Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion - page 189. (Read 647176 times)

I find it rather ironic he claims to have a miracle computer to predict the future but is unable to predict anything about bitcoin at all.  Oh, you need years of history to try and create an algo that will function correctly when backtested against the data?  Well, what good is that?  We don't live in a static universe with fixed variables and the same currency "flowing" around back and forth to the same fixed variables over and over.  

It's not like JP Morgan hasn't made a bad trade in years because they have miracle algos either, it's because the banks run the damn govt in a non-aggregate market where they can front run everything that happens in that market...which is controlled by...themselves.  Just a plain old algo, which is all that Armstrong uses, are notoriously bad against black swan events too, which he cannot predict.  Black swans aren't based on capital flows, they're based on random things like the dust bowl occurring from bad farming practices.

with cons and charlatans like Martin Armstrong you always get something like "asset X will go up or down or stay flat". Yet somehow even with such predictions he always ends up being wrong.

Here is where I pulled that number from. I have not really looked into it in depth.

http://www.education.rec.ri.cmu.edu/fire/naclo/pages/Ling/Fact/num-languages.html

The guy has done nothing, but re-work the work of others since day one and get away with it.  Must be that "7000 living languages" that you guys are claiming are out there. 

Number of languages

The total number of languages is estimated to be between three thousand and eight thousand. It is difficulty to give a more accurate number, since linguists sometimes disagree what are distinct languages and what are dialects of the same language.
The Ethnologue catalogue of world languages, which is one of the best linguistic resources, currently lists 6909 living languages. About 6% of them have more than a million speakers each, and collectively account for 94% of the world population. On the other hand, about half of the languages are spoken by fewer than ten thousand people, and about quarter have fewer than one thousand speakers.

First, let's discuss the main problems with Iota vs Byteball:

1)  Anti-spam PoW (unprofitable PoW) for emails was entirely designed for one-offs.  You put in some labor and the state changes from 0 to 1 once it's been satisfied and this information is now meaningless and can be thrown away afterwards.  Satoshi decided that in order to chain the past to the future in a continous ledger, he would need to create a linked list with a get rich quick scheme built on top of it, otherwise there are no incentives for the burden associated with the cost of holding this data forever.  

It seems like IOTA was invented (unprofitable PoW) while ignoring everything Satoshi learned needed to be utilized in order to launch the bitcoin scheme.  True, Iota could utilize a form of pruning, thus correcting the incentives problem and dragging it back to more like email PoW in nature, but then you have a very fragile, unsound money system with no valid form of state recovery if it goes down.

I'm not saying bitcoin is sound money, because it's not.  It doesn't function as a store of value due to price floor being recursive based on it's own demand, meaning you can always mine an endless stream of coins as transaction fees at the new floor and the floor can crater to nothingness at any time unless bitcoin was the unit of account of something (but it never will be since it doesn't function as a store of value - chicken and egg scenario).

Most attempts to increase bitcoin scalability in altcoins, and thus lower redundancy, seem to make it even less sound money where you can no longer trick people into believing it's money at all.  People will see how fragile they are and treat them as they should be, just as a throwaway currency like airline miles instead of pretending they are a valid store of value like gold or silver.

As for Byteball:

2)  Is there really a purpose in a, hmm how to describe it in general, a branching/multi-threaded/non-linear system like a DAG if you're just using bitshares-style consensus to force convergence and make it linear in a single path again?

Enough off-topic for today.

XMR was 0.0176 when I typed that and longed, then it went to 0.01888.  As for Eth, it's a scam propped up by the R3 group, so it will be propped up until the bankers decide they want to liquidate.


Has zero to do with anything special about Indians.  Both India and China are overpopulated, thus ripe to be exploited by global labor arbitrage.  If Russia or Sweden was mindlessly having a million kids each, then they would be farming labor there because excess population drives down wages.  The fact that places like the horn of Africa are overpopulated yet produce no viable stock for these international financiers to farm labor from does kinda tell you something though.

Your always the opposite play to me.. i think ill sell some xmr and.buy some eth here

You are incorrect in youe generalization again roach. Yes if cost is the only factor why India? Why not africa or a cheaper country? You love making stuff up I know that. India has the most advanced computer science curriculum at a few certain universities that only allow the best of the best.

Much to Anonymint's horror, Monero is starting to look bullish to me from here.

Lol, the reason is not because Indian people are somehow smarter than others.  It's because corporations practice global labor arbitrage, outsourcing work from the 1st to the 3rd world for pennies on the dollar until it causes the 1st world to collapse and the 3rd world to rise up in cost.  Then they close up shop in India (causing it to collapse just like the US) and move to the next 3rd world country creating a perpetual state of boom and bust with cheap labor for evil international financiers to exploit.  Globalization is garbage, period.  It benefits nobody except international bankers and their sanctioned minions in the long run.




As much flac as black people get for being primitive or violent or whatever, it's blatantly clear that the aboriginal bone structure is the one that's VASTLY different from all the rest, to the point where they're basically a different species:



The skull is much more similar to something like "Peking Man", an earlier homo erectus human ancestor:



Generally, the more primitive the DNA, the greater the ridges are by the eyebrows and more the mouth sticks out compared to the nose like in the following picture:

Hi CoinCube,

Thank you again - We can peacefully agree to disagree and respect each others view - I trust that is okay.
I also wish to Thank you for handling this sensitive dialogue with such care - keeping things much civil.

I will agree with you on your statement "single greatest contributor to human progress"  Indeed it is true under the Three Abrahamic - much progress was made  - when the adherents bought into Social solidarity with an emphasis on unity, group consciousness and sense of shared purpose, and social cohesion.

But also - when the above breakdown due to various decaying components...the system also falls just as hard -- we see that today.  The Moral Decay / Corruption / Poverty...lack of unity (complete Divide).

I limited my argument to the Old-Testament as the archeological record is strongest. In my opinion it is an indisputable fact that this text has been faithfully transcribed for the last 2000 years or so based on the archeological record.

Regarding the New-Testament it is more complex for a variety of reasons. I am honestly not familiar enough with the history of NT transcriptions to help here. However, I would argue that as the Old-Testament has been faithfully transcribed for 2000 years then the burden of proof is on the skeptic if one wishes to argue that same fidelity does not hold for the NT.

My personal religious position is that of Ethical Monotheism but I am not affiliated with any Jewish, Christian, or Islamic group. This prior post of mine accurately describes my views.

It's not "ethical monotheism" propping up civilization as can be seen by the "Florida effect" where people are far more likely to agree to being taxed to support local schools that share the same genes as them, while they resist being taxed to support what they consider foreign invader gene pools.  It's simply the fact that they view people with the same genes as them as being possible relatives and treat them as such (a selfish gene type scenario) instead of killing or stealing from them.

Ethical monotheism is probably the single greatest contributor to human progress

...
 But I don't plan to go in detail -- too much work.

Thus far your position is firm on TORAH - thus I take you're of Judaist faith - I maybe wrong.  Do you also hold the view that King James Bible or other "CHRISTIAN BIBLE's" remain the same?

Ethical monotheism is probably the single greatest contributor to human progress from any source since human culture emerged from the stone ages. This force which emerged first in Judaism and and spread throughout the world via the mediums of Christianity and Islam continues to shape human destiny even in a time when much of the world foolishly rejects it as irrelevant.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/mono.html


http://old.explorefaith.org/neighbors/beliefs/nature_j.html