Is it right to kill one person to save the lives of many? page 2

334 posts

Flag Post

I have to totally agree that a political backdrop would happen if you remove World War 2. I guess one of the most impacts that came out of World War 2 would be the death of colonialism. The Japanese in the second world war exposed the weaknesses of the colonial masters and that sparked off a cry for independence from all the colonies. A lot of our modern culture and world is an influence from World War 2 and situations that were created by the war. Take away Hitler there would still be other problems faced at that point of time.
Communism was on the rise and the only reason why Hitler came to power was due to the rise in Communism. President Hindenburg was an anti-communist and saw that Hitler was a great candidate to counter the Communist.
The Great Depression another factor that led to Hitler’s rise. The Nazi party the years before had suffered terribly, thanks to Stressmann who had led Germany to a new Golden Age. The Nazi Party was down to about 7% of all votes. However, the Great Depression had put the Nazi Party back into the same position of power and received 38% of all votes in the next election.
You say that Hitler had been evil. Go ahead, shoot him. These would still continue to happen. Just another man who would take his place. It is never about the person, it is about the events that lead to the person. War would still happen.

Speaking about bombs, how about Nobel? The guy who invented dynamite that ultimately led to the creation of bombs and the usage of explosives in war. Why should we not shoot him, he killed millions due to his invention. What makes him a lesser villain than Hitler?

The only question I have though is is it limited to time travel. Because what about self-sacrificial? Like when you hold a position by yourself to give people time to retreat and you get overrun are you not saving people’s lives at the expense of your own?

 
Flag Post

Crossbower, I’m not at all ignoring the pathetic state of “human affairs” (politics?) and how we luv to make war. It would appear that it is imbued in our survival-of-the-fittest mode. Up until modern day and our fast-shrinking world, mankind was well separated by a lot of factors…distance (including huge oceans), languages, body features, material status, etc. This kind of world-stage easily lent itself for one faction of humans to see itself as superior as “entitled” to dominate any other group.

By dominate, I mean take their resources; enslave & exterminate the ppl; and any other manner the superior felt necessary for its “survival”. This became increasingly more difficult to do as world trade of goods began to be a lot more complicated than the colonial era. The human conscience began to find such actions to be vile … slavery.

However, America’s robber barons had no problem raping the resources from South American and any other place that had something they could make a buck. In a sense, we are still doing this today. Only, it is in the form of taking advantage of “cheap labor” (sweat shops). American business has “outsourced” its need for labor to nations where labor is much cheaper than that IN America where unionization of the working class shifted some of the profits into the hands of the worker.

All of that was done w/o the need for wars. Yes, there were some skirmishes, but management eventually conceded … only to live to fight the battle another day in a different way. Hell, the newspaper magnets (Hearst & Pulitzer) even managed to fuck over the lowly, VERY lowly paperboys for a fucking few pennies … such is the mindset of the very wealth. Hearst castle needed those few cents per bundle of newspapers.

All of this in the name of capitalism. However, the eyes of the American public are today being opened to the downside of capitalism. They are beginning to see how it can create a huge wealth/income gap between a very few and a whole lot of very lower economic classes. Hopefully, this next election here will also bloodlessly work towards putting an end to this “survival-of-the-shitist” mentality. Well, it will be a very long time until it is stopped—corporations are hard to kill. We now consider them to be ppl and we sure don’t wanna kill no “ppl” … do we?

But, Crossbower, all of that said, the real point I’m making about how you think WWII was inevitable (because another asshole like Hitler would have played the inevitable essential role) doesn’t take into consideration that there is always a possibility that it could have been averted by diplomacy. Maybe wasn’t very likely; BUT, given the opportunity to take out one of the players, I sure as fuck would have assassinated as many of those this magical time travel would have allowed.

Give Peace a Chance because We Are the World and we are all neighbors of a precious gift from “the Gods” of living—Earth. Yeah, all of that shit is pretty sappy; real pinko, fag, liberal puke … nothing near as glorious as war and all of the wonders it has wrought.

Fuck, I think I’m gonna do out and kill me a few ppl so the world will be a better place. I have a few in mind. And, I know best because I AM the best damn human around—because I intend to survive and do it in Hearst-style.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

long, completely off-topic rant about the evils of capitalism and how the American people need to ‘wake up’ to the wealth inequality gap

Aside from it being your favorite topic to rant about, Karma, how exactly did that add to the thread?


Originally posted by crossbower97:

Speaking about bombs, how about Nobel? The guy who invented dynamite that ultimately led to the creation of bombs and the usage of explosives in war. Why should we not shoot him, he killed millions due to his invention. What makes him a lesser villain than Hitler?

When you put it that way, absolutely nothing. His inventions end up killing more people than Hitler did (Hitler himself used derivatives of Nobel’s inventions to kill many). You could even argue that the development of nuclear weapons owes much to his work, as the multiple shaped charges that trigger the initial compression wave are very much in his field.

You could also go right back in time, and kill anyone who invented the concept of using tools to hunt, since it is clear that our use of tools in violent pursuits resulted in untold billions being killed. Imagine how many lives could be saved if we prevented mankind from ever using tools.


Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

IMO a better question might be, if you had the power to force a country’s will, mind control, would you use it?

Personally? Absolutely not. Enslaving other minds to my own as drones is absolutely against my philosophy in every regard. The wide variety of thought patterns between individuals and wide disparity of goals is a strength (assuming you can prune out the more extreme viewpoints). A single unitary mind loses that strength, and in exchange for a singularity of purpose, you are left with only a single set of views on how to tackle any given problem, losing the benefit of dissenting viewpoints.

Oh, wait. There’s Edison. He was in it totally for the money, but hey, that’s one.

There are innumerable inventors who try to make changes. There was one invention about five years back that stuck in my mind: translator glasses. A person speaks in front of the wearer, microphone in the glasses picks up what’s being said and runs it through google translate, displaying the translated words visually on the screen of the glasses. It fell by the wayside because the inventor was unable to secure funding to finalise the prototype and take it to market. It was a new paradigm, and at the time the existing methods of translation were ‘good enough’ with no urgenct need to try a new method of cross-culture understanding, so money to develop it further was going to be difficult to come by.

You are right though in that sometimes game-changing discoveries are made and successfully pushed through without conflict being present, but as you’ve noted yourself they are rare, and far between. Even then they’re relying on a foundation level of tech that is itself, usually adversity-derived.

The modern version of Thomas Eddison would probably be Ray Kurzweil. Same frankly brilliant mind, same sort of business sense with those inventions, and string of companies to his name. However, the inventions of the two men are radically different, to a large part because the available technology to use as a foundation is so different. I think it’s very safe to say that without the war-driven developments that came out of Bletchley Park, not a one of Ray’s inventions would have been possible, as they are, to a one, microprocessor based.

Think how little Eddison could have achieved if battery tech for example, was nonexistant in his lifetime.

 
Flag Post

What the fuck, vika?
If you are gonna QUOTE me, at least do it right.
Don’t twist/summarize my words to suit your bias.

If you aren’t able to see how what I said IS ON TOPIC & adds to the thread, then that simply speaks to how your mind is limited to seeing your biases. What is it that YOU say about me upon encountering a challenge?

What now? Because I don’t see your MEDICAL MARVELS as being all that necessary to humanity as you do … esp if it means jumping into war w/o doing all that is possible (killing Hitler as a child) to not do so. If you want to see such advancements better funded, then a much better attitude from the wealthy towards the little guy and his diseases/health needs might actually be a better direction to go. But, I guess ya just aren’t able to see that…eh?

And, it was the Chinese that “invented” Gunpowder … if you want to go to the source for propulsion of a killing object.

Nobel intended his invention to be used for construction.
Einstein’s formula made the nuclear bomb possible.

My point in my “rant” was to show just how evil Man can be and to what ends he will use most anything intended for peace to become a vile tool.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

What the fuck, vika?
If you are gonna QUOTE me, at least do it right.

Why bother, when it’s obvious the whole thing’s just your usual pet rant topic? We’ve all got one. I’m aware I bring my own into things too much and am trying to work on that. But I also try to only bring it in when it’s germaine to the topic. You spent five paragraphs ranting about the American capitalistic model and how the people need to wake up to where the money is flowing. How is that at all relevant to the topic of the thread?

If you aren’t able to see how what I said IS ON TOPIC & adds to the thread, then that simply speaks to how your mind is limited to seeing your biases.

Fair enough. I’m too stupid to understand how the ‘robber barons’ of the US are hoarding all the money that belongs to the people, and thepeople need to wake up and rise back against the oppressors, is at all relevent to the discussion of killing Hitler or Nobel, to prevent a holocaust.

Why don’t you explain it, since I’m too stupid to see how they’re the same topic?

What now? Because I don’t see your MEDICAL MARVELS as being all that necessary to humanity as you do.

Yea, medical marvels. That’s what it’s about. Medical marvels like the battery, or the automobile, or the written word. Medical marvels like agriculture in inhospitable terrain, or the microprocessor. All medical marvels. Yup.

esp if it means jumping into war w/o doing all that is possible (killing Hitler as a child) to not do so. If you want to see such advancements better funded, then a much better attitude from the wealthy towards the little guy and his diseases/health needs might actually be a better direction to go.

That’s my whole argument right there. Money is only available in spades for new innovations when it is in the immediate interests of the purse-holders to do so. Imminent catastrophy if they don’t open the purse strings is the only guaranteed motivator. Human self-interest at work.

So, every time there is a yawning abyss right in front of us that the existing methods won’t deal with, out come the purses, and every new idea that sounds workable is funded.

It’s not workable to say “we’ll just mind-control the wealthy into doing whatever we say”, though I guess that answers Janton’s question about whether or not you would see that as a valid means to reach your goals.

And, it was the Chinese that “invented” Gunpowder … if you want to go to the source for propulsion of a killing object.

So you need to find that individual who invented gunpowder and put a bullet in their brain. Another vector for war averted. Another truly gamechanging technology eliminated.

Nobel intended his invention to be used for construction.

Doesn’t matter what he intended it for, matters what it was used for. Therefore you travelling back and putting a bullet in Alfred Nobel’s brain before he could invent it would be justified according to your own logic. With him dead, his invention doesn’t get made, and another tool that winds up getting used for war, no-longer exists.

Any invention that used his as a base, no-longer exists. Such as the nuclear warhead, which used the capabilities of conventional plastic explosives as the trigger. Einstein’s formula was no good without access to compounds that could create the necessary focussed blast waves.

My point in my rant was to show just how evil Man can be and to what ends he will use most anything intended for peace to become a vile tool.

There’s your answer right there then. The inventor of the spear, the inventor of the bow&arrow, the inventor of the atlatl. The inventor of the sword, the inventor of the cart, the inventor of bricks, the inventor of food preservation. Each and every one of those can be weaponised, and its weaponisation led to deaths. If you put a bullet in the brain of every single inventor, before they could invent their invention, think of all the lives you’ll save.

Sure you’ll lose 10x over (probably a 1000x over) lives for every life you save, every time you purge a gamechanging technological or social innovation from history, but it’s all worth it in the name of peace, right?

 
Flag Post

Why bother, when it’s obvious the whole thing’s just your usual pet rant topic? We’ve all got one. I’m aware I bring my own into things too much and am trying to work on that. But I also try to only bring it in when it’s germaine to the topic. You spent five paragraphs ranting about the American capitalistic model and how the people need to wake up to where the money is flowing. How is that at all relevant to the topic of the thread?

Raise your hand if you automatically skip over Karma’s posts.

Best part is crossbower wasn’t even talking to him. LOL

There was one invention about five years back that stuck in my mind: translator glasses. A person speaks in front of the wearer, microphone in the glasses picks up what’s being said and runs it through google translate, displaying the translated words visually on the screen of the glasses. It fell by the wayside because the inventor was unable to secure funding to finalise the prototype and take it to market. It was a new paradigm, and at the time the existing methods of translation were ‘good enough’ with no urgenct need to try a new method of cross-culture understanding, so money to develop it further was going to be difficult to come by.

Google Translate is pretty lousy but the portability of a computer UI and the voice-to-type ability {assuming it worked} would definitely have been useful for churning out Singularity type devices – it would have led to the death of smartphones.

 
Flag Post

raises hand
Anyway if you could go back in time then wouldn’t you just be able to take the tech with you? I mean a set of computers containing the combined scientific articles of the last 70 years would speed up research more then preventing ww2 would slow it down. Of course killing hitler very likely would not have stopped ww2, we would instead have had another German leader rise to power who could have been better at millitary strategy and perhaps could have won ww2 for the nazis.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thijser:

raises hand
Of course killing hitler very likely would not have stopped ww2, we would instead have had another German leader rise to power who could have been better at millitary strategy and perhaps could have won ww2 for the nazis.

This guy

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thijser:

raises hand
Anyway if you could go back in time then wouldn’t you just be able to take the tech with you? I mean a set of computers containing the combined scientific articles of the last 70 years would speed up research more then preventing ww2 would slow it down.

It’s not a bad idea. I can only see two potential flaws.

1. If a computing device from the 2200s was dumped in our laps today, would any of us have any idea how to access the thing? All the knowledge is on it, but would we be able to figure out how to connect a power supply to it, then access the files in an order that made any progressive sense?

2. The second flaw is more morally dubious. In order to see the data on the computer’s drive put into action, we’d need a large research and manufacturing base. That means securing the cooperation of a country in existence at the time. There’s only one country that comes to mind in that era that would have a vested interest in obtaining knowledge of all manner of (to them) entirely unconventional technologies and capabilities. Giving that country access to 70 years’ worth of R&D would completely negate any benefits gained from killing off their historical leadership, and pretty much guarantee they would win the ensuing conflict.


Raise your hand if you automatically skip over Karma’s posts.

I do still read them. Occasionally I find useful nuggets in there, even if the vast majority is normally extremely predictable, or unpleasant. Despite his claims otherwise, I usually read his links as well, unless it’s yet another pointless youtube link. I come here looking for offbeat points of view after all.

Well that, and I cannot get greasemonkey to work properly with the version of firefox I run through the proxy. Without greasemonkey, I can’t run the scripts to autohide posts. It’s either use my real ip address here, or don’t autohide posts, and I heh, kinda lack the willpower not to read them if they’re visible :)

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

I’m sure Jan reads all of YOUR posts….lol
What was it he calls them…..techno babble?

Yup, and it’s a fair point. Reminds me I have to work harder at communicating tech-heavy topics more effectively. It might be a difference in our mindsets Karma, but I appreciate such a view. Especially when I can see he’s not trolling, and it’s a genuine grievance.

If he’s voicing that it’s a struggle, odds are others are struggling as well, and not voicing that. So, if these people are still making the effort to read my posts, then I figure its the least I can do to try and meet them halfway. It benefits me in the long run too, to have practice at explaining these subjects to a non-technical audience, and hopefully get better at doing that.

And, YOU wonder why I have the two of you on mute.

Actually I don’t wonder that. I have worked the pattern out, you know. I’m certain most of the others have too. You mute someone the first time they openly disagree with you, then it’s a struggle to get unmuted, only to be muted again the next time they disagree with you. Others handled this in their own way; I’d fallen into the trap of not arguing with you if I disagreed because I didn’t see it as worth the shitstorm that always followed. A semblance of friendship with you basically meant not calling you out on anything.

It is quite amazing how well Jan can respond to posts that he automatically skips over.
Personality disorder much?

If you check, he responded to my post, not yours. He’s quoting sections of mine, then responding to them underneath. So there’s no logical break present there.

BWT, I also skip over material I find not worthy of my time/effort to read.
And, guess what….petty shit personal attacks the two you make certainly; religiously; automatically fall into that realm.

That’s your perogative. You are welcome to hide all posts I make if you wish to. Like yourself I’m a major presence on this forum, and I’m well aware that may mean I am an unwelcome sight to some. That I’m unwelcome to some elements of the forum, such as the trolls and timewasters I could care less about. But, if those who do not fall into the above categories take the time to read my posts, then I feel it is my duty to keep an eye on how I express myself and try (sometimes successfully, sometimes less so) and moderate my own behavior. Show courtesy in trying to make it a pleasant read where possible, and try and keep my exasperation either to myself, or fling it at specific targets when keeping ire to myself proves impossible.

If I cannot do this, then I cannot expect my posts to be read, and if I cannot expect my posts to be read, what am I even doing here?

Still, it is a digital medium and that makes the content fairly fluid. If anyone does wish to mute my posts, (or any other user’s posts) information how, and a link to the script to do it can be found here. The script will prevent specified users’ posts from being displayed at all, on your computer. Be aware it may break the conversational flow.

 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Yeah. I mean, even one person for 2 is justifiable. This may be my communist side speaking, but I believe everyone is equal and one life is the same as every other. It diesn’t matter what gender, ethnicity, or how rich you are. We are all the same, its just that some work harder than others.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by thijser:

raises hand
Anyway if you could go back in time then wouldn’t you just be able to take the tech with you? I mean a set of computers containing the combined scientific articles of the last 70 years would speed up research more then preventing ww2 would slow it down.

It’s not a bad idea. I can only see two potential flaws.

1. If a computing device from the 2200s was dumped in our laps today, would any of us have any idea how to access the thing? All the knowledge is on it, but would we be able to figure out how to connect a power supply to it, then access the files in an order that made any progressive sense?

2. The second flaw is more morally dubious. In order to see the data on the computer’s drive put into action, we’d need a large research and manufacturing base. That means securing the cooperation of a country in existence at the time. There’s only one country that comes to mind in that era that would have a vested interest in obtaining knowledge of all manner of (to them) entirely unconventional technologies and capabilities. Giving that country access to 70 years’ worth of R&D would completely negate any benefits gained from killing off their historical leadership, and pretty much guarantee they would win the ensuing conflict.


Well these is also the route of providing this information to multiple sides. Note that I don’t think only the Germans would be interested, I think for example that there were American companies that would kill for this kind of access. If you take say 10 laptops with you and put instructions for printers (faxes already exists back then just make sure it’s easy to connect them with those). Additionally it’s useful to note that Hitler was also a reaction to the economic crisis following ww1. This information could easily prevent said crisis(through you would have to go back to around 1918-1923). As for power well they already had radio’s and a fair understanding of electricity since Tesla.

And karma if you want an answer to your pm then unblock me, of course as you said ignorance is bliss and all that, that seems to apply to both of us.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

Raise your hand if you automatically skip over Karma’s posts.

Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

Yeah but I like vika. So I try to make an effort, and most of the time it turns out to be interesting stuff, so I’m glad I did.


With karma’s it’s exactly this:

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

long, completely off-topic rant about the evils of capitalism and how the American people need to ‘wake up’ to the wealth inequality gap

ad infinitum. And even if there was something in that textwall worth responding to, all i could hope for a reply is:

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:pissy shit petty shit personal attacks


Not much point unless i feel like trolling.

Surprise, surprise, surprise…Sergeant Carter!
Gomer Pyle
.
.
Originally posted by thijser:

And karma if you want an answer to your pm then unblock me, of course as you said ignorance is bliss and all that, that seems to apply to both of us.

IF you (only tacitly … by “raising your hand” to Jan’s query?) align yourslef w/ shit like the above, then I seriously doubt you would have a worthwhile (to me) reason for doing so. To ensure that things like Jan’s rants and vika’s snarky “insults” remain in the open is why they are able to whine about how I have them thusly blocked. I simply am not interested in finding childish gibberish in my SD “mail”. I’m currently getting bucket loads of it via snail-mail & door-hangings now that we are in election season. I find it odd that some ppl so cherish having the ability to transgress the privacy of others. And yes, ignoring unpleasant things as much as is possible certainly is bliss.
.
.

Anyway, to be a weeeebit more on topic.
In giving my reaction as to what I would do to Hitler, I was following the OP.
But, I am well aware that the political scene in Germany didn’t just spring up overnight w/ Hitler. I would say that it goes back even further than WWI. As I ranted in a post, social debacles like wars are the result of Man’s inability to be … well, be sociable. I’m not talking about ALL of Mankind.

No. It is the dark side of Yin-Yang….the darkest. It is those ppl who view themselves as the natural leaders, the ones who are more MOST deserving of as much as they can obtain…by whatever means at their disposal. They are the “wolves” who believe the “sheep” obviously need to be Eloied rather than benevolently led.

If that kind of behavior isn’t embodied in the concept of: The (very few) rich getting richer while the balance get the shit end of the stick; then someone just isn’t paying enough attention to how things go in real life. But, please note, I well understand that this applies mostly to a particular well known 1st World power & the unfortunate 3rd World ones. There are those in the EU that are Socialistic enough to manage to give Capitalism a good name.

I like how you expanded on the OP by inserting the idea of going back in time some with “updated” concepts. It reminds me of this from Star Trek. I see your proposal as being somewhat an odd twist that springs from: Those who fail to heed history are doomed to repeat it.

To go even further with the Star Trek model and how they had finally managed to break that vile cycle, The Federation managed to:

“…have the planetary governments agree to exist semi-autonomously under a single central government based on the Utopian principles of universal liberty, rights, and equality, and to share their knowledge and resources in peaceful cooperation and space exploration.”

I fully agree, much better than trying to manage the wolves by use of their own devices, EDUCATION on “history” is highly likely the only thing that is going to prevent Mankind from warring … hot, cold, or economically.

 
Flag Post

It’s a fair idea thijser. I would be leery of supplying information to companies rather than to governments personally, but that’s more because I trust companies to only cherry-pick what is profitable to their existing speciality, whereas a government is more likely to take anything useful.

I think how I would do it, is I’d use our knowledge of which areas of the world were unpopulated or scarcely populated at the time, along with which areas had at-the-time untapped resource deposits, and assemble a sizable team plus mobile infrastructure to take with me. I wouldn’t be planning on returning to my own time afterwards, and would instead set up a new power with these resources, so I had a base from which to distribute knowledge.

I’d still distribute it rather than hoard it; not looking to take over the world’ operations for myself, but I think with a strong infrastructure behind me, and a defensible position by our standards, nevermind by theirs, I would be in a much better position to guarantee I could rapidly accelerate the development of the world, and skip things past some of the mistakes made along the way.

In fact, if I was doing that, I think going back further in time, prior to the world wars would be the way to go. Prior to the chaos of the industrial revolution.

 
Flag Post

Well I think that the time around the world wars would be the time you can set these systems. Before the industrial revolution there would be no reliable way to power your devices, no easy way of printing your stuff and no easy way of getting towards these untapped resources (all depended of course on what you can take with you, if you can have a solar car+boat and several laptops and printers and a paper machine and a large supply of inkt cartiages/refueling system/spare parts then no problem). So I doubt you will be able to do all the much before the 1900’s. And it’s important to note that the futher you go back the more difficult it will be to read the knowledge you have. If you ever look at really old scientific articles you will notice that they are far more difficult to read then current once both because of language and expected common knowledge. I recently had to look up a few really old articles (from the 70’s ) and they expected a lot more knowledge of power mangament and that sort of things then modern computer science articles. You can only imagen what happens in reverse (where the common knowledge might not even exist). So I highly doubt this system will allow you to transfer information for more then 100 years.

As for who gets it I think the right way to do this would be to give laptops to various groups, give one to 1919 German governement 5 to various large companies 1 to the US governement 1 to Russia 1 to one of the Assian countries 1 to an African country an one to a south American country.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thijser:

Well I think that the time around the world wars would be the time you can set these systems. Before the industrial revolution there would be no reliable way to power your devices, no easy way of printing your stuff and no easy way of getting towards these untapped resources (all depended of course on what you can take with you, if you can have a solar car+boat and several laptops and printers and a paper machine and a large supply of inkt cartiages/refueling system/spare parts then no problem).

I was more considering things like a portable nuclear reactor and a supply of fuel cells. Electric-powered mining vehicles, truck-based refining and heavy manufacturing facilities. Possibly just go a different route and pack an old, retrofitted oil tanker with all the equipment and food supplies necessary to get an industrial base off the ground from scratch with no external support, and keep it self-sufficient, then shove the ship itself through the time travel portal. Multiple ships if it’ll take them, including military vessels.

I am literally talking here about a mobile industrial revolution. Don’t rely on the capabilities of the time, but take them all with me en-masse. This is why earlier would be better; both so that easily accessible resources are not currently being exploited, and so we don’t have to reeducate natives to unlearn the way of doing things they’ve learned.

So I highly doubt this system will allow you to transfer information for more then 100 years.

It will if the entire support system including sufficient population to use the knowledge on the system, go with me. That would be the entire point of taking so much. We have the knowledge (literally as much of the net as we could store, and as many dead-tree style resources as we could obtain digital copies of), and have the equipment to set up a heavily defendable, self-sufficient, highly technological community that can realistically defend itself from whatever capabilities the significantly less advanced societies around us have. Another advantage to aiming for earlier in civilisation’s history is the capabilities of surrounding civilisations would be drastically reduced in comparison, so if things did go sour we would have overwhelming technological superiority to politely ask them to bugger off.

From there it’s a case of expanding our influence, and teaching the people of the groups around us. Not touching their government systems; let them self-govern as they see fit. It’s a cultural ability fast-tracking, not an invasion force. Prove ourselves by our abilities, and willingness to bring their basic knowledge and capabilities up to our level, as swiftly as is safe for them, whilst letting their societies continue to self-govern.

Wouldn’t be compatible with the goals of every society, but enough more primitive civilisations could be transformed in a lifetime of effort to make the process worthwhile.

Drop in in the early middle ages, and we might even be able to skip that 800-year odd period where scientific progress was unheard of. It’s a good time when most of the older civilisations’ capabilities are long-forgotten and an age of regression is at hand.

 
Flag Post

That could work but would ask a lot more from the time travel tech, moving 1 human + laptops is a lot easier then moving an entire heavy manufacturing facility. And I think it’s going to be difficult to gain all supplies needed to keep your base running. Your facility would likely require almost every single resource on the periodic table, and it will be difficult to place your base in such a way that you have access to all of them. So you will likely need several bases for this plan which in turn will likely be seen as an allien invasion by the people of that time likely invoking a war, and even if that doesn’t happen you would need to ensure that the people in charge keep the same set of morals you set at the beginning. If a coupe occurs then you might just end up setting up the most tyranical ruler in history.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thijser:

That could work but would ask a lot more from the time travel tech, moving 1 human + laptops is a lot easier then moving an entire heavy manufacturing facility.

The time travel tech wouldn’t work anyway, as the planet is not occupying the same space if you go back even a few fractions of a second. But if we could do this, let’s do it properly.

And I think it’s going to be difficult to gain all supplies needed to keep your base running. Your facility would likely require almost every single resource on the periodic table, and it will be difficult to place your base in such a way that you have access to all of them. So you will likely need several bases for this plan which in turn will likely be seen as an allien invasion by the people of that time likely invoking a war

Agreed. Hence why a full military-industrial complex would be needed. I tend to have a pessimistic view of human nature in response to the unknown, and a flotilla of mile-long metal ships making unheard-of noises together with strange metal beasts belching fire or spinning rotors in the sky is, to the population of a primitive socity, about as unknown as it gets.

Absolute worst-case scenario, we’d need enough people with us, to form a genetically stable core colony, and bring the young of other societies into our group. Not my preferred way of doing things, but it’s a fallback plan if neccessary.

and even if that doesn’t happen you would need to ensure that the people in charge keep the same set of morals you set at the beginning. If a coupe occurs then you might just end up setting up the most tyranical ruler in history.

Yup. But that’s a risk I would prefer to take, as I don’t see running ramshod over another’s civilisation as an option. If they don’t have the freedom to self-govern are we really bringing a boon, or a curse?

 
Flag Post

The space problem would probably be a question entirely based on reference. And if we can make a space machine we should also be able to launch a space ship that is able to bring at least on person towards the place earth was at the target time.

And if you bring enough people to form a genetically stable colony then what will prevent your people from taking a “illegal imigrant” view towards the native population? Seeing as they will likely be poorly educated and in general unaware of the culture in your colony? Especially seeing that if your wish to do something like that what is to prevent you from doing this right now? There are plenty of people in poor areas of the world with plenty of resources but just now the knowledge to exploit it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thijser:

And if you bring enough people to form a genetically stable colony then what will prevent your people from taking a “illegal imigrant” view towards the native population? Seeing as they will likely be poorly educated and in general unaware of the culture in your colony? Especially seeing that if your wish to do something like that what is to prevent you from doing this right now? There are plenty of people in poor areas of the world with plenty of resources but just now the knowledge to exploit it.

The main advantages are being able to alter the planet’s technological history and use current knowledge to prevent inefficient resource depletion and manmade climate change triggered when we acted without thinking – including biosphere collapse.

These aspects demand time travel being used to go back into the past, and could not be carried out in the present.

 
Flag Post

But the fact that we are not able to pull this of in the present makes me wonder whatever you will be able to pull it off in the past.

 
Flag Post

It cannot be pulled off in the present because in the present the industrial revolution already happened, and it’s a bit difficult to pre-empt something that already happened, unless you go back in time to a point before it happened.

This also means all environmental damage caused by the industrial revolution cannot be prevented from happening in the present, and could only be prevented from happening, by going back into the past before it occurred.

 
Flag Post

Yes but we are also not able to pull bring the third world up to speed with the first world. So what makes you think that you would be able to pull it off with a population that is even futher behind? Especially seeing as that brining resources with you is going to be far more expensive seeing as I cannot see any way by which time travel is ever going to be cheap.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thijser:

Yes but we are also not able to pull bring the third world up to speed with the first world. So what makes you think that you would be able to pull it off with a population that is even futher behind?

Because we can bring the third world up to the standards of the first world (well, sort-of, there aren’t enough resources left for everyone to have the same levels of luxury), but there’s no incentive to do so. If you’re starting again, there essentially is nothing but the third world, and if the people you bring with you, wish to have the level of lifestyle they’ve been accustomed to, or perhaps more aptly give their kids that quality of life, then once you’ve made the jump, there’s no choice but to follow through, as there’s no turning back.

Heck of an incentive to see things through, right there.