproduceerd kan worden, alle fabrieken, bakkerijen, distributiecentra, kunstmestfabrieken, recycle centra, scholen, theaters : alles. dat betekent dat de werkelijke kosten van die weelde liggen in het onderhouden van de zonnecentrale. Dat zijn dus marginale ondehouds en vervangingskosten. Hebben we aan de oever een grote (dunne film) panelen fabriek gebouwd dan zijn die kosten natuurlijk minimaal, en het is zeker denkbaar dat die nul zijn aangezien je de werknemers met energie krediet (Euro’s) kunt betalen.

Het is al vele jaren bekend dat hernieuwbare energie weelde kan creeren, huizen kan verwarmen en alle andere dingen kan doen die we nu met fossiel doen. Het argument tegen was altijd dat fossiel goedkoper was. Dat is natuurlijk een grote leugen gebleken. De kosten van het gebruik van fossiel zijn immens, het kost nu al vele mensenlevens, al zijn het levens die ons (kennelijk) niet veel kunnen schelen (zoals in Africa of Azie of Zuid Amerika). Het probleem is dat mensen aan de verkoop van fossiel ‘verdienden’, er rijk van werden. Aangezien fossiel het middel was om weelde te creered waren de eigenaren van fossiel (en hun intermediaries de banken) in staat mensen te verleiden met die weelde om te zorgen dat we doorgingen met het gebruik van hun ‘product’. Dat product omvat fossiel -en- krediet (maar dat voert wat ver).

Willen we met een nieuw niet asociaal kabinet toekomst bestendig worden en de schade van Wiebes inhalen dan zouden we een medogenloos hernieuwbare energie beleid moeten voeren. Medogenloos omdat fossiel medogenloos is geweest ten opzicht van de werel, omdat fossiel de drijfveer was achter het asociale beleid van Rutte en de VVD. Het ging hen om meer geld meer fossiele cashflow. Wat we nodig hebben is meer weelde in handen van burgers. Reele waarde dus geen blokjeshuis van 400.000 Euro maar een motiverende woning met een tuin voor 150.000 Euro. Dat kan allemaal als we daar onze eigen energie voor opwekken, zodat niemand ons kan tegenhouden als we willen graven, bouwen, vervoeren, assambleren, opruimen, aanplanten etc. Geen banken, geen externe investeerdes.

De speerpunt moet het opwekken van hernieuwbare energie zijn, want efficientie bevrijdt ons niet snel genoeg uit de macht van fossiel. Opwekken opwekken opwekken, en de industrie omvormen naar een electrische. Waterstof is nog een uitstel en pro fossiele strategie. Biomassa was een strategie om veel cashflow te genereren. Zelf zonnepanelen en windmolens bouwen, op een zo groot mogelijke schaal en zo snel mogelijk. Gebruik maken van de meest recente technologie, manieren van automatiseren, AI, robotica. Hierbij kan bv. ook land in het buitenland worden aangekocht zodat Nederlandse bedrijven daar innovatief aan de slag kunnen bv met de integratie van zonnepanelen en landbouw. Denk je dat een landbouwerktuig niet tussen zonnepanelen kan oogsten?

De Roboeconomie, die met gebruik van hernieuwbare energie en technologie de ecologie herstelt en welvaart creert is waar we uiteindelijk zullen uitkomen. Laten we niet eerst elke andere domme en asociale optie proberen.



 

What is the Roboeconomy?

Experts are advising to forgo the goal of economic growth to save humanity from the ravages of fossil fuel use. You’ve heard it all before, but have you ever connected the dots? Ravages of fossil fuel use? Why would we tolerate that? Because someone sells it to us. Why do we need to buy it, its found in deep under ground, nobody made it or owns it really. Why don’t we simply distribute it? The answer is we ‘simply’ do and the mechanism by which we do it is called the ‘Economy’. The economy is a system to ‘optimally’ allocate fossil resources.

You can ask “Optimally for whom?”. Good question. Not for you if you means the average non-oil well owner or banker. You may be ignoring those having a hard life in your country, which is a higher percentage than you if you live an easy life (more so in the more economically advanced countries!). The economy is optimizing for one group only : The banks. Because the banks created it and the banks need to remain all powerfull in it to sustain it. There’s only one catch : It only works with fossil fuels. This is why we need to let go of economic goals to save ourselves from the ravages of fossil fuel use.

So is there an alternative. The answer is YES. Its called the Roboeconomy. Many because it uses Robots because it is Ecologically compatible with the existence of life on Earth and because it does strife to maintain an economy, which is simply a structure who’s goal is to use resources optimally but this time to the benefit of mankind.

The main elements of a ‘roboeconomic’ society is that all energy is from renewable sources. This has the effect of distributing productive capacity more widely and reducing the need to produce or source products from places along an important fossil fuel supply chain or in a way so that transactions make banks rich. Do you think we produce in China because it’s cheaper? Nope. Production in China is not cheaper but the coal there is dumped, and the bunker fuel for the container ships is subsidized and banks get damn rich from all the financial traffic.

There is a lot of ‘economic activity’ related to all the steps needed to make something in China for consumption on the US market. What that means is that the benefits of fossil fuels are distributed all along that production and logistic chain and because banks fight so hard against any alternative to fossil fuels, we need to participate in this process in order to live a decent life.

In the Roboeconomy this global network, the reason for a global bankingsystem, will shrink and all but disappear. Instead production will move closer to consumers and closer to renewable energy sources. This will also happen because there is no reason to market widely anymore. If you have a subsidized dirt cheap global logistic system global brands make sense. If you decide to abandon that you have no reason. There is no profit in selling shoes from Africa in Norway, local shoes will be cheaper!

The first key property of the Roboeconomy, to only use renewable energy will on its own bring all the changes we need, by depowering the banking system. Of course the banks will try to own -All- renewable energy sources. They will also try to slow down the growth of RE in now poor sunny countries as well as the shift to electic production systems and logistics. This is also done by making you a follower. This is a fundamental marketing oriented manipulation to the benefit of the economy. If you still like Coca Cola you need to reflect on that, its a sign you are indoctrinated. Instead of worshipping brands your role is to help with the transition.

The second key property is that technology is used to create wealth and to restore the ecology. The latter will be easy once cheap versatile robots drop in prices. We have the Ford and Boston Dynamic robots and Tesla Roadbots so soon we will have autonomous access to every part of the globe. Innovation in motors stalled for nearly 60 years because it was about selling fossil fuels. Now innovation can free itself, mostly with private money, to truely improve the fate of humans. Robots, AI, new types of logistics. Thin film solar panels (a blocked technology that needs to be freed by an Elon type entrepeneur). As it gets hotter on Earth we will find our means to produce an answer will become less and less encumbered by fossil and banking opposition.

The Roboeconmoy is what this blog is about, and renewable technology and other ideas and concepts. I hope you share our ideas. If so let us know on Twitter at @climatebabes



 

Robotics

Boston dynamics has been shown to know how to crack the code of fast movements of arbitrary ‘systems’ of actuators. It’s probably thanks to the speed of CPUs and enormous amounts of memory that its robots can trigger the right control based on their position vs gravity, their own mass, elastic effects and actuator lag and power curves. Complex, but if you make lookup tables of everything not impossible. The algorithm that navigates all these control signals will probably be a standard part of any real AI..

The latest in robot dancing

It is fascinating how one lab can achieve so much and many others are left in the dust. The Ford (we thought Amazon) digit robot walks but is not as agile. It has the advantage of being a product made for a real purpose. What happens if these become more lightweight, if the controls are minimized and internalized and turn out to be doable with generic hardware. The challenge with AI is often training the system, that process requires a lot of cycles, energy and time. But once the resulting weight matrix has been developed it can be really lightweight and fast.

Now there’s a real attempt to make these things not look to much like humans, because our innate reflex is to project emotions and intentions on whatever moves around us. Japanese are the most sensitive culture in this respect because in Japan machines can have souls and can be considered to be alive. This is not a weird position, we are after all also biochemical mechanisms. The rub is that we have different needs from machines.

The big challenge of the next 20 years is to remain on top of robots and AI. To keep them from being servants of egos, from destroying our planet because somehow someone made them strive for self preservation without also makeing them want to see us around. If we manage we can have a renewable powered society where robots can do nearly anything, robots, road bots (Tesla’s with autopilot with a robot mounted on it for example). Once these devices can roam freely outside, running on solar/electric energy that does not run out, our options to survive climate change increase. Our job is to not start loving them, not try to give them a soul that wants to survive, because that’s how we’d lose our freedom to them!



 

A Natural Health based performance measure

I has been the perception of many for decades that trying to save something will help save it. It never does. People don’t like to be hero’s and what needs to be save is weak, so why put energy into it. The slogan works with people that have empathy for the weak, but most leaders don’t or they would not be leaders.

Shaming goes a lot further towards motivating change, but it is a negative motivator. It requires someone to take the role of victim, one that acuses the pollutor, and a victim is weak so does not get empathy. The whole process of accusation is something most people dislike. It is ( to be sexist ) very feminine. Justice in general is feminine and for the weak. The world is run by people who are strong and do not call on justice but simply do what they can get away with even if it is a crime.

What does work imho is a grading system or classification of leaders as to their ability and achievments regarding conservation and restauration of nature. Just like we as a civilisation are not yeat on the Kardashev scale, but can aspire to, all countries and municipalities should be put on a ‘health scale’, where every aspect of its nature is rated compared to the possible optimum. A bit like a golf course where every hole has a handicap.

There is such a rating in terms of carbon offsets or carbon emissions, but that has not prevented Holland from developing a nature cripling Nitrogen emission problem. CO2 and NOx are winning in Holland because there is more money in it, and because it can’t be brought up as a topic of pride or shame in a decent conversation.

Drought is an issue in Holland. Rain shortages are about 200 days worth and growing. This could mean a downgrade of the country as a whole on the Standards and Poor ‘health’ rating of our country. Apparently we can’t achieve better performance under our stupid Mark Rutte government. This and the Nitrogen means that people have red eyes, beathing problems, are more succeptible to Corona virus, and nature can’t really cope with the changes.

If you view Holland as a big open floor restaurant right now the kitchen waste is dumped in the middle of the hall and the cooking fumes are blown into the faces of the guests. Apparently the suppliers are running it, not somebody who cares for the customers. Of course there are many ‘development’ ratings and ‘eco’ ratings, but those don’t communicate you are better off in the dry heart of Spain than in beautifull Limburg.

We are talking here of a measure of natural healthyness of a country or region or city. Simply put if there where no civilisation at all, how healthy would a place be. This includes its support of mental health, so no cruelty or absence of trees, green medows etc. (of course when measured against the potential of the land). Then when you have a drink with people from other countries you can boast about it or be shamed, and then maybe you will vote for leaders that see actual strength (not fossil credit cashflow) as something important.