Did you retards figure out a way to achieve allocative efficiency without a free market yet?

enjoy your ban, faggot

Attached: Read A Book.webm (490x360, 4.48M)

"Boil down 200 pages of economic cybernetics for me"
Okay: computers are more efficient than conglomerated human interactions in general, qpply this to economics.

okay, different user here, new to Zig Forums call me a newfag, idgaf let me explain this in a simple enough way that your retarded brains will understand it but in a complex enough way to convince you.

you already do this stuff anyway, this thread is retarded because computer algorithms already calculate what we spend on what, we give them a percentage of the publicly available money that we have (aka taxes) and then the computer calculates the amount of money that goes into what.

The only useful thing that could be done to calculate the amount of money that goes into stuff automatically is to have every single public worker (in a communist system this would apply to everyone) keep track of the items they're using, and limit this amount to a reasonable number so they can't cheat, then a computer would have a huge fucking database that would have every single item's price registered, prices of items would be calculated based on what the needed materials to make it are and the amount of man-hours required to make it are, workers would get paid based in the importance of the work they perform, which would be publicly voted for or decided by an expert committee trusted by everyone (could be voted for as well) and then we could set a maximum wage and a minimum wage, say, for example, $40/hour max and $8/hour (could be voted for as well) and, then based on the job ranking, we'd calculate the wage of individuals within the maximum and the minimum we've established. there, not that hard, is it?

Either way, even though this would work I'm not too sure about how well it'd perform, I don't advocate for this kind of economic system, just explaining how it could work for your tiny retarded minds.

oh and btw, you don't fucking need an AI for this shit, it's dumb enough that a dumb ass server network could get the job done…

Thats why you need to read Cockshott, youre asking for explenations to whatever doubts you may have about AI use in determining the technology without reading Cockshott, the very proponent of such. So believe me, the best thing you can do for yourself is to NOT read boiled down versions of Cockshott´s analysis and read him for yourself, his works are in the fuckin book thread stickied to the front of this board, you fucking moron. Honestly your lazyness is apparent and your ignorance about the subject is palpable, go read directly from the man himself than from someone who cant explain it better than the guy who complied that shit together, you know, an actual expert on these matters.
Somehow your high-and-mighty stance wont fool anyone here, though, and see right through your limp dick excuse for an explenation that you just typed.

Do us all a favour and read Cockshott, it will save us the need to see your bile and it will save you time, as youll entertain your brain with the machinations of someone who truly, honestly, understands more about this sort of shit than anyone in this board. Now fuck off pseud

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (593x394, 74.01K)

here you go mister totally different user

now go fucking read

it's time to end this fucking meme once and for all. A "free market" has never existed, and will never exist. Markets literally CAN NOT function without state regulation. Or if it does, it quickly spirals into a corporatist economy where even the fucking air you breath is owned by coca cola. Which isn't ideal for anybody, really.
Also if you wanna know more about post-market economies just read fucking Cockshott. Even your peanut sized lolbert brain could comprehend that.

is it just me or do you not have a fucking brain? do you have to stick to Cockshott's words? is that shit your new bible or what? yes, he might have a working theory but tell me a single reason why what I just proposed would not work, I will have a read either way, but allow me to give you some advice, even if you do agree with EVERYTHING someone says, always try to make your own modifications to their work, add what you truly think would be better, nothing is perfect, and I doubt Cockshott's work is any different, I'm sure you can find flaws in it and you can figure out a better way to do things, improve things instead of forcing them down everyone's throats, because nobody is going to swallow unless you can explain things simply enough that everyone, even the most retarded person will understand it, if you come up with a working economic theory that is easy enough for everyone to understand and that works well enough that it'd solve everyone's problems, you will probably have massive support and change things even if just a little, BUT ONLY IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN IT and if you stop acting like you're superior to everyone. And if that's not what you want, then you can just stay at your mom's basement with your cum-covered fedora and keyboard reading Cockshott and thinking it's perfection for the rest of your life.

yes
just ask what people want lmoa you fucking dunce i mean how could you not even realize that its incredibly simple haha "h-how can we know what people want???" i dunno maaaybeee ask them or something hahaha like wtf

Keep assuming shit that isnt there and keep your projections astral rartdo, i tell you to read cockshott because hell do a better job answering your questions than me you fuckin troglodyte. Dipshits like you stumble on here on the regular, and always fail to see the stickies for their own benefit, so it gets tiring when the gorillionth haughty pseud like you gets triggered over stuff he never reads about, like using AI to determine the production and consumption of a society, for example.

yeap, you're totally not assuming shit that isn't there, right?

I never even got triggered about you saying an AI is a good solution, in fact I said it'd probably be a good idea, I proposed another solution without using AI and said I wouldn't advocate for neither of them, even if I wouldn't refuse to using them, because I'd rather have humans control their own future, but I never got triggered about you saying an AI controlled economy could turn out to being a viable and possibly quite good thing, in fact I do think that'd be a worth trying possibility.. just not as of right now because I don't think we've got the technology yet…

...

I got triggered about you treating it like it's a holy book or some shit…

Except Paul never advocated about an AI doing the economic calculations so I have no clue what you are rambling on about. Nor did his system prevent humans not controlling their own future.

Attached: cockshott_posadism.jpg (1024x711, 422.54K)

He wanted to use a instrument such a democracy in the Socratic definition of the word to determine the needs and wants of the people. This gets put into a centralized computer network in which we use simple linear algebra to determine how and in what way we produce the needs of the people. It's been a solution ever since the late eighties.

Enough data is already collected through google, facebook, amazon etc. Capitalism solved the calculation problem for us.