Topic: Is a Madmax outcome coming before 2020? Thus do we need anonymity? - page 9. (Read 102759 times)

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9884655

I suspect CoinCube agrees with me that it is best not to argue with someone who doesn't understand the math and science, because it is impossible to have an intelligent discussion when the other person doesn't know the math background.

I was not really disagreeing with you. I was mostly agreeing and then was trying to teach you something extra, but you apparently (and I don't say this in a snotty tone, just politely) still don't understand the math of how dynamic systems converge on a pattern distinguishable from disorder (a.k.a. noise or lack of information). Study for example Differential Equations and the concept of Q for example in audio systems along with the terms critically damped, underdamped, etc..

People gravitating (i.e. inertia) is a constraint.

I agree with you that decentralized systems are more resilient, but you need to understand that all decentralized systems also have order, e.g. the ants have a rule-based order to their decision matrix. Do you know what 100%indiscernible disorder is? A black hole where nothing discernible exists.

A little bit flawed, why do you need a constraint, i mean surely the people will gravitate towards the better outcomes/solutions and the unpopular crazy ideas would always be in the minority.

In fact anarchy is the best solution for evolution, because then nothing would constrain the human evolution, and the human race could evolve democratically.

For example:
1) The state taxes highly people and people have small incomes so they have to work extra hours
2) Because of this, stress levels in humans could reach critical points
3) Stress levels cause heart problems and in longer terms it may evolve our species into the wrong direction
4) In long term this could cause a decrease in live expectancy, and new infants could also be born with heart problems

So you see how this could affect evolution in the long term, surely you dont want the working drones that work 18 hour/day to cause bad mutations in the human genom, so obviously if you give infinite number of choices to the people and not constrain them into something negatitive, then the majority will decide and will evolve into that, based on our current adaptation.

First we were hunters gatherers, then we were laborers, now we are mostly office workers or service sector employees.
We are not fit for survival in a jungle, most of us, but we dont need it, because we have tools that protect, enhance us.

That is what evolution is about, to circumvent our flaws and enhance our intellect and knowledge.

For example if a worldwide catastrophe would occur and all people got into the streets rioting, then we dont really need to make spears and arrows for ourselves, and tools like hammers and stuff to build a new society, because we already have knowledge of better technology: guns and 3D printers.

If atleast 1 people knows or has backed up the blueprints for our current technology, then even if we destroy our current civilization, we wont have to start from square 1.

See thats the beauty of evolution

I know man, i`m a peaceful guy, i dont wish for any revolution or anything, because i know that any kind of revolution (especially a proletarian one) will cause more havok that it was before. Because no matter what the intention of the revolutioners were, guess what the leader of the revolution will be the new opressor after that, and will treat the opposition as the new enemy.

Thats not the solution, no matter what change will happen, it must be a peaceful intelectual one. I prefer to call it an intellectual Renaissance.Or the 2nd renessaince.

In the First Renaissance we crippled the powers of the organized religions (which still unfortunately exist, but not that influential anymore, atleast not in the western world).
The Second Renaissance will cripple the powers of the corrupted states worldwide, and only after that the human race shall know peace and real prosperity, or utopia of any kind depicted by some Hollywood movies.

And I completely agree with you man, i dont know why you disagree with me, i just say what you said, because i know that any organized opposition will cause only more civil war and unrest. It must be a peaceful intelectual resistance, and for that we need to educate the zombie minded sheeple about this.

Technology can be a great helper, but also a great opressor (based on who is using it). If people use it then we can build decentralized economies, if the government uses it, it will build mass surveilance grids and spying softwares.

So who is more eligible for using it?

This is a competition between decentralized free market and corrupted organized states, the competition is big, and whomeves has better things to offer will win. Obviously in the long term the state will lose, as it has nothing to offer but taxes, regulation and war, which one day could destroy the human race.

The only way that we can survive as a race is to put our minds together and invent alternatives to everything centrally controlled, if not then the next Stalin clone will destoy the human race.

Folks we are frogs being slowly boiled to death. Only a few of us see what is coming in terms of 90% taxation and confiscation of wealth.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/18/japan-considering-exit-tax-to-leave-country/



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/17/eu-looking-to-centralize-corporate-taxes/



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/17/german-socialists-so-eager-to-destroy-germany/



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/07/18/who-is-in-that-hated-top-1-could-it-be-you/




http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/04/22/the-cadillac-tax-obama-will-all-your-benefits-as-part-of-obamacare/



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/10/30/crowd-walks-out-on-obama/



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/08/20/the-obama-dark-age/



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/01/03/what-was-in-the-fiscal-cliff-bill/




Use higher taxes to force all savings into government bonds, so that all savings can be nationalized for corruption.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/01/29/cycles-obamas-tax-free-bonds/



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/14/the-three-bombshells-tucked-inside-the-continuing-resolution-to-fund-the-govt/



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/04/30/obama-is-ready-to-impose-tolls-on-all-interstate-highways/



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2012/09/02/obamacare-the-death-squads-maybe-real/





    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Socialist.

    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

CoinCube is describing that unconstrained dynamic systems composed of autonomous actors can't always converge their solution space on a local minima, thus oscillate all over the solution space chaotically without any solution. An example in real life would be starting a new altcoin with mutated features every 5 minutes, so there is never any adhesion. Even ant colonies have built in constraints to their decision network (e.g. protect colony as highest priority, forage for food as second priority, protect self as third priority, etc), which enable them to accomplish goals.


We may not need the State to provide the constraint.

For example, block chains don't mutate every day. We are even having difficulty overcoming Bitcoin's inertia to improve upon it.

Instead we may end up with (even anonymous) benevolent dictators such as Linus Torvalds, who lead the way.

The State (and group religion) is (are) merely an obfuscation of which Czars are pulling the strings behind the curtain, and their motivations to rape the population.

There will never be 100% anarchy, because it doesn't converge on any outcome. Always there will be leaders.

The key distinction in my mind is as follows.

Unlike the unabortable collectivized constraint models, decentralization technology (e.g. open source, PoW, and end-to-end principle) enable bottom up competition for leadership.




Please enlighten me, where is the instruction manual for shooting a paradigm shift?

You may have misunderstood the part where I said I am between a minanarchist and a free market anarchist. What I mean is that we have to prove to what degree technology can mute or render impotent the power of the State. Pontification is not the same as implementation. Even though it sounds nice, the reality is that the State exists because humans disagree and fight. This is why for example Proof-of-Work was such a major technological breakthrough, because it enabled centralized trust of decentralized untrusted parties. Ditto the end-to-end principle pushes the trust out to the ends of the network, so the untrusted intermediaries are just dumb relays. Please see my prior post where I mentioned that some decentralized (insufficiently damped) systems don't converge and instead oscillate. It is not enough to just say "magic wand decentralized!". We have to actually build decentralized technologies that solve real problems. Also decentralized systems may have tradeoffs. For example, an entirely anonymous, decentralized economy means human trafficking may become less traceable. OTOH, government is the most egregious human trafficker, bribing our women (with inequality employment laws, welfare, subsidizing hypergamy, and divorce battering ram) to ignore men forsaking child rearing (birth rates have collapsed in Western nations where government is > 50% of the economy) and conscripting our men to kill each other in silly wars.

http://blog.jim.com/economics/the-future-belongs-to-those-that-show-up/
http://blog.jim.com/images/JapanFert4.png

Tangible assets are very illiquid without a market maker, because they are not fungible like money is (e.g. not every person who has a fish wants to trade for a gold nugget). The centralized intermediary ruins the end-to-end principle. I have suffered greatly dealing with gold dealers. Tangible assets will not scale to a knowledge economy. Sorry.

The government can never entirely take down the internet. We hackers are too resourceful. Heck we can even 3D print guns out of plastic and build contraptions out of junk we find in a gar(b)age (can).

For one thing, we can retrofit WiFi routers to form mesh networks across communities, then connect those with HAM radio or what ever.

Let them try to shut it down, it will be just like when they shut down Napster, which will incentivize us to produce decentralized solutions.

We do need to re-design crypto-currency to adapt to multiple chains, if regions are temporary unable to communicate with each other.

There is a lot of work that needs to be done in crypto-currency that is not being done on Bitcoin.

We are starting to win. Even Sergei and Larry of Google were hackers before they became famous.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/18/apparently-our-blog-is-now-suggested-by-google/

http://i0.wp.com/armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Google-Screen-Shot.jpg?resize=584%2C973


P.S. I don't agree with blog.jim.com on every point. Note he is the first person who ever communicated with Satoshi in a public forum.

Yes, until there are centralized money collectors (banks) , until then the state can always make up an excuse to loot them (especially the civilian money stored inside it, not the banks profit). Stupid people blame it on the banks, which is bullsh*t, the bank would never do such thing, as it hurts its reputation. It's always the state that is the most evil, i saw what happened in the USA, the occupy wallstreet BS, and it was a propaganda BS, as it blamed everything on the banks, when in fact it was the state that did all the evil there.

Huge taxation, Inflation, and extreme regulation is the most disgusting thing that i can imagine.They take advantage and humiliate the average citizen, and push it into the mud, while time to time giving him a bone (socialism) so that he doesnt feel so helpless, but throughout the life of an average person, he gets the worst from his state.

Yet, 90% of the population are still statist drones, so brainwashed that its disgusting.These mindless sheeps will never get it, the fact that slavery was never abolished in the 1800's, in fact its bigger than ever was, it's just that its hidden so well that you cant even detect it.

Every single day i see legislation depriving citizens from their rights, throughout the world, and its disgusting. Brave countries that once were remarkable turned into police states: USA,Canada, Switzerland, once were nice countries and now they are controlled by evil forces that want the total enslavement of all people.


Perhaps but then again, if the big collapse will happen worldwide, i think physical goods have their value, anything could happen to the internet, and then the crypto world could be endangered.

Of course the disadvantage of that is that the government can confiscate it, but atleast its physical.


I disagree there, it is possible to bring total anarchy with capitalistic principles, because the state has never done anything positive ever. Nobody needs it, its just a burden in all of us, the free market could perfectly satisfy all needs.
For elderly/children/disabled you could set up charities. For civilian services like ambulance/firefighters etc you could set up a payment system, i mean everything could be privatized.

Sure everything would cost money, and there would be a money sign everywhere, but atleast there would be no opressor, only lazy people want free stuff, but even freedom comes at a price, the price of everything not being free is the price of freedom, because once you start introducing socialist elements and state elements, then you start to lose freedom.

Looks like people have chosen so far free socialist stuff but give up all their liberties and dignity to be abused by the state as much as possible, and now they cry that they have a police state, i mean give me a break
These stupid sheepherd couldn't even tie their shoes without a government regulation and subsidies, damn these idiots who support these slavemasters  

There is massive global Stockholm syndrome in the world, when i see a politician on TV it makes me vomit, but then again if they speak in an arena, 10.000 of idiots cheer them like if they were messiahs or similar, when in fact they are just slavemasters, and few months later they get tax increases and more regulation so that they get jobless and then they are even more dependent on socialist aids, its so disgusting.

Ah yes add to my prior post that the savings is not in the hands of the actors in the economy, instead in the hands of the Czars.


Tangible money violates the end-to-end principle, i.e. we at the ends can't autonomously exchange it for another form of value, instead rely on a physical exchange with an intermediary dealer (between us and what would be the block chain in crypto-currency) which makes us vulnerable to fraud, government dragnet, and mugging.


I suppose minanarchism (or more precisely Contentionism) best describes my current political-economic philosophy, only because of the realism that technology can't entirely eliminate the State so in order words the statism is minimized as much as technology can. Also I am not a capitalist in the traditional sense, because I theorized stored value is waning as knowledge capital takes over the future. But that doesn't make me a communist either. I am pro free market, i.e. free market anarchism.

Yeah sure which will get looted by greedy politicians: Cyprus,Greece,Hungary, and now USA, yeah sure that pension is very safe there, when it takes only an executive order to loot it all  

Obviously you underestimate the greediness and evilness of todays political era

Also bank accounts could be looted aswell, due to our magnificent and brilliant Keynesian fractional reserve banking system which is very sound and logical (or atleast this is what the propaganda says), only about 3-4% of the money is covered, so if there is a panic all banks freeze their accounts and confiscate some or all the money (current or debit accounts aswell) + the rest of it gets covered by taxpayer money, and even this is sometimes not enough, so it needs some additional money printing by the CB to cover this.

Meaning that if there will be (and it will be) the big crash, then nobody would be allowed to withdraw money from the bank and all funds will be lost. I`m not saying that keeping money under the pillow is better, because there too it gets vaporized by immense inflation, so the only safe haven is digital decentralized currencies with no goverment intervention.

Precious metals could be also a good idea, however that is too visible and could be confiscated by the state, so not a good idea. 

Are you an anarcho capitalist because i like your views?

I grow weary of trying to explain the difference between bottom-up (free market) and top-down (collectivization, democracy, large corporations, religion) systems and the fact that only the former can optimize.


Let me quote from that link for you.


The problem of collectivization of impacts is that individuals don't react with global optimization, but rather with rational self-interest which is globally destructive. Collectivization removes the degrees-of-freedom from individual actions of rational self-interest, and places the adjustments in the hands of top-down Czars, who can't possibly optimize each of the individual lives of the actual actors in the economy. In other words, a Tragedy of the Commons. Note however, the Knowledge Age may offer us the hope of an Inverse Commons which has the opposite result (it actually gets better the more we share with "open source").

This is why I compared this in the past to simulated annealing, which is nature's only known general optimization algorithm, i.e. the molecules in ice are allowed to locally self-organize if ice is top-down cooled more slowly, so the frozen ice is more optimized in structure with less cracks.

The constituents have structured their lives, expectations, life planning, investments, low birth-rates, etc based on a subsidy. This is inertia that can't be undone (old non-productive people, few socialistic indoctrinated youth). As I explained upthead, the Norwegian GDP (direct oil businesses + government reliance on tax from oil) is 50% dependent on oil.

And they haven't saved anything net. Their external debt is $700+ billion and their sovereign fund is 800+ billion and their annual government expenditures are $160 billion.

You see they are not prepared, because top-down collectivized systems can't anneal, only bottom up systems can.

I don't want to explain this again. This is the umpteenth time I have explained (argued) it.

Edit: please read the caveat about the expediency of top-down systems, that all bottom up systems are composed of top-down actors, and bottom up systems don't necessarily converge without some top-down incentives. The implication is there is an ongoing contention between the two forms of systemic structure.

FYI, most of that tax money is going into a HUGE fund that Norway is saving up for when they run out of oil. They know they won't be able to sustain their oil funded social programs for long, especially once the oil runs out, so they are saving a whole lot of money into a fund that they hope will be able to sustain them for long after.

Ah, found the name and wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway#The_Government_Pension_Fund_Global

So, basically the entirety of what Soviet Union was.

+/- a few months

My guess is gold and bitcoin to a few $1000s after bottoming. It is cashing out without paying what I expect to be globally ubiquitous confiscation level taxes by 2017 (e.g. 90%?) that is the potential snag.

Any one who doesn't understand that tax is an enslavement paradigm is clueless. I am tired of explaining it.

And now for something more interesting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbhbpdWc-wE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFatCrUg8u8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvwqSMRtoSI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pB8JXBTmHXY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76XIRucXPtU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fregObNcHC8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqmRDV0a_70
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LzHXePgT9I&list=PL7D7F71BC947408BD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGwd63nAFlI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBCLgG_hF0Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DE3fOpVlIFA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkQy7o-u8KI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_j8gVc0dJU&index=11&list=PL46F8D419F00825F0

No, we don't need.

It's not just Norway that taxes it heavily, there are plenty of other nations that do the same thing, greedy politicians want all the money for the goverment to then use if for corruption or buy themselves government cars, mansions, etc. Believe me i`ve seen plenty of this, its all propaganda.

I suppose that you talk about foreign companies drilling in Norway (because obviously small Norway companies have absolutely no access to the oil mainly because of the regulation and the high tax makes them uncompetitive in the first place)

An other solution could be to implement some merchantilist policies, so that the oil drilled in Nw can only be sold in Nw, if you are concerned about "their oil", because its better to be merchantilist than socialist in my opinion.

But even then, if you are concerned that the big company is running away with all the oil, then highly taxing them is not the solution, banning it is lunacy, so the only option is to introduce new competitors, thus proving once again my point, so that the competitors to survive, then need less regulation and considerably smaller taxes.

Otherwise its only the Nw people who will get buttf*ck€d, not them, which you are trying to protect in the first place.

The 78% tax has NO effect on the price of gas for the people of Norway- they produce about 2.5% of the world production-not enough to have an effect.

I don't get how you think the oil company should get the oil they extract from Norway land- for free or very cheap.