Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion - page 172. (Read 647176 times)

Where's the Sidhujag cure to fix this problem that makes bitcoin worthless?


Or this other rather impossible to fix problem?

The r0ach report 29: Bitcoin is similar to the double slit experiment in practice - It only works if you don't use it

http://steemit.com/bitcoin/@r0achtheunsavory/the-r0ach-report-29-bitcoin-is-similar-to-the-double-slit-experiment-in-practice-it-only-works-if-you-don-t-use-it

Technology is just a tool like a hammer, though; a means to an end but not the end.  This makes the word technologist, transhumanist, and all derivatives like that kind of like saying you're a stapler.  It's not hard to make the argument humans have no purpose (nihilism), but if you think the opposite, there's definitely not going to be any purpose found in being a stapler.  

That's my theory for the Fermi paradox, that human direction is entirely based around primitive things like reproduction and if you genetically engineer that out or somehow evolve past that, you likely lose the will to live at the same time and then just disappear.  The less depressing version of events would be that once achieving that stage you have reached some type of level of transcendence and no longer need to be around here.

They are telling you how to be more competitive. They are simply highlighting how to be competitive globally and holistically on a multi generational timeline.

In my opinion you will have great difficulties forming a society of like-minded people because your core positions are mutually exclusive. You can eliminate top down control or you can be competitive you cannot do both.

Freedom requires self-control to maintain coherence. The more knowledgeable and freer the society the more self-control is needed. When a society chooses to reject internal self-control aka moral restraint it leads inevitably to external political restraint aka a police state. The only alternative to those two possibilities is the general loss of coherence and the wanton destruction of accumulated knowledge.

Economic arguments are important but secondary for economics and game theory are ultimately driven by morality and ethics.

We have disagreed on this point in the past.
See: Superrationality and the Infinite

Ultimately unless he can conquer, enslave me, and force me to submit to his morality, then it's all hot air from my perspective. I will not attempt to pretend I know anything about his power over others, probably because I don't care to know.

Basically they're just all babbling idiots which I should ignore.

I'm generally more approachable when people don't speak down to me (and others). Dispensing with his absolute conviction about morality would be a start of someone I might be willing to absorb and contemplate. If he could recognize that what he is doing is analogous in some way to the very left he despises, might indicate to me that he is a smart and observant person with sufficient humility about the futility of absolutes.

I think generally most people just ignore and don't even bother to give such feedback. I should probably adopt that more invisible reaction.

In short, politics and religion is a battle over top-down control. Rather I just accept the world is diverse and I'm not going to be able to form a society of like-minded people. Ultimately economic arguments are what matters. I would probably be more interested if these dudes were telling me how I can be more competitive (and obviously gaming the collective will incentivize me to become less competitive).

I would be more interested perhaps if he was able to argue that conservatives are going to dominate the earth and so I better join them or else. I doubt such a convincing argument could be made successfully. Thus it's all rhetoric to play in the propaganda game of politics. The leftists tell me that I must adopt their morality or else they'll have the government destroy me. The conservatives tell me I have to adopt their morality else I will go to Hell. Basically they're both trying to intimidate me into joining their dysfunctional cults.

The don't throw your pearls at swine scripture comes to mind. Politicking is throwing feces at swine. If they had pearls, they'd be more circumspect.

I realized while writing this that I am not right, left, Libertarian, nor even min-anarchist. I'm apolitical. I'm a technologist. And I'm a man.

The quote was Bruce Charlton who is Christian not Jewish. The video clip is of Dennis Prager who is a conservative Jew.

As I said before I profoundly disagree with your interpretation of the book of Matthew.

A text taken out of context, becomes a pretext.

I disagree with the implication that Matthew 6:5 should be read as a prohibition against Bruce Charlton sharing his thoughts on religion with others on his private blog or Dennis Prager from sharing his understanding of the religious implications of the left right divide in his homemade video clips.

I would refer you to the following:
Mark 16:15
Matthew 24:14
Psalms 96:3
Revelation 14:6-7
Matthew 28:19-20

Judging the world around us is nothing more then a decision making process. It is the application of prior knowledge to make a determination about the state of current reality. It is a determination ultimately of what is true and what is false to the best of our limited ability.

If one tried to live by the principle that we can never make judgments one could not live life. The concept is ultimately incoherent.

The Book of Matthew is not telling us to do the impossible. It is telling us the proper way to consider others who are living in a way we disagree with. It warns us that ultimately we ourselves will be held to the same harsh standards we apply to others.

Matthew 7:1


(1) Judge not, that you be not judged. (2) For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again. (3) And why behold you the mote that is in your brother's eye, but consider not the beam that is in your own eye? (4) or how will you say to your brother, Let me pull out the mote out of your eye; and, behold, a beam is in your own eye? (5)You hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of your own eye; and then shall you see clearly to cast out the mote out of your brother's eye.

When we judge we should strive to be free of hypocrisy. Given flawed human nature this necessitates that the focus of our judgement should primarily be focused inward on ourselves. We should strive to first consider the beam in our own eye as this is the primary problem. Only after we fix ourselves are we in a position to help others fix themselves.


Matthew 7:1: The Most Misunderstood Bible Verse
http://thediscerningsheep.blogspot.com/2014/12/matthew-71-most-misunderstood-bible.html?m=1

@realroach of course commodization of mining is nonsense. And Bitcoin will be entirely centralized at the Zionist end game, exactly how they planned it when they created Bitcoin. Where is that link to Szabo's federation theory of mining? I think it's somewhat true that the game theory of proof-of-work prevents a rogue whale/miner from taking 51% control to do abhorrent actions which destroy the system. Yet at the end game (which is perhaps decades from now) of the death of stored, fungible monetary value, all those whales are locked into a "one for all, all for one" top-down, totalitarian control system to try to sustain the value of their useless stored value units.

Now understand my prior post (the quote of my discussion with CoinHoarder) and my theme about the knowledge age is about where blockchains are going that the creators of Bitcoin may not have realized:


Thus, another 10,000X gain may still be coming for the project which fulfills my knowledge age theme. Bitcoin may not be the last one we will see in our lifetime. The train may not have left the station yet.

Sidhujag, are you one of those noobs who claims commodification of ASICs is inevitable when there's absolutely no incentive for it to happen?  What about Anonymint?  There's my take on it:

Bruce Charlton once again is making up dogmatic bullshit. I don't feel any brotherhood with that overbearing Jew who thinks he knows what is right and wrong as if he appointed himself to be God.

The left and right are both trying to dictate morality. They both reach for top-down control, with the religious conservatives obfuscating their power trip in guise of religion being the absolute truth that everyone must follow lest we incorrigibles go to Hell and be disrespected in the Jewish or Christian circles.

None of them are following Jesus' wisdom in Matthew 6:5 to STFU and pray in their closet and leaving the judging about morality to God at the gate to heaven.

Oil shock was a malthusian event which led capital to flee towards safe havens. Phosphorate which cannot be synthesized and used by farmers extensively went up much more than any other commodity. Now malthusian event just ended and even if another came bitcoin had dethroned gold as a safe haven just as I predicted when I told you the "next time btc passes gold in price it will be for good". I tend to be subtle in my comments hoping you would have the IQ to decipher my meanings but I was undoubtedly wrong. So now bitcoin which already will replace fiat is also seen as a better sov than metals.. hence the S based adoption curve we are seeing and an amazing price discovery with the likes of which we have never and will never see again in any asset in our or our childrens lifetimes.

...

Welcome to the bullshit world of Armstrong where he claimed gold was going to "crash to the abyss", what was it, $800 or something he said?  Now he says this:

"How does this end? Armstrong says, “Our computers are showing that interest rates are going to go up faster than anybody has ever seen in history. . . . You are looking at a doubling of interest rates very, very rapidly. . . . Gold and equities are the place to be.”"

First he was saying dump gold WHEN IT WAS AT THE FLOOR, now he says buy gold lol. 

His train of thought I'm guessing is that if interest rates go to the moon like after the so-called "Nixon oil shock", govts would collapse from not being able to service the debt without trying to hyperinflate it away to make the payments lower.  So all he's really saying is massive inflation on the way.  Gold and silver typically vastly outperform stocks in hyperinflation scenarios, and metals are already right near cost of production floor anyway.  Metals are a no-brainer over stocks.  Stocks also take a jump off a cliff before going up when govts get into currency/inflation trouble like that as well.

It was 2015.75

Okay, makes sense, so this temporary low in 2016.75 could be much worse than 2008? And will stay bad for some time?

An opposing view:

Here is a very short little video clip that describes the fundamental difference between the right and the left. I highly recommend watching it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPVDfhXQfw8&app=desktop

r0ach's bolded core assumption above is false. However, to show that requires a fairly deep philosophical discussion.

Briefly and borrowing the words of Bruce Charlton who is more articulate on this topic then I am.

"Most mainstream metaphysical assumptions are incoherent wrt. epistemology. As examples:

If natural selection is assumed metaphysically true, as the only and sufficient explanation of Man; then human reason must be a product of natural selection; which means that human reason can never know anything (because natural selection is about differential fitness, not about truth).  

If it is assumed that the universe is assumed to be a combination of randomness and determinism; then we personally could never know this - because we personally would be a combination of randomness and determinism and could never know anything. The universe might actually Be random/ determined - but if so, we personally could never know that."

A more detailed analysis of this point for those interested in this topic can be found here:

Metaphysics comes before Epistemology
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2017/12/metaphysics-comes-before-epistemology.html?m=1

Wtf welcome to the real world buddy?! You dont know how todays markets work? Why do you think are pushing for dex so hard? Well with my new assets feature all stocks and bonds can actually be on chain. Anytime iou comes to play u will get debt based pseudo instruments created automatically. I dont think you are referring to the same malthuse article im talking about. He doesnt even mention crypto in it.

Cuckoldcube posted some entirely wrong thesis about what the right and left is, so I had to post the real thing:

http://steemit.com/life/@r0achtheunsavory/the-r0ach-report-28-the-most-politically-incorrect-thing-posted-on-steemit-before-that-s-obviously-true

LOL, the Szabo view makes the erroneous assumption that PoW doesn't centralize more by the day resulting in something resembling a federated chain.  So yea, his stupid economic view might work if everyone pretends a federated chain is "decentralized".  The so called fundamentals are all lies pushed by people who know it but lie anyway, while the price is entirely a fraud as well.  People like the Winklevoss have 200,000 coins they bought for next to nothing they can send to Coinbase and use as margin collateral to 10-50x the price overnight (the same thing that was done to create the artificially high Ethereum price on Poloniex).  

Do you really think it's a good idea for people to be able to rig markets by putting up collateral that not only has no real value due to not being a real commodity, but it's a completely imaginary asset that doesn't exist in the first place?  That's an even bigger scam than the fraudulent Wall Street markets that existed before it.  And it's not just bitcoin, they can create an infinite amount of coins and do this over and over.  How is that not a scam? lol.  These markets are all just fraud bubbles and the only type of assets that have real value are ones that exist in the real world you can take physical delivery of.

Need to travel? Got gold? You're fucked. Trade gold for cryptocurrency is required.

You still havent read the szabo article I linked to you many times. Do that first. Iota i agree on.. spectre protocol is much better (aviv's project). But your wrong on so many levels its hard to know where to start with u other than telling you to read more.

And why the Anonymint view on technology being good is (anonymint's favorite word) myopic:

From the Steemit thread:  

https://steemit.com/internet/@schattenjaeger/net-neutrality-is-not-a-human-right-it-s-socialism