Pages:
Author

Topic: Dark Enlightenment - page 23. (Read 69245 times)

hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 26, 2014, 02:00:51 PM
#94
Cross posting because I think this is indicative of Dark Enlightenment philosophy on the utility of government (or more generally any top-down authority)...

It'd definitely be good if we insured there were no new species come in and take over and flourish while old species died.

Wait....none of us would be around then...

I'm awaiting a CO2 tax effectively banning breathing and a consumer protection law banning death.

Heck let's just ban everything. Let's ban banning. Let's ban banning banning. And ban banning banning banning banning banning. Do you see now my theory of everything w.r.t. unbounded recursion.

hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 24, 2014, 07:09:13 PM
#93
Example of philosophy of whom I admire and the genre of generative essence insight we share. You should recognize him as the co-author of the selfish mining attack which shows mathematically that Satoshi's proof-of-work is vulnerable to attack by a pool possessing only 25% of the hash rate.

I see we come from nearly the same generation as I started on the TRS-80 in 1978 at age 13 and obtained a Commodore 64 at age 18. Other than the difference in age of obtaining a C-64 I could have written the following word-for-word about myself.

Quote from: Emin Gün Sirer
My background is quite straightforward: I saw a computer for the first time when I was 13 and knew right then and there that these devices would revolutionize the world. I got my own Commodore-64 at 14 and have been writing software systems since then. I initially thought I'd study artificial intelligence and build über-intelligent robots that would take over the world, then I realized...

Probably add Linus Torvalds, although I'm paled as an ant compared to him as a do-er although I reckon this load prevents him from making some genre of generative essence insights. You can add the higher IQ Eric S. Raymond as my elder, although we appear to have somewhat conflicting generational outlook of the introspective kind.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 24, 2014, 09:42:10 AM
#92
http://blog.mpettis.com/2014/03/economic-consequences-of-income-inequality/#comment-22896

Quote from: AnonyMint
I would argue that your model of income inequality is antiquated because savings is now expressed in knowledge and not in stored claims on labor, i.e. fiat money.

So we would have to entirely recalibrate the basis and rework the model. I don't have the spare time at the moment to dig into such an endeavor.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 23, 2014, 10:55:17 PM
#91
For those who think there is no global conspiracy, you are apparently not aware of Anthony Sutton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSVWXmZB1wc
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 23, 2014, 08:35:42 AM
#90
http://blog.mpettis.com/2014/03/will-emerging-markets-come-back/#comment-22623

Quote from: AnonyMint
I can dream about a solution to eliminate the ability of government to tax virtual knowledge. They would still be able to tax tangible commerce which is being replaced any way by virtual knowledge production.

We are moving towards maximum division-of-labor wherein the individual is his own company and call sell his knowledge production anonymously. This requires a different implementation than Bitcoin's design.

The government won't be able to tax that (if it comes to fruition and works as envisioned), thus the backstop for public debt won't be possible. The tangible commerce world is orders-of-magnitude less productive than the intangible knowledge work, e.g. look what the laser printer did for decentralized publishing, then the internet did to decentralized publishing, and now the 3D printer will do to decentralized manufacturing.

The key is the anonymous money has to become a unit-of-account via decentralized exchange and mining. This requires certain technical feats, which have yet to be demonstrated.

P.S. I would have preferred to have written "one of the more prolific and astute". There is no way to edit posts here and I'm in a rush and don't proof read.


http://blog.mpettis.com/2014/03/will-emerging-markets-come-back/#comment-22888

Quote
DVD, the keyword phrase that I wanted to changed was from "the most" to "one of the more".

My suggestion should be real before the end of 2014, then we can judge if it is practical and workeable.

Note by definition, it is impossible to save that part of the economy which is uneconomic, i.e. all those who didn't and won't obtain the correct skills and who will fight for more government aid and debt instead. You proposal will simply allow them to continue longer.

We stand at a crossroads. I chose to the individualism, decentralized, bottom-up fork in the road. You choose the double-down on more top-down management while stomping on decentralized annealing fork.

Btw, I think both forks will be enacted and run in parallel. And I am confident which fork dominates over time as it gains size and the other withers.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 23, 2014, 08:09:56 AM
#89
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
March 22, 2014, 08:46:57 PM
#88
I haven't heard about the Dark Englightment. Where I can read more info about it?




What I like about the Dark Enlightenment (which I had actually never heard of prior to a month ago) is that it has given me a ton of outside the box thinking to look through. Each of those little dots on the map above is a blog of some sort. I am sure some of it will be garbage but there will also be gems. I have started with the political philosophy of Menicus Moldbug since he is described as the founder of the neoreactionaries (the purple section of the map). His Gentle Introduction to Unqualified Reservations is essentially a detailed walk-through of Complaint the Third: Democracy is a failure. It's a very long but fascinating read.
member
Activity: 85
Merit: 10
March 22, 2014, 01:59:38 PM
#87
I haven't heard about the Dark Englightment. Where I can read more info about it?
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1007
March 19, 2014, 11:53:47 AM
#86
That's fine with me, as this is quite an anarchistic viewpoint, but not Marxist. Ultimately they want to model the whole of society in the most reasonable and scientific (materialistic) advanced way. At best they might acknowledge your point (and other anarchistic concepts) as a possible viable strategy in the on-going class struggle. (The whole discussion on the ultra-left is ultimately only about the strategy of how to get there, how to reach the classless society. The idea with the temporary dictatorship of the proletariat was a failure.  Smiley)
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 19, 2014, 11:43:01 AM
#85
And they were correct until Satoshi invented a solution the Byzantine General's problem with proof-of-work.

 Huh Non sequitur for me. Crypto-currencies are many things but they won't annul the theories and efforts of Marxists (even with proper anonymity, quite the contrary in fact), as they strive for equality (as a result! "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs") and total(itarian?) transparency.

Autonomous actors in an economy is not the same equal actors. There is no force to keep them equal.

The reason anonymity is important is because it enables that autonomy to stand up against those vested interests that want to capture the money creation process and use it to aggregate capital. Without that power, smaller capital grows faster than larger capital.

Sorry i can't explain this in depth right now. Either that summary makes sense, or it needs to wait for a future time when i can expound.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1007
March 19, 2014, 11:40:15 AM
#84
And they were correct until Satoshi invented a solution the Byzantine General's problem with proof-of-work.

 Huh Non sequitur for me. Crypto-currencies are many things but they won't annul the theories and efforts of Marxists, even with proper anonymity, quite the contrary in fact, as they strive for equality (in the results! "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs") and total(itarian?) transparency.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 19, 2014, 11:15:33 AM
#83

Marxists would usually argue that this kind of "Capitalism (freedom)" actually can't exist. It would always concentrate wealth in the hands of the few, and if the Bourgeoisie had no state to protect their interests and their property, it would create one (which would be a concise summary of history, hence the Marx/Engels theory of Dialectical Materialism, with the Synthesis being the natural and inevitable outcome at some point in the future of society's evolution: the classless society, i.e. (stateless) communism).

And they were correct until Satoshi invented a solution the Byzantine General's problem with proof-of-work. But unfortunately without anonymity, that solution won't stand.

Btw, I see as I expected the globalists are pitching their NWO solution in the guise of discrediting their nation-state central banking:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5784742
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1007
March 19, 2014, 07:49:34 AM
#82

Marxists would usually argue that this kind of "Capitalism (freedom)" actually can't exist. It would always concentrate wealth in the hands of the few, and if the Bourgeoisie had no state to protect their interests and their property, it would create one (which would be a concise summary of history, hence the Marx/Engels theory of Dialectical Materialism, with the Synthesis being the natural and inevitable outcome at some point in the future of society's evolution: the classless society, i.e. (stateless) communism).
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 18, 2014, 09:57:26 AM
#81
From private message:

Quote
Ok - so I read your post on Demise of Finance/Rise of Knowledge, branched off from there and read esr's Premises of the Dark Enlightenment.

...

how do you compensate for the economy of force? 

...

We improve our economies of scale by a thousand fold by specializing.  A farmer grows food for 10,000 people.  A city of 10,000 people has three cops.  Those three cops are inherently better (just like the farmer) at dealing with stupid people hopped up on meth.  And are as much more efficient at it vs the normal citizen.

How does this fit into prosperous anarchy?

In maximum division-of-labor no one person is omnipotent, because he/she doesn't have the specialized knowledge in every field. In open source we work together because doing otherwise fails in competition with others who adhere to open source. Because given enough specialized eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.

So in short, the 3 cops won't get very far if they are doing harm to society, because there is too much specialized knowledge they don't have that will battle them in varying scenarios.

The power gets spread around. Top-down controllers become impotent because the holders of specialized knowledge withdraw their support, e.g. as we are doing now with crypto-currency to the fiat controllers. We have more specialized knowledge than they do.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
March 16, 2014, 11:22:47 PM
#80
Quoting myself as the post is relevant to this thread

Quote from: Eric S Raymond a.k.a. ESR
Premises of the Dark Enlightenment
Posted on 2014-02-19 by esr   

Complaint the Third: Democracy is a failure. It has produced a race to the bottom in which politicians grow ever more venal, narrow interest groups ever more grasping, the function of government increasingly degenerates into subsidizing parasites at the expense of producers, and in general politics exhibits all the symptoms of what I have elsewhere called an accelerating Olsonian collapse (after Mancur Olson’s analysis in The Logic Of Collective Action).

Of all the the premises of the Dark Enlightenment this is the most most critical for this is the mechanism (described as the power vacuum up-thread) which allows collectivism to grow to the the point where it threatens systemic collapse.

The historical predecessor for our current system of government was Athenian democracy. Their system lasted for 178 years.

Quote from: Alicia Rose
Plato (427 or 428 BC - 348 or 347 BC) lived during the Athenian democracy. Plato in his most well known work the Republic points out all of the problems and pitfalls regarding living in a democracy, including its injustice and the oppression of the individual under the weight of a democracy that dictates at the whim of the majority of citizen votes.

The most chilling praise of democracy that I have ever read is that of James Anthony Froude.  

Quote from: James Anthony Froude
Democracies are the blossoming of the aloe, the sudden squandering of the vital force which has accumulated in the long years when it was contented to be healthy and did not aspire after a vain display. The aloe is glorious for a single season. It progresses as it never progressed before. It admires its own excellence, looks back with pity on its earlier and humbler condition, which it attributes only to the unjust restraints in which it was held. It conceives that it has discovered the true secret of being 'beautiful for ever,' and in the midst of the discovery it dies.
...
A centralized democracy may be as tyrannical as an absolute monarch; and if the vigour of the nation is to continue unimpaired, each individual, each family, each district, must preserve as far as possible its independence, its self-completeness, its powers and its privilege to manage its own affairs and think its own thoughts.

The founding fathers were well aware of the potential dangers.

Quote from: Ed Crews
At its birth, the United States was not a democratic nation—far from it. The very word "democracy" had pejorative overtones, summoning up images of disorder, government by the unfit, even mob rule. In practice, moreover, relatively few of the nation's inhabitants were able to participate in elections.

Specifically the founding fathers built a government with multiple safeguards against democracy. They built a government which

1) Lacked the ability to directly tax the population (no authority to tax income).
2) Had only one of its two legislative branches directly elected (The senate was appointed by state legislatures).
3) Did not have a fiat currency (gold and silver was money).
4) Did not have a central bank (no FED).
5) Did not allow direct election of the president (president was to be selected by the electoral collage).
6) Only gave the right to vote to landowners (called freeholders).
7) Gave most power to the states.

Gradually over time each of these safeguards has fallen. When Benjamin Franklin was asked what form of government the constitution of 1787 had created, he replied: "A republic, if you can keep it."
He reply has traditionally been read as a warning against monarchy, but it could just as easily be read as a warning against democracy. The Dark Enlightenment argues that we are failing to "keep it".

It argues that the republic is decaying into democracy and that democracy is a failure.
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
March 13, 2014, 08:31:08 PM
#79
Someone asked me to summarize my TOE.

Forces and thermodynamics are just entropy. Spacetime is just unbounded frequencies (and phases) in the frequency domain.

http://unheresy.com/The%20Universe.html#Matter_as_a_continuum
You're on the right track, keep going Wink

Quote from: Nikola Tesla
There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 13, 2014, 04:03:11 AM
#78
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 13, 2014, 12:15:35 AM
#77
Someone asked me to summarize my TOE.

Forces and thermodynamics are just entropy. Spacetime is just unbounded frequencies (and phases) in the frequency domain.

http://unheresy.com/The%20Universe.html#Matter_as_a_continuum
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
March 11, 2014, 03:26:40 AM
#75
    Many computational biologists would agree that (and I'm sure Anonymint would have to, albeit begrudgingly, concur) , had it not been for lambda calculus, the understanding of spreadsheets might never have occurred. An essential challenge in artificial intelligence is the understanding of probabilistic information.

     On a similar note, given the current status of optimal symmetries, hackers worldwide daringly desire the emulation of object-oriented languages. Nevertheless, context-free grammar alone is able to fulfill the need for the construction of context-free grammar especially with special reference to ECDSA and its existential threat to the farthing.

I'm sure I don't know what you mean, but I'll have a stab at interpreting your riddle. Tongue

Materialist TOEs (theories of everything) cannot account for -- among other things -- a "first cause". If a person writes a new OOP language using another OOP language, where does "object" come from?

And that is precisely the issue my TOE addresses.
Pages:
Jump to: