Topic: Economic Devastation - page 151. (Read 504811 times)

I guess I'll just chuck this up, along with all his "BITCOIN IS DOOMED AND HERE ARE ALL WAYS TO HAXOR IT!" to his extremely bad skills at explaining things in ways anyone but him can understand. Maybe things would be more productive for AnonyMint if, instead of reading posts from people on his ignore list, and talking about how big and awesome and smart he is, he actually went and coded something that SHOWED what the hell he is talking about.

BTW, I was considering starting a threat where we could simulate the Transaction Withholding Attack, having Anony take the role of the evil cartel, and roleplay with some other forumites the decisions that miners and users would take in response to his attempt of an attack, but that would likely be a massive waste of time. Especially since we already know that the only purpose would be to educate AnonyMint about how bitcoin actually works.

Rassah give up. You don't comprehend. Period. Please stop stalking me in every thread.

Silly people. Wasting time. Don't have any real work to do.

CoinCube I appreciate your appreciation, but I would rather you had not tried to promote my highly obtuse articles. This audience is not yet ready.

Ignoring your insults, sure, but that's not what I said. If X is a unit of knowledge, for every increase in knowledge X, the amount of capital needed to create a single item becomes -1*X, but the amount of variety of items that are now possible to create with that knowledge is now 2*X. For example, the amount of capital to produce an iPad is falling, but the amount of capital to produce the hundreds of other competing tablets is rising rapidly. If all we had was one phone, one tablet, one flat screen TV, and one computer, your argument would be valid. But with increased knowledge, we are having an ENORMOUS increase in competition and choice, which means an explosions in the number of factories and specialized manufacturing facilities needed to create the capital enabled by that knowledge.  And just as a job getting automated frees up labor capital to apply to new more technical jobs, freeing up production capital frees up that capital to be used in more complex and innovative tech.


I remember TurboJet. I used to work for a computer company that also ran a printing service, and they had pretty close ties to Mike and TurboJet. But, again, someone invented the Nokia candybar style dumb phone, and now there are no Nokia candy-bar style dumb phones. So what? Knowldge obliterated that one simple device that used few components, and replaced it with thousands of much more complex devices that use hundreds of complex components.


Which I specifically addressed above:


Hopefully it will take you less time than that to figure out bitcoin. In one thread I even noticed you claim that bitcoin price follows mining difficulty...

Ah I see the lowlife, sewer-trolling, character assassins are digging around now trying to dig up some raw sewage to eat.


Well you thought that because sewer rats can't comprehend what they read. Try reading again.


I see you went hunting around in that directory because I didn't bother to put an /index.html file there. Rectified.

That was a private email draft that I composed and was thinking sending to my Cool Page userbase, and never did send. And no one saw that except me.

And no where did I imply timing of a collapse. You quote one word out-of-context. In fact, the 2007/8 financial collapse was imminent, you fscking idiot troll.

And no where did I predict the price would go to $3000 by 2007 or 2008. I wrote about ratios between available precious metals and world's money supply, just like today people write about the potential of Bitcoin. In fact I did make a public prediction about silver price in 2010, and it was exactly correct in May 2011 as I had predicted.

Btw, I do hope you ignore my writings, because I am going to be laughing at you.

And you even try to stir up antisemitism where there was only a euphemism. If you could have only read my private email exchanges recently defending Jews against those who were accusing them of being the source of banksterism.

---

Edit: Readers have the advantage of reading in this thread the culmination of what took me 4 - 5 years to figure out. Of course in 2006, I didn't yet have it completely figured out. Did you!? And in 2010, I still hadn't figured out that the problem is hard money. It finally started to click in later in 2010, when I wrote those seminal articles which are linked in the OP of this thread.

I thought you thought the western civilization would collapse because the Bible said so:

http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/shelby-moore/major-frauds-of-humanity

http://www.financialsensearchive.com/fsu/editorials/2009/0320.html

And I thought if we bought silver from you, the "imminent" (as of 2006) collapse would mean $3000/oz:

http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Urgent_Warning.html

Tell us how you feel about Jews while we are here:
   
@makerofthings7 the underwriters were short. No mass movement happens without the banksters owning it. When my coolpage.com reached a million users, they sent a Jew to buy me out. I will not mention his name. The poll discussion is finally coming to realize this. You do what they want, even if you don't know you are, or you are out (one way or the other). – Shelby Moore III yesterday

(from http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/mining%20-%20Any%20counter-proof%20that%20Satoshi%20Nakamoto%20did%20not%20design%20a%20ponzi%20scheme%20on%20purpose%20%20-%20Bitcoin%20Beta%20-%20Stack%20Exchange.htm)

Idiots will never address the salient point. They will always talk about things that don't address the salient point.

The amount of fixed capital need per unit of knowledge produced is declining. And the capital need to produce tangible goods from knowledge is decreasing.

Mike Fulton and I wrote the worlds first accelerated printer drivers for a laser printer, TurboJet back in the 1980s. I watched how the laser printer (and Linotype driven by Postscript) obliterated all that high fixed capital publishing.

Now we have the laser printer for 3D, called 3D printers.

I have no time to read or respond to idiots who fart all over the threads and spend their day stalking me.

Somebody farted?

But this vast and rapid increase in knowledge didn't decrease the amount of physical items that we demand, it increased them. You can now convert your knowledge into long-term store-of-value, and spend it on thousands of different electronics and knowledge derived tools. So the need and demand for capital, and a wider variety of capital, actually increased, along with the need for long-term capital used to acquire that new technology.
Your counterargument is that 3D printing will make the physical capital creation of those tools so easy as to be irrelevant. Maybe. However, 3D printers are limited in what they are able to produce (can't print CPUs or specific chemicals for inputs now), and there is a good chance that knowledge will always outpace the capapibilty of 3D printers, meaning some things will always need to be done by hand.
Also, this argument seems to be very similar to the ludite argument that as machines replace labor, there will be less and less labor, and thus employment. Replace knowledge with labor, and machines with knowledge. I could argue that, as knowledge increases and the rate and capability of automated capital production increases, there will be an increased pace of specialized knowledge creation and specialized capital production creating the type of capital we haven't even imagined yet, just as automation replacing jobs ended up creating jobs we haven't imagined in early 1900's.

Just an FYI, brain isn't an organ like a heart, where the genes tell it what it's structure should be and how many valves or parts it should have. It's a network of neurons, which actually physically change based on what you experience through life, which grows new neurons as old ones, along with their links, die. So brain entropy is not dependent on the number of genes in the human genome, but on the number of neurons in the brain and the number and variability of networned connections those neurons could make. So the entropy is vastly larger than one-in-a-billion.

Oh, um, well, yeah, maybe. Imperial evidence shows that exact thing in Venezuela, and possibly the opposite thing in USSR, where collapsing collectivism resulted in the ruling party stealing as much as they could before getting out, while economic freedom was being very slightly expanded. Though it may be because people in Venezuela are in a democracy, while people in USSR were essentially a dictatorship, so the former could demand more collectivism, while the later could not.
So, when SHTF, all rich people should GTFO to North Korea?

That is an excellent (astute, perceptive, efficiently summarized) high-level perspective of the collectivism problem and individual opportunity, yet doesn't explain the root cause. And of course because attempts to explain the root cause (e.g. the definition of knowledge and its implications) are misunderstood because it is possible for disbelievers to pigeon-hole various statements to obfuscate the whole.

I am happy to see some provocative comments has spawned much discussion.

Here are so more...


I hope you realize how incredibly socialist and anti-capitalism and eugenics directed your illogical position is. You wish to make others responsible for the initiative and effort of others. Hey I grew up in all black schools in the slums of Baton Rouge and New Orleans, but that did not stop me from learning, because I was eager to learn. I would learn more at home in my room with all my books and gadgets or in the back yard digging up bugs and studying behavior than I did in school sometimes. I regret the internet was not available when I was 5 years old. I can only imagine, as I can see my (and I am sure your) ability to generate knowledge accelerated upon the network effects of the internet.

Education and rote learning is not knowledge because it is in the past. Knowledge is created by the ability to think and react to new scenarios. Autodidactism is the future because it is both more efficient and it generates the initiative to create knowledge.

Edumaction


Young People Should Work for Free

Student Loans, The Next Bubble?

Student Loans, the Next Debt Bubble

P.S. A high school track & field sports friend of mine [name redacted as it violates privacy], who ended up as an adjunct professor at Georgetown and a head of an R&D department at SAIC (unfortunately that means filing patents), said I was the one who caused him to grasp university Physics (we ended up at the same university). I remember studying with him for roughly 1 hour one day. That is effective! Because I cut directly the generative essence of the matter and provided the insight for how to think for oneself on the subject matter.

He is and in my opinion does so successfully.
If he is correct (and I believe he is) this is the equivalent of someone in 1927 claiming that the economy was
going to collapse soon. Easy to disregard (lots of good times in 1928) but very important to think about before dismissing

He defines knowledge here
Information is Alive

Nothing you said is wrong but you are missing the overall thrust of the argument.

But this is not a counterargument. All collectivism requires is that capital be seizable by force.

If large amounts of capital becomes hidden and mobile it may avoid being seized. This will result in collectivism starving at a faster rate (requiring it to consume more of the resources it can sieze) then it would otherwise do. In effect this will accelerate the crisis not avoid it.

Hmm... I skimmed because I agree with a lot of the beginning so I am clearly missing something at the end.  I look at the emerging knowledge economy and see amazing individualism.  And by that I mean a few individuals are capable of projecting their knowledge across the entire globe easily, and thereby reap the benefits of a global market.   The effects of this are the newly minted Google, Facebook, twitter, etc billionaires... and likely a lot of others that are lower profile.

This is pretty obvious for knowledge based services.  Automatic scaling of AWS nodes or Google apps lets IT services focus solely on delivering the information service, not all the manual details of deploying server farms, etc.

Outside of IT, production has become a commodity service -- easily obtained for relatively little $.  So the effort to create/store/ship a physical embodiment is no longer a limitation for a company.  You can shop for factories to do turnkey production of electronics and plastic/metal casing, foam packaging, etc that you specify via common electronic and 3d design file formats.  And then you can have those products warehoused at Amazon or another drop-shipment company.  No need to see them yourself. 

For example, I forget whether it was Sirius or XM, but at one point the company had 100 employees and was delivering satellite radio service worldwide (or at least that is what I remember... not going to verify it now...)

Could the counterargument be that capital seeking collectivism (i.e. not open source collectivism) requires capital to be immobile and easy to seize, and that we now have systems to keep capital extremely mobile and difficult to seize? I.e. used to be that to have a lot of capital, you either stored it in a bank or property, both of which are difficult to move and easy to seize, while now we can store a lot of capital in digital currencies, and those who own it can't simply have it taken from them, and can easily move around the world undetected if they need to.

He is arguing something else. He is arguing that collectivism is nearing the point where it causes general economic collapse. Furthermore he is arguing that when such a collapse occurs the populace will demand yet more collectivism in tragic feedback loop.