So, why do you pay your internet/phone company? Or your electric company? People are going to want to pay for government services they use, or ones they believe would be beneficial to society. Even from a security and medical perspective, it costs way way WAY less to take a homeless bum off the street and put him into a shack with a bit of food money, than it does to keep policing him to make sure he doesn't steal or cause issues, and to treat him for major medical issues he gets from living outside without food. I would think security and medical companies would implement this to lower their bottom line, but this is something that governments don't often realize, and thus ignore.

All of that can be thrown out on the whim of the populace being governed, if the majority of the population decides to not follow those laws. So all of that is only in place because the majority of the populace has certain beliefs about "innocence" and "fair trial" with due process.
So, why can't the society, where the majority believes in those same things already, just follow those beliefs as general guidelines? Why would a society that believes "innocent until proven guilty" and "everyone should have a right to a due process" instantly turn into lynch mobs if the government says "That trial thing, you're on your own?" Better yet, how well did the laws and "fair trial" requirements prevent lynch mobs down in the south a hundred years ago, where the majority didn't care about them?

Not, uh, not exactly. It was a confirmation of a journal entry, with the assumption that the money would be stuck on a truck and delivered eventually, or that the other post office or bank would be borrowing money too, thus negating the outstanding bank journal entry (like Ripple is supposed to work). There is no expectation that you will be sent the blockchain once you pay someone in bitcoins, but there is expectation that the receiving person will "borrow" against it, too. So, it's just different enough to be convoluted as hell 

So, is the goal anywhere in sight yet?

If a massive pool went down, all the miners that were on it will just switch to the other pools, so the number of miners or the block payouts will not change.

But otherwise yeah, agreed.

Does anyone else think that "voluntarily hiring someone to protect your property" is morally equivalent to "others hiring someone to take your property against your will?"

Why not? That's how Cosa Nostra in southern Italy works. They're not technically "government," but they do function in place of it.

They're the NSA, not the CIA. They spy, and collect info, and masturbate while listening to our phone calls, not actually go out and do stuff.

Please stop misrepresenting us.  Obviously we are not for aggression against innocents.   It is the initiation of force, something you have admitted statists are happy to do.
[/quote]

Aggression against whom?
[/quote]

I would guess whoever it is that is initiating force against victims and is sacrificing/raping/molesting them? As far as I understand it, that whole NAP thing means "initiating violence against anyone else" is taboo, not just against you, so I suspect defending someone who is very obviously being aggressed against is ok too?

Bitfloor is an LLC, meaning Roman is not liable for anything that happens to the business, unless it's actual fraud. Since his problem is that the bank closed his account, not him, and other banks are refusing to take his check and disburse the money to owners, unless you can prove that he is negligent in trying to return the money (ignoring the problem and not doing anything), you probably won't get anywhere with the lawsuit, especially since there's apparently some lawyer actively working on this problem for him. On the other hand, maybe suing his LLC  would force some estate liquidation company to accept the check and liquidate the company assets to owners that way. I guess that's the last resort, if his lawyer can't find a bank.

I would expand that to state - It matters what the regulators think our laws and regulations state. And they can change their minds about that.

That idea, that we are all connected, and we are still figuring out the ways in which these connections connect and influence us, may very well be true. As a scientist and an atheist, all I can say is "we just don't know yet." An yeah, thanks for the discussion, too.

That's quite a leap. A lot of the world's economic policies and beliefs are influenced by ideas invented by Keynes. Does that make him a higher power?

Gee, thanks MoonShadow. I was hoping he wouldn't bother googling and wouldn't find out that all those "crazy future ideas" I had were things that have already been thought up and done. Guess I don't have much imagination either 

Sounds like interest has a very real effect on the physical world, and like some people actually have theories about how it affects us, and are trying to affect the physical world's society by changing those rates to be close to zero. It seems we can also see the results of that near zero interest rate test, which is "rampant unsustainable borrowing leading to collapse." So this doesn't seem like it applies in the same way that spiritual and metaphysical things that we can't test or perceive with our senses and instruments does. Or are you suggesting that things like prayer and belief affect our real physical society in the same way that interest rates do? And if yes, what is causing that effect - shared belief and habits, or a higher power having direct influence?

So you imagine the future with a radically different sociopolitical structure, but you imagine everything in it will be the same as things are now? Why not:
- Public transportation replaced with suspended rails going through the city and country, with pods, that you can rent, automatically traveling under them to preset destinations (patented idea, replaces road maintenance with something much cheaper). Subscriptions to road areas in the same way that you can buy a London metro ticket that gives you free ride within limited areas. Much more focus on teleworking from home. Personal VTOL aircraft to avoid roads altogether, flown with GPS and computer avoidance assistance.
- Community supported and sponsored parks, with gardens grown by shared owners or even produce by companies that want to show off their designer fruits and vegetables.
- Private security firms that get paid to keep communities safe, figuring out it's easier to pay that homeless bum some money to keep an eye out for anything suspicious, than to keep having to haul him away. People's income almost doubling in size due to lack of 45% tax means they can afford to support themselves, and have spare cash to donate as well. Saving money actually pays off due to deflation, so the culture saves instead of borrows, and even poor people can have what little wealth they own grow for them.
- Specialized delivery services that use high speed MAGLEV rails to send packages and containers wherever you want at hundreds of miles an hour, without need for drivers. Rails protected by fences, surveillance, and specialized drones that can take off, target people, and after sufficient warning incapacitate them with electric shock or gas.
- Hardware developers working around the world to invent new gadgets or improve on the old ones, and small specialized manufacturing buildings print out the components and assemble them for you, regardless of what design you downloaded, right there, within a few minutes/hours. No need to deliver almost anything except for raw materials and some specialized components. No one is limited to a version of an iPhone and has to wait for new versions any more. If someone comes up with a new feature, you just order the new component, or have it printed, and swap it on your phone.


Paralyzed by paperwork??? Governments get paralyzed by paperwork. Regulatory stuff gets paralyzed by paperwork. Companies don't care about paperwork. And for whatever paperwork is needed, why have a company that does paperwork for energy, manufacturing, shipping, finance, and everything else, try to do it all at the same time? Talk about inefficient. Efficiency is specialization. Have a company that does payroll, as most businesses use now. Have a company that specializes in accounting. One that specializes in market research. Etc etc etc. Companies already us these well established nongovernment services.



Damn good question. Governments are required to do 100% accurate accounting and tracking, because they have to make everything they do public (well, most government agencies, anyway), and have to answer to their constituents, who want to make sure nothing is wasted (and, ironically, waste a lot in the process). Companies can easily figure out what should be tracked closely, and what you can guesstimate as being close enough, since all they care about is the bottom line.


So why wouldn't corporations grow to an enormous size without government? If it's more efficient to mass-produce, they will grow big and mass-produce. If it's more efficient to print and assemble locally, they'll do that. There won't be a government stopping them either way. As for cheap transport, those mega size container ships crossing between US, China, and Europe are not government owned. Besides, US doesn't get that much oil from the middle east, anyway. Much of it is domestic, and much of the rest is from Canada.


Or we can ignore them. Thanks to new tech, it's getting easier and easier  

It's because progressives don't like discrimination of any kind, and are defending Muslims that live in their civilized countries from those who would lump them in with the savages in the middle east. It's also because Christians are a majority, and Muslims are easy targets to discriminate against, so progressives see the injustice and try to stop it. Had Muslims been the majority, or Jews, and had Christians been the ones being persecuted and discriminated against, I'm sure progressives would have been defending Christians. I doubt most progressives even know what Islam is about, so I doubt they're just supporting a religion.


Yeah, so what the hell happened? No one questions or denies that ancient Muslim nations had a great and awesome history with many contributions to the world. So how did it turn from that into such a horrific and appalling joke?

Hmm, which would you call more incoherent? We don't know, but based on the things we know, and this evidence, MAYBE that's what doing it? Or a fantastical tale of talking snakes, hydrogen and oxygen atoms of water turning into carbon atoms to make wine, virgin pregnancies, and all powerful beings sitting in a relative up direction from us in the sky, causing that thing to happen for reasons we can't understand?


Blatant disregard for history aside, just look at the modern world. Of the many cultures that exist in our world today, which cultures are calling for the murder of hundreds of millions in the hopes of ushering in a new era? (Hint: it's the very religious one whose culture is about where Christianity was 600 years ago)

Again, how? If this stuff doesn't affect our senses or our physical reality, then how can it harm us? Unless it can harm our senses or emotions, in which case this should be testable.


Science isn't a system of belief, it's a system of doing verifications on ideas, and discarding those ideas we can't verify. As for the light being a particle and a wave, that's just another variation of "How can bumble bees fly?" Sure, those not familiar with this aspect of light might think this is a tough question that can't be answered, but it can and has been.


I would answer simply that consciousness begins where something is able to sense and is aware of its surroundings. We know algae is aware of it's surroundings, at least to a very limited point, since it shows us that it prefers to grow in some areas over others. Rocks and stars show absolutely no signs of consciousness. If you mean self-conscious, that's a tougher  line to distinguish, but one that's within the spectrum of consciousness, not within the spectrum of obvious consciousness and unconsciousness of dead inanimate things.


I've never heard of the spirit molecule, but I am pretty sure that if you had been born without any senses, including sense of touch and pain, that you would have no consciousness at all. There would simply be no experience to guide the development of your brain. No learned behaviors, thoughts, ideas, of senses to react to from instinct. So I'd say your present consciousness is just a collection of your memories and experiences, all of which, despite feeling rather grandiose, can be mapped out, and even tampered with, from the physical network of neurons in your brain. We know that people who suffer brain damage often change personalities and become different people, which suggests that it's the physical brain that determines everything about who you are. So what do you believe "consciousness" to be, if it's outside of your thoughts, dreams, personality, etc?



Since we can easily generate radiation and magnetic pulses, this should be easy enough to test...


Can these variables be measured with a high enough statistical probability? I.e., even if we can't measure them directly, can we through pulses at a group of brains and test for any most frequent outcomes? If yes, we can prove this scientifically. If all the outcomes are random, then why are these mechanisms relevant, if they'll cause random, seemingly unrelated outcomes?


You mean tested, peer reviewed, and able to be duplicated by others with similar results???


Science doesn't have to comprehend. It just has to test. If there are tests on this stuff, and the outcomes are statistically significant, then they can be believed to be true, and afterwards science will start working on explaining the process and why they are true. If tests show seemingly random and unrelated outcomes from this wisdom, then, again, the random outcomes would make it irrelevant.


It really depends on your definition of wisdom though. I wouldn't call the centuries of wisdom surrounding our medicine, which believed that things like infections and illnesses were caused by demons, or bad blood, or bad airs, to be wisdom worthy of keeping in light of new discoveries about viruses and bacteria. And as we discover more things about our physical universe, that "wisdom" keeps getting pushed back and back towards things that are unprovable, which people believe despite any way of perceiving or testing the evidence for it. It's the "god of the gaps" concept, with the gaps being smaller and smaller. So, sure, no one has disproved the existence of the Almighty, but neither has anyone disproved the existence of dragons and unicorns. And don't dragons and unicorns have just about as much effect and influence on our lives, perceptions, and instruments as the Almighty? So shouldn't we consider them wisdom to believe in just as hard as belief in the Almighty?

It's fairly easy to hold on to BTC when some exchanges go offline and others get their USD withdrawals blocked