[Madness]

This was necessitated.

No holds-barred, locked-cage, ladders and chairs; how should we be voting with our research dollars as a human species, unconstrained by the shallow sociocultural politics of the world?

[Wilshire]

Remember that in the US, the Supreme Court ruled that money IS speech, and therefore it can quite literally talk for itself

btw, can you clarify "research dollars"?

[Madness]

Money/time we put into making actual research happen?

If we had a sort of open-science, global academic network, unaffiliated with any specific institutions, that all shared a pool of money donated by humans, where should we, scientist/non-scientist, direct our communal exploration?

For instance, NASA and the Manhattan Project were both raised as examples of unprecedented interdisciplinary research in the space monies thread - obviously, transparency isn't an issue that has to be debated in the context above.

[Wilshire]

Thats an interesting premiss. I'll think on it some and get back to you, but I guess the task will be to see what things would be beneficial, and what things to prioritize, if any.

[Wilshire]

Long term, far reaching, complex problems that deserve funding from everyone with the means to support it.

Energy:
The world if facing an energy crisis. There is a massive need for cleaner, more efficient, and better distributed electrical generation. From everything I've seen, humanities best bet is Fusion. Look it up. H-H fusion produces gigawatts of energy with the amount of hydrogen contained in bathtub worth of water, and produces only Helium as waste. There is no risk for catastrophic failure (i.e nuclear explosion/meltdown like Chernobyl , so the process is inherently safer than Fission. If you're curious, look ITER, its a Fusion test facility being developed by the EU in France. This if far beyond the silly "sun" fusion thing they did in spider man.

Advantages: self sustaining, almost 0 pollution, massive output.
Disadvantages: not a quick fix. Will take decades to produce a facility capable of producing this kind of energy on a commercial scale.

Once scaled up properly, there will be almost no cost to produce clean energy for the world. Problem: What happens to the world economy when energy is free?

Crude oil:
  Gas for cars: An issue a lot of people know something about, but few people know a lot about it. Maybe I'll come back to it. All I'll say right now that an alternative from crude derived fuel needs to be found. That will take decades at best, and the longer we wait, the harder it will be to transition.

  Plastic: Crude makes everything, and thats an issue. Way beyond gas powered vehicles, Nearly everything made of plastic comes from crude oil. This sucks, because regardless of how much you believe there is, it will eventually run out and/or it will/is becoming exponentially more expensive to get. Even if we figure out how to replace fuel, there are almost no alternatives to non-crude derived plastics. Lactic Acid can actually produce some decent plastic, but its a yeast based biotechnology and would be hard to scale up.
Like with fuel, we know crude will run out eventually. Not for a while yet, but again we need to start now because the world runs on crude, and it will take a very long time to change that.


Space:
The long term survival of humanity requires space exploration. The earth will eventually become inhospitable and run out of resources. To steal Neil deGrasse Tyson's idea: lets build afleet of launch vehicles that can take us anywhere in the solar system. One that can get us to the moon, to venus, to mars. Figure out how to build orbital platforms on the moon, mining platforms on astroids, space stations around mars.
Why space? Eh, theres another thread for that .

Anyway thats a few quick thoughts.

[Royce]

Legalizing pot maybe? It sure has many different uses. First of, if you start taxing it, the black market will be weaker, and lots of "new" tax dollars can be spent on other things. It can be used in textiles, paper, paints, clothing, different foods, cosmetics, insulation, animal feed, medicine, and many many other things. I even heard that it can be used as gas, but I do not want to claim that

I am not saying that this will save the world or anything, but it is well worth to legalize it, so we can research its potential without prejudice.
The potential of the plant is huge, and it is a shame that we do not take advantage of it.

[Francis Buck]

Immortality.

[Callan S.]

On research into how we don't lack the solution to a bunch of current problems, instead it's just that various minute demographics simply choose to deny the already present solutions to various other peoples. And how those other peoples treat it as if it's a condition of nature (ie, unchangeable) rather than the choice of other men.

Or I guess we could chase after new, more sexy problems...for some reason...

[Wilshire]

On research into how we don't lack the solution to a bunch of current problems, instead it's just that various minute demographics simply choose to deny the already present solutions to various other peoples. And how those other peoples treat it as if it's a condition of nature (ie, unchangeable) rather than the choice of other men.

... not a big mystery. Money. Who is going to spend money to save people without it?

Or I guess we could chase after new, more sexy problems...for some reason...

Why should we stop forward progress? Like you said, we already have the solutions to plenty of issues, sitting back and patting ourselves on the back isn't going to get us anywhere.
Also, no one is forcing you to spend your imaginary research money here. Feel free to hold onto it.

[Madness]

Just going to bounce around in bliss.

Energy:
The world if facing an energy crisis. There is a massive need for cleaner, more efficient, and better distributed electrical generation. From everything I've seen, humanities best bet is Fusion. Look it up. H-H fusion produces gigawatts of energy with the amount of hydrogen contained in bathtub worth of water, and produces only Helium as waste. There is no risk for catastrophic failure (i.e nuclear explosion/meltdown like Chernobyl , so the process is inherently safer than Fission. If you're curious, look ITER, its a Fusion test facility being developed by the EU in France. This if far beyond the silly "sun" fusion thing they did in spider man.

I agree - however, the manifestation of 'New Energy' is going to spawn another Industrial Revolution-type ripple when it occurs. Also, is this a strictly necessary avenue of research if Germany, as a country, might remove themselves from the grid as early as 2025?

Disadvantages: not a quick fix. Will take decades to produce a facility capable of producing this kind of energy on a commercial scale.

Once scaled up properly, there will be almost no cost to produce clean energy for the world. Problem: What happens to the world economy when energy is free?

Remember in our thought experience, we're not restricted by the usual bureaucratic and academic infighting - so decades could be brought under ten years if the research was attacked obsessively from as many possible angles.

Problem Response: An free-energy world is also a post-economic world, I think. Otherwise, unlimited energy won't be free.

Crude oil:
  Gas for cars: An issue a lot of people know something about, but few people know a lot about it. Maybe I'll come back to it. All I'll say right now that an alternative from crude derived fuel needs to be found. That will take decades at best, and the longer we wait, the harder it will be to transition.

Your second point for crude, plastic, is by far the most poignant.

Let's adjust the first to:

Mobility Vehicles: What other modes of transportation are available to serve the same purpose as cars (whether that means alternative fuels, Musk's Hyperloop, or anything in between)?

  Plastic: Crude makes everything, and thats an issue. Way beyond gas powered vehicles, Nearly everything made of plastic comes from crude oil. This sucks, because regardless of how much you believe there is, it will eventually run out and/or it will/is becoming exponentially more expensive to get. Even if we figure out how to replace fuel, there are almost no alternatives to non-crude derived plastics. Lactic Acid can actually produce some decent plastic, but its a yeast based biotechnology and would be hard to scale up.
Like with fuel, we know crude will run out eventually. Not for a while yet, but again we need to start now because the world runs on crude, and it will take a very long time to change that.

As I wrote, the much more critical issue when considering our use of crude fuels. Not a lot of people realize this; all our tacky, crap plastic filling landfills are the human transmutation of the majestic, awesome fossilized bones of that which has came before (especially dinosaurs ).

What am I going to do without cheap crap?

This feeds into the idea of planned obsolescence, which I think we should ignore for the purposes of this conversation. Let's assume that alternatives can be made-to-last and environmentally resistant.

Space:
The long term survival of humanity requires space exploration. The earth will eventually become inhospitable and run out of resources. To steal Neil deGrasse Tyson's idea: lets build afleet of launch vehicles that can take us anywhere in the solar system. One that can get us to the moon, to venus, to mars. Figure out how to build orbital platforms on the moon, mining platforms on astroids, space stations around mars.
Why space? Eh, theres another thread for that .

Anyway thats a few quick thoughts.

No, this topic definitely deserves to be included here as well to consider generally.

Legalizing pot maybe? It sure has many different uses. First of, if you start taxing it, the black market will be weaker, and lots of "new" tax dollars can be spent on other things. It can be used in textiles, paper, paints, clothing, different foods, cosmetics, insulation, animal feed, medicine, and many many other things. I even heard that it can be used as gas, but I do not want to claim that

I am not saying that this will save the world or anything, but it is well worth to legalize it, so we can research its potential without prejudice.
The potential of the plant is huge, and it is a shame that we do not take advantage of it.

Lol - Jack Herer's The Emperor Wears No Clothes?

You're bring that one historically full circle, Royce. +1 the bold. Also, I've read (and studied) elsewhere corroboration for the idea that THC is only one of as many as 4000 possible compounds with medicinal properties in hemp plants (research has been slow before and since the mid-70s).

Immortality.

Check out Aubrey de Grey, Google's Calico, or, obviously, Kurzweil (who was hired to build Google's attempt at an electronic brain, among more mundane projects).

On research into how we don't lack the solution to a bunch of current problems, instead it's just that various minute demographics simply choose to deny the already present solutions to various other peoples. And how those other peoples treat it as if it's a condition of nature (ie, unchangeable) rather than the choice of other men.

More sociological research then ? I'm sure in our hypothetical world, science is maximally efficient, so we can easily gather the relevant census data and, of course, have organized access to all available research data (which seems the largest obstacles to finding evidence one way or the other).

On research into how we don't lack the solution to a bunch of current problems, instead it's just that various minute demographics simply choose to deny the already present solutions to various other peoples. And how those other peoples treat it as if it's a condition of nature (ie, unchangeable) rather than the choice of other men.

... not a big mystery. Money. Who is going to spend money to save people without it?

Well - everyone in this thread?

Also, no one is forcing you to spend your imaginary research money here. Feel free to hold onto it.

Lol. We're all infinitely wealthy for the purposes of this thread. Inaction is not an option .

[Callan S.]

On research into how we don't lack the solution to a bunch of current problems, instead it's just that various minute demographics simply choose to deny the already present solutions to various other peoples. And how those other peoples treat it as if it's a condition of nature (ie, unchangeable) rather than the choice of other men.

... not a big mystery. Money. Who is going to spend money to save people without it?

Money isn't a part of physics. That it is, however, is how the minute demographic presents the world to us.

Curious how refering to money is a way of crying poverty in terms of taking actions/choices.

Or I guess we could chase after new, more sexy problems...for some reason...

Why should we stop forward progress? Like you said, we already have the solutions to plenty of issues, sitting back and patting ourselves on the back isn't going to get us anywhere.

Imaginary research money into how people can end up treating ONE method of progress (if I dare risk legitimizing it by also calling it that) as if that is the ONLY forward progress there ever is and ever was possible.

[Royce]

Lol - Jack Herer's The Emperor Wears No Clothes?

I am guilty of flicking through that one .

I know that this is maybe a bit off topic, but when it comes to research in the field of resources, it is pure ignorance(or politics?) to ignore its potential.

That you can use some plants as a drug, has ruined the credibility and willingness to even look at what this plant is capable of providing.

You just want to get high all the time, is always the counter argument that people throw at me. Well, I did get high all the time in the past, but I do not do that anymore, but I still want to legalize it because of its other productive uses, I say. It makes no sense that the plant is illegal if what you say is true, they say. What if people who make the decisions are ignorant, corrupt maybe?, I say. FUCK YOU, they say.

[Wielokropek]

Neuroscience! I'm surprised no one's brought it up yet.

[Madness]

I know that this is maybe a bit off topic, but when it comes to research in the field of resources, it is pure ignorance(or politics?) to ignore its potential.

Politics.

Something being a "legal pharmaceutical" doesn't stop a whole lot normal people from abusing it. It just stops research being done on the "illegal" ones.

Neuroscience! I'm surprised no one's brought it up yet.

Your posts seem to have the cut of someone versed in and passionate for the subject matter.

I for one would love to see more research done towards "progressive" neuroscience, specially adapting neuroscientific principles towards benefiting the average person with neuropractices that don't involve mediation by invasive chemicals or surgery to facilitate "strengthening" cognition.

So meditation, ambidexterity, speaking multiple languages, kinetic (martial - like literally the ability to control your body) finesse through martial arts, dance, or gymnastics, changing perception of communication through braille, sign language or reading lips, playing a musical instrument... among classics like regular ol' diet and exercise.

All of these research themes are in their infancy and still require much of the foundational grunt research to be done in order to build towards being research paradigms necessary to affect social change by dissemination.

However, I think this whole idea of personally actionable cognitive augmentation is going to be glossed over by the powerhouse research in cognitive neuropsychology (and the biology and chemistry heavy paradigms) (because people are fucking lazy and vote with their dollars towards nootropic or surgical strategies and technologies to affect ma' change now!).

[Callan S.]

Lol - Jack Herer's The Emperor Wears No Clothes?

I am guilty of flicking through that one .

I know that this is maybe a bit off topic, but when it comes to research in the field of resources, it is pure ignorance(or politics?) to ignore its potential.

That you can use some plants as a drug, has ruined the credibility and willingness to even look at what this plant is capable of providing.

You just want to get high all the time, is always the counter argument that people throw at me. Well, I did get high all the time in the past, but I do not do that anymore, but I still want to legalize it because of its other productive uses, I say. It makes no sense that the plant is illegal if what you say is true, they say. What if people who make the decisions are ignorant, corrupt maybe?, I say. FUCK YOU, they say.

What if it's just not that good, compared to other sources of production? Even if it's the patrolling/costs of patrolling of any crops that would make it less efficient than other sources of production?