It's an interesting question. Personally I feel it depends if there's a trial period and easy separation. If your sales pitch is "Try it and it's so awesome you'll want to keep doing it" that's a lot more compelling (assuming non-addictive) than "resistance is futile".

What a dupe. Once you try the hive mind trial, you will automatically believe what the collective believes, that YES, IT IS AWESOME.

This made me laugh

>Try it and it's so awesome you'll want to keep doing it

I've got this heroin to sell you...

I would be down for ghost in the shell merging with select individuals. But the borg feels like... just dying pointlessly. It’s like you’re assuming that you’re joining a greater purpose simply because there’s more people in it than you yourself. It’s up there for least compelling ideologies.

But by joining the collective you don't die, you mind becomes part of the hive mind. It's not gone, it still has a (minuscule) influence on the behavior of the whole swarm.

Voter turnout figures suggest that being a miniscule influence isn't exactly what people consider having a good time.

Amusing but insightful

Do you look at the general public and conclude that, on average, a random person tends to make informed decisions that you would like to be a part of? As an American, I routinely think that half of the country has terrible reasoning and that the other half is technically making better decisions for often equally dumb reasoning. I feel like a borg would be observably similar. Look at the decisions it makes. If you disagree with most of them (strongly), would you join it? It’s not all that different from joining any social group. You just offer it 100% of your salient identity.

Moffett is wrong. If we can have 1-2 billion people rally behind a single religion we can have a cosmopolitan society. The question is how do we divide up things so people feel that they are getting their fair share... without destroying the planet.

I've been asking myself this also. We have the ability to be more productive(vastly). The question is how much more productive can we be without reaching the asymptote that represents environmental death.

I think we have reached a critical junction where we must pause and consider our environmental and social impacts first and foremost. We evolved divine conscious to protect diversity of all kinds. Our failures and successes will lead to further propagation. Before we were the dominant species on this planet biodiversity was thriving. Our goals should be to seek further diversity in information, life, and living systems. Success is not guaranteed in our lifetime, but guaranteed in infinity. We should do our best though.