Information icon.svg Voting is completed for the RationalWiki 2021 Moderator Election and the results are now posted.
Congratulations to the winners!

Talk:The Venus Project

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon science.svg

This New Age related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Copperbrain.png

Archives for this talk page: <1>, (new)



Adding more content[edit]

Well let's add some content so the contents table will look like:

  1. About The Venus Project
    1. The Venus Project is not
      1. a communism
      2. a political organization
      3. an utopia
    2. The Venus Project is
    3. Main ideas
    4. The plan
  2. Changes
    1. Problems solved
      1. by replacing monetary system with RBE
      2. by automation and cybernetics
      3. by circular cities
      4. by changing culture
    2. Jobs removed
      1. by replacing monetary system with RBE
      2. by automation and cybernetics
      3. by circular cities
      4. by changing culture
    3. Other
  3. Criticism
    1. (done)
    2. (done)
    3. (done) — Unsigned, by: Owner of my account / talk / contribs

Problems[edit]

These include - how do you measure the value of resources - and how do you barter 'your services, the milk of your two cows and everything else' for a house; or pay for resources exploration etc?

Technology etc changes - 'There is a world market for only three computers'

etc, etc

And why 'The Venus Project'? Anna Livia (talk) 12:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Point 1: There is no barter. You don’t have to milk cows but if you do you can do whatever you want with the milk. Housing is provided for. Resources are provided for.
Point 2: I don't understand the second point.
Point 3: Are you asking why it’s called “The Venus Project”? I think that the history on that is that Jacque and Roxanne previously called the project Sociocyberneering which more accurately reflects what they were doing but a lot of people were confused by the name. They eventually changed it to The Venus Project because they were living in Venus, Florida.
Hansen128 (talk) 04:32, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Fate of the old world[edit]

Should we mention that they want to drive billions of people homeless and demolish all old cities? I don't really know how this is supposed to be resource efficient. https://www.thevenusproject.com/faq/what-would-be-done-with-the-old-cities/ Filtered Walrus (talk) 10:24, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

It is correct that TVP proposes leveling old cities but that is only done after new cities have been built.
Hansen128 (talk) 04:31, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

"In Reality"[edit]

I have to say, I'm not a fan of replacing an entire section meant as criticism to one that reads like it's come straight from a pamphlet from the Project, filled with buzzwords and vague steps, and lacking a single citation. If this were posted by a completely new account, I'd have reverted the change in an instant.

Can I get a justification for the removal of the "In Reality" section, please? ℕoir LeSable (talk) 01:38, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Ah, well, I guess my comment is OBE now. Please disregard. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 02:16, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Just now seeing this. My apologies. I’m still learning how to use this site. I ran across this talk page back in July but the entire discussion was many years old. I added some comments but got the impression that nobody was reading it or following up on comments. You have proven me wrong so I will keep a closer eye on this page from now on.
I made the recent changes to the article. The “In reality” section was so poorly done I didn’t see a way to fix it without scrapping it entirely. Same with the “No money” section. The new section “How decisions are made” was intended to give an overview of TVP’s decision making process as well as dispelling the misunderstandings in the “In reality” section, and to do it in just a few paragraphs. It was hard trimming the content down that far to fit it in just a few paragraphs—that’s probably why it reads like a pamphlet. And yes I did get some of the information from TVP resources. I’m happy to provide references if that's helpful. I haven't learned wiki citation style yet so I apologize for that. Hansen128 (talk) 01:55, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Comment[edit]

Sorry for my forum style entry, not sure if this is the right way. I've been part of rationality communities for a decade and I am embarrassed with the level of inaccuracy in this article, to the point that I created an account to see If I can help. What is the best way to suggest changes? Modalende (talk) 01:53, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

If they're minor changes, or don't significantly change the tone of the section you're editing, go ahead and put them in. If they're major changes, putting cited sources, IS/WAS markups, and/or proposed new language here in the talk page is a good start. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 02:16, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
So here’s the problem. The authors don’t understand The Venus Project. It’s like the article is titled “Calculus” but the article body is about “Trigonometry”. If you’re not willing to make massive changes, the article will remain heavily inaccurate. The criticisms don’t even apply to TVP. There are lots of fallacies. So, unfortunately, it's difficult to correct any of this without larger re-writes.
I’m willing and able to help with this effort too, in any way that I can. I wrote an essay, posted to the essay section, and I’ll write another one if that’s helpful. Personally I think it would be great if a handful of people (like 2-4) could work together on this. I’d say my strength is TVP knowledge and I’m not too shabby at writing either. Although I’m not that familiar with wiki formatting or the goals of this site—at least not in terms of TVP. I’ve learned a lot from reading this site in the past (and am excited to be here!) but I’m feeling quite a bit like a duck out of water. Hansen128 (talk) 01:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Problems with the article[edit]

These are what I see as the problems with the article as it is currently written.

  • TVP is not Soviet economics or communism. Those systems have money, banks, prisons, and police. TVP doesn't have any of those things.
  • TVP is not a cult. It is not a religious group. It advocates for sustainable living on the planet. Living sustainably is not a negative or unusual venture. There are no systems of control or manipulation. Members are welcome to join and leave as they choose.
  • Software developers do not dictate what people want. City inhabitants decide what they want. Software developers, engineers, and other tradespeople work out how to provide the things that people want. They do that by analyzing resource constraints, production limitations, recycling protocols, energy requirements, and so on. They use these factors to arrive at the best way to provide the things people want. This could be done with computers, which can process trillions of bits per second, to weigh all of these competing factors to make the best decision. This isn't all that different to how supermarkets make supply decisions today. It's just expanded out to the entire city. Supply and demand is not ignored, it is integral.
  • I don't recall Jacque ever saying that there would be absolutely no scarcity in TVP. It might depend on the context. Of course scarcity exists on a sliding scale. Gold and quartz are both technically scarce because they exist in limited quantities on Earth but of course gold is a lot more scarce than quartz. In our current system there are people struggling to obtain food, while store shelves are stocked full. It's technically possible to provide enough food for everyone but the profit system makes it very difficult to get the job done. TVP proposes a system that's focused on providing for human needs first. The money system is no longer a limitation because with sufficient abundance, it is no longer needed.
  • TVP doesn’t promote a money-less society because Jacque dislikes money, they propose it because money is detrimental to the goals of the project. A money society brings along with it debt, poverty, crime, war, and scarcity. TVP wants to eliminate those things.
  • I think that the author at one point is referring to Universal Basic Income. I would say that TVP doesn’t specifically advocate for UBI but they’re aware that it might be useful during a period of transition (from our current culture to an RBE). That being said, UBI is avoided as an end goal because it brings along with it the problems of a money-based system.
  • Along with TVP, the Zeitgeist Movement is also not a cult, for the same reasons listed above.

Hansen128 (talk) 18:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)