Pages:
Author

Topic: Economic Totalitarianism - page 30. (Read 345758 times)

hero member
Activity: 854
Merit: 1009
JAYCE DESIGNS - http://bit.ly/1tmgIwK
February 26, 2016, 02:39:20 PM
Brain structure is also based on what you lived and your previous experiences and there is no way to efficiently replicate them.
Even if you manage to replicate 99.9% of someone's brain the 0.1% difference might give you huge differences.

But they might replicate social tendencies and trends based on this kind of technology, but we probably won't see this in the current century  Grin

Its impossible I tell you, there is too much random quantum fluctuation in a brain to copy it.

Its like cracking infinite passwords at once just to read the information from there.

You have to be a God to do this.

It`s more likely that a meteor hits the earth and we all die.
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 503
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
February 26, 2016, 02:38:52 PM

Thats too absurd. There isnt enough energy on the planet to do such things ,even now the energy market is crumbling and it is very inefficient.

Plus I`m not even sure quantum computers are possible to build, it really hits the walls of physics and the limits of the universe.

Tyrrany cant be infinite, there are boundaries even to the government.

Well if you manage to replicate accurately a brain's structure and the way it works you might be able to simulate it quite efficiently and without much power(after all a brain only uses a few watts of effective consumption).

But this is still science fiction for now
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 503
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
February 26, 2016, 02:36:12 PM


One of my friends used the 23andme service a couple of years ago (sending in both material from him as well as his wife), before it was clear that genetic info was at risk to being turned over to .gov.  He got a lot of interesting information (including a surprise that his wife may have some TAIWANESE ancestry -- she doubts that and has no Oriental features at all).

He also found certain propensities to health problems and other factoids.  He still gets an occasional update from them when they invent a new procedure.

I WAS interested.  Now not so much.

Our .gov has proved over and over that you give them an inch (one iPhone's password info), and they want a mile (tap into iPhones to catch a drug dealer).

My fear is when quantum computers come online and someone will be able to do a brain simulation based on your genetic code.
Brain structure is also based on what you lived and your previous experiences and there is no way to efficiently replicate them.
Even if you manage to replicate 99.9% of someone's brain the 0.1% difference might give you huge differences.

But they might replicate social tendencies and trends based on this kind of technology, but we probably won't see this in the current century  Grin
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1036
Facts are more efficient than fud
February 26, 2016, 01:52:58 PM


One of my friends used the 23andme service a couple of years ago (sending in both material from him as well as his wife), before it was clear that genetic info was at risk to being turned over to .gov.  He got a lot of interesting information (including a surprise that his wife may have some TAIWANESE ancestry -- she doubts that and has no Oriental features at all).

He also found certain propensities to health problems and other factoids.  He still gets an occasional update from them when they invent a new procedure.

I WAS interested.  Now not so much.

Our .gov has proved over and over that you give them an inch (one iPhone's password info), and they want a mile (tap into iPhones to catch a drug dealer).

My fear is when quantum computers come online and someone will be able to do a brain simulation based on your genetic code.
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1865
February 26, 2016, 01:47:56 PM


One of my friends used the 23andme service a couple of years ago (sending in both material from him as well as his wife), before it was clear that genetic info was at risk to being turned over to .gov.  He got a lot of interesting information (including a surprise that his wife may have some TAIWANESE ancestry -- she doubts that and has no Oriental features at all).

He also found certain propensities to health problems and other factoids.  He still gets an occasional update from them when they invent a new procedure.

I WAS interested.  Now not so much.

Our .gov has proved over and over that you give them an inch (one iPhone's password info), and they want a mile (tap into iPhones to catch a drug dealer).
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1036
Facts are more efficient than fud
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
February 25, 2016, 11:22:00 PM
I give up on hiding from the government. Can't be done. I am pursuing microtransactions as the way to fight back (the government can't tax every damn little thing that people do, because people don't want to track every damn little thing they do). You can say I am pursuing a new strategy of "hiding in plain sight".

For privacy, I prefer zk-snarks. Monero is available now, Zcash is not. I presume Monero could perhaps add zk-snarks in the future if they decide to.
hero member
Activity: 854
Merit: 1009
JAYCE DESIGNS - http://bit.ly/1tmgIwK
February 25, 2016, 01:27:47 PM
Well, well, if you consider that my post today basically points out that scripting on a block chain can never be secure unless the security is centralized (and you trust that centralized manager), then basically the writing is on the wall that China already controls Bitcoin and they also want to control the centralized scripting block chain.

Decentralized crypto currency and block chains are currently dead. We only have centralized. The internet is being destroyed.

China may be mining BTC with free electricity (cost charged to the collective), thus the ETH is essentially free for them at any price. And they can't sell all the BTC they mine without driving the BTC price down.

On the next halving, China's % of the hashrate will increase from the current 65%.

We need cheaper electricity, damnit, stupid politicians over here can even make a normal energy deal for cheaper oil or remove some taxes from it, so that electricity gets cheaper.

In fact they want to make it more expensive because of the enviromentalists concerned for pollution, therefor tax electricity even more....

We need cheaper energy ASAP.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
February 25, 2016, 04:42:39 AM
Well, well, if you consider that my post today basically points out that scripting on a block chain can never be secure unless the security is centralized (and you trust that centralized manager), then basically the writing is on the wall that China already controls Bitcoin and they also want to control the centralized scripting block chain.

Decentralized crypto currency and block chains are currently dead. We only have centralized. The internet is being destroyed.

China may be mining BTC with free electricity (cost charged to the collective), thus the ETH is essentially free for them at any price. And they can't sell all the BTC they mine without driving the BTC price down.

On the next halving, China's % of the hashrate will increase from the current 65%.
newbie
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
February 24, 2016, 01:11:38 AM
I realize this is nothing new, but I feel it is relevant to the discussion,www.casesam.co.uk  I have noticed a sharp rise in degenerate behaviour over the Casesam Samsung S7 cover past 3 months which is adding fuel to  big bang.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
February 24, 2016, 05:58:10 PM
http://www.coindesk.com/japan-considers-regulating-bitcoin-as-currency/

I told you so...

Recently the European Commission (EC) announced plans to apply the EU anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing regulations (the Fourth AML Directive or 4AMLD) to digital currency exchanges and possibly wallet providers.

This move is a part of the EC’s broadening action against terrorist financing.

But while this news comes as no surprise, another EC proposal, far less publicized and somewhat overlooked, has the potential to revolutionize the current state of affairs in digital currency regulation in the EU.

The EC announced that it will consider applying the licensing and supervision rules of the Payment Services Directive (PSD; a new version of which, 2PSD, has been adopted in 2015) to digital currency exchanges in order to "promote better control and understanding of the market".

PSD is one of the cornerstones of the EU single market for payments. It sets out rules for regulated payment services and contains a catalogue of such services.

Firms which render payment services have to comply with many regulations, including licensing and supervision rules, which now the EC apparently also intends to apply to digital currency exchanges.

Such a plan seems to be sensible. It is clear that there are two legal acts in the EU that would be well-suited for regulating cryptocurrencies: PSD and another related directive, the E-Money Directive (EMD). Works on the new '3EMD' are now under way, so some changes could be introduced there as well.
Revising basic assumptions

What matters, however, is what the current PSD regulatory methodology looks like.

A crucial piece of the PSD is the definition of "funds", which so far has included only cash, bank (scriptural) money and e-money (regulated by the EMD). Cryptocurrencies do not fall into any of those categories – a fact confirmed by the European Central Bank (ECB) and others.

It follows that, for the EC, digital currency exchanges would be best covered by some provisions of the PSD, although in the current form it does not apply to digital currencies at all.

It therefore appears that regulatory change might have to be much deeper than merely adding a few provisions extending the scope of licensing and supervision regulations on digital currency exchanges.

New regulations would probably have to revise some of the basic assumptions and concepts of the PSD, including definitions of "funds", "payment transaction" or "payment institution".
How should stakeholders react?

It is difficult to evaluate the EC's plan, since at the moment it is extremely general and vague. However, very likely it will open the door for the introduction of cryptocurrencies to the EU payment services regulations.

Various proposals may emerge afterwards, from cautious and restrained ones to those proposing comprehensive and broad regulation.

Firms that may be affected by any regulatory change should monitor developments closely and be ready to react.
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
February 24, 2016, 03:50:38 AM
Yes, yes you have.

sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
hero member
Activity: 854
Merit: 1009
JAYCE DESIGNS - http://bit.ly/1tmgIwK
February 22, 2016, 05:22:15 PM

Fucking hypocrytes, they want to regulate BTC in europe very harshly, but on the other hand they fund the "blockchain" bullshit of the banks.

Any logic in this?
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
February 22, 2016, 02:21:12 AM
I told you so...

Recently the European Commission (EC) announced plans to apply the EU anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing regulations (the Fourth AML Directive or 4AMLD) to digital currency exchanges and possibly wallet providers.

This move is a part of the EC’s broadening action against terrorist financing.

But while this news comes as no surprise, another EC proposal, far less publicized and somewhat overlooked, has the potential to revolutionize the current state of affairs in digital currency regulation in the EU.

The EC announced that it will consider applying the licensing and supervision rules of the Payment Services Directive (PSD; a new version of which, 2PSD, has been adopted in 2015) to digital currency exchanges in order to "promote better control and understanding of the market".

PSD is one of the cornerstones of the EU single market for payments. It sets out rules for regulated payment services and contains a catalogue of such services.

Firms which render payment services have to comply with many regulations, including licensing and supervision rules, which now the EC apparently also intends to apply to digital currency exchanges.

Such a plan seems to be sensible. It is clear that there are two legal acts in the EU that would be well-suited for regulating cryptocurrencies: PSD and another related directive, the E-Money Directive (EMD). Works on the new '3EMD' are now under way, so some changes could be introduced there as well.
Revising basic assumptions

What matters, however, is what the current PSD regulatory methodology looks like.

A crucial piece of the PSD is the definition of "funds", which so far has included only cash, bank (scriptural) money and e-money (regulated by the EMD). Cryptocurrencies do not fall into any of those categories – a fact confirmed by the European Central Bank (ECB) and others.

It follows that, for the EC, digital currency exchanges would be best covered by some provisions of the PSD, although in the current form it does not apply to digital currencies at all.

It therefore appears that regulatory change might have to be much deeper than merely adding a few provisions extending the scope of licensing and supervision regulations on digital currency exchanges.

New regulations would probably have to revise some of the basic assumptions and concepts of the PSD, including definitions of "funds", "payment transaction" or "payment institution".
How should stakeholders react?

It is difficult to evaluate the EC's plan, since at the moment it is extremely general and vague. However, very likely it will open the door for the introduction of cryptocurrencies to the EU payment services regulations.

Various proposals may emerge afterwards, from cautious and restrained ones to those proposing comprehensive and broad regulation.

Firms that may be affected by any regulatory change should monitor developments closely and be ready to react.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
February 20, 2016, 09:30:45 AM
...

Gold will work, of course, as a Store of Value as long as you do not have to board the plane with it.

US resident citizens can always choose platinum if worried about the TSA upon exit or a general gold confiscation (unlikely IMO, but possible).  Silver of course would be free of that confiscation threat, but it is bulky.  

Or saffron?  (Worth more than its weight in gold I have read)

Sorry I think this is ill informed advice. Any thing of value will be confiscated at transportation hubs, borders, checkpoints, routine inspections by police, etc..

And I am not convinced it will hold its value.

Either we move too far into a Dark Age, and gold loses its value relative to food. Remember Armstrong has explained why this happens throughout history of man.

Or we move to the Knowledge Age and gold loses its value relative to the crypto currency I am creating.

Or maybe both!
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1865
February 20, 2016, 12:56:40 AM
...

Gold will work, of course, as a Store of Value as long as you do not have to board the plane with it.

US resident citizens can always choose platinum if worried about the TSA upon exit or a general gold confiscation (unlikely IMO, but possible).  Silver of course would be free of that confiscation threat, but it is bulky. 

Or saffron?  (Worth more than its weight in gold I have read)
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
February 19, 2016, 10:10:37 AM
hero member
Activity: 854
Merit: 1009
JAYCE DESIGNS - http://bit.ly/1tmgIwK
February 19, 2016, 03:55:33 AM
...

I specifically omitted ethereum, we know how that shit goes.

Most altcoins are unstable, we know that especially new hyped ones.


But there are a few ones who have became stable, or atleast established.

Look at DOGE or LTC, we know that no matter how silly or stupid they look, they will be around for a long time.

People like silly things, and I would invest in those, because they earned the reputation in these years.



As for stuff like ETH? C`mon, those guys were almost bankrupt and only ask for more funding.
Pages:
Jump to: