This seems like a good place to leave this...

http://falkenblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/humans-born-capitalists.html

If you intend to do this, please change the genesis block and remove the benchmarking code.  Change the default port number, also.

This effect will slow down as the currency matures.

+1

I don't think that you young people can quite understand just how revolutionary Wikipedia was and still is.  I remember growing up in the Dark Ages, prior to the Great Internet Event (tm).  My father paid a small fortune for an incomplete encyclopedia, and I read all 23 volumes that we had in a single Summer.  Now days, an 11 year old can call 'bs' on an adult full of it in two minutes with a cell phone.  My grandfather would just make stuff up to screw with us kids.  We never could know if he was feeding us a line or not because his lies were so plausible to an eight year old.  I can't do that to a six year old without one running to the computer to check googlw or wikipedia.

Without nukes, we don't have the spare energy to build a space elevator, technology aside.  A launch loop is going to happen first, and functionally requires nukes.

Yo!

A long time.  People still freak out about the electromagnetic radiation that cell phones emit under normal operation.  Neutronic radiation actually merits such panic.

Possible I don't know.  Smallest practical is about 14 Kw thermal, which is tiny.  There is no theoretical minimum for an energy amp thorium reactor.  But the reactor size itself is rarely the issue.  It's usually the containment and shield mass that is the largest expense, which is why civil reactors favor such huge economies of scale. 

Wait, you are trying to set up a company to sell property that you know that your family has stolen from their employers, and you want us to help you commit this crime?

Yes, there is.  It's called escalation of force.  I have the right to try and prevent you from continuing to damage my property.  I can, if I see fit, lay hands on your person to attempt to physically eject you from my property.  If you are harmed in the doing so, I might be liable for that or I might not, but that depends on both the degree of the harm and the intent of action.  If you bumped your head because you tripped while being pushed off my property, but the bump was neither long term brain damage and a reasonable third party observer wouldn't have assumed that I intended to cause you harm, nor that same observer believe that I had used a level of force that was unnecessary towards the goal (protect the property, eject the thief) then I have done nothing wrong.  If you resist my interference (or the interference of my hired thug) and then either take a swing at me or threaten to do so, then that is the initiation of force that escalates the conflict, not me protecting my own property from harm.  If you pull out a knife, a deadly threat has been issued even if nothing was said.  At this point, I'm within my rights to pull out a firearm, but I can't shoot you in the back.  If you are trying to escape, I must let you leave, no matter the harm already done to my property. 

Lacking evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that they came by it honestly, via their own labors.  Either they made themselves, or they traded for it.  You seem to insist that the basic assumption is that those who posses an object or real estate came by it dishonestly.


No one decided this, because no one can.  Where did you come up with this idea?

Not quite.  The delivery truck driver in the former Soviet Union had exclusive say over how the truck was used, so long as he was still the driver.  This is because he had possession, but he did not have ownership.  One of the necessary conditions of ownership is the right to destroy the thing.  The truck driver didn't have the right to destroy the truck, even though he certainly had the access necessary to do so if he had the will.  I will presume that you would agree that only you should have the right to decide to destroy the fleshbag that your mind resides within.  So would you agree that you own your own body?

No one said that there are no rules.

No one who lived near Chernobyl died or contracted cancer as a direct result of their proximity.  Chernobyl was a bad accident, but contrary to popular belief, an American coal plant releases more radioactive material into the air each year than Chernobyl did.  The problem was that Chernobyl was doing it in concentration as well as would have continued doing so so long as the fire continued.  Coal contains large amounts of thorium and uranium naturally, and there is no way to get them out before burning it.  So some portion of those elements do end up in the exhaust.  I've been employed in both types of power plants in the United States, including the oldest coal fired power plant still licensed in the United States, Beckjord Power Plant, and I can honestly say that I would much rather live near a nuke plant than a coal plant.  Yes, there is a small chance that said nuke plant could be mismanaged and have an incident that harms my children; but that's a certainty if you live downwind from a coal plant.  Go tour a coal plant, nothing green grows within a quarter mile of the stack.  Nothing.

EDIT:  BTW, Chernobyl continued to produce power for another 15 years or so before being mothballed.  Only the affected reactor was closed immediately.  There is no evidence that employees that worked at Chernobyl after the incident were exposed to any more radiation than their peers at any other nuke plants.

That might be your objective, but it's certainly not mine.

I have to admit, I'm amused at the irony that a thread with this one's original subject matter can devolve into an argument where both parties involved violate one or more of the conditions that they recently agreed to.

http://desertislandgame.com/

I'll just leave this here....

Then we need to get even more basic.  What defines "ownership"?  What does it mean that an individual believes that he "owns" a thing, whether or not others recognize his claim?