Indeed. Has your generation lost common sense?

Back in my day we sort of knew if you play with hand grenades, you will be maimed.

Your generation is so fucking entitled.

Who the fuck goes working in a danger zone without adequate security? An idiot.

How much more duh! can you be.

George Carlin joked that why do those people in Hawaii who build their houses next to active volcano wonder why they have lava in the living room. 

Simpleton nonsense. Peter R showed the market cap is following Metcalf's law so the only way you can get to that valuation is for it to be widely adopted.

Another way of knowing your idea is nonsense, is if 1% held BTC, then the other 99% would need to be impoverished or the global wealth would have to double.

The problem remains scaling.

The more salient term you wanted to use is de facto.

You've got a scaling problem. $10 billion market cap versus $200 trillion in global wealth.

Monero (CryptoNote) planted by the NSA?

https://criticl.me/post/what-nsa-created-cryptonote-2292

This essay has illuminated one of the greatest flaws of altcoins — they don't share the same network thus they don't have the security-of-scale to resist 50% attacks.

Those who have paid attention know I have already wrote about what I think the solution is. It is a paradigm shift. And it will help Monero and all the altcoins.

I also don't fully trust the cryptography in CN's ring sigs, especially when combined with the theoretical combinatorial attack I presented to the Monero devs. I think we could improve on that. But it doesn't necessarily mean I wouldn't use CN as is, if nothing better was available.

That was true in the Industrial Age where stored monetary capital was paramount because production require large fixed capital investments and the mental assets were very insignificant portion of the costs of production.

The Knowledge Age changes this entirely. Click the link the quote post below.

You entirely ignored the entire point of my essays in the opening post of this thread.

I am getting tired of repeating this same damn concept over and over. Why can't commentators read the thread before commenting?

Coinits you do realize how dumb you are? Of course you don't.

My high IQ father (former West Coast Head Attorney for Exxon and moved up higher than that) once remarked, "People think so linearly".

Do you realize what a burden it is on me to have to come back and refute all the dumb shit that dozens (if not 100s, I've lost count) of readers post when they don't understand what I understand?

Unfortunately you dumbasses will win the battle of who can write more dumbshit so that other dumbshits will follow your dumbshit.

You couldn't possibly fathom your error could you?

It is not her fault that the guy is violating her trust, but it is her fault that she trusted someone. Who is supposed to be responsible for her judgment?

What exactly do you propose to do in the anonymous age when people can upload and host photos anonymously to the internet? You won't be able to prove who is at fault. Then what do you do? Throw a hissy fit?

What was the entire point of Satoshi's miraculous Proof-of-Work invention? It solved the Byzantine General's Problem of not needing to trust untrustable 3rd parties — a decentralized trust solution.

So instead you would prefer to have a prison planet wherein you transfer the monopoly on force to a collective which will always be infested by the opportunists that want to profit on that power vacuum. You will choose to destroy the maximization of entropy in pursuit of a futile goal of abrogating individuals of their culpability for serendipity. And in your vain and futile attempt to remove nature from the universe (to reverse the irreversible trend of entropy to maximum), you enslave your dumbass Marxist selves.

Go ahead. I know I can't stop you. That is why I will create anonymous systems. So I can opt-out of your dumbass insanity.

Have fun dumbshit. This is not ad hominem. I am speaking factually.

P.S. Aren't you noticing all the pumped up propaganda now on these nude photos issue? I have seen another lady on C|Net, etc.. Don't you realize the powers-that-be are pitching this to program your dumbass brains? You fools never learn.


Since you can't seem to grasp the overriding issue is the holistic cost of societal collapse as explained above, let me put it another way for your pee-size brain can maybe fathom.

If you go climb into the lion's den and they eat you, are we supposed to blame the lions? Is the government supposed to protect people from their own irresponsibility? And what moral hazard does that create?

So just do what ever the fuck risky stuff you want, because social insurance, welfare, and the Big Brother always has your back ass covered. Let's charge the cost of your risky choices to the collective, so we can all increase the costs and bankrupt the society. And while we are at it, let's hand the keys to some enforcers that we "trust". So then you've transferred the individual trust issue to a collective trust issue. And how does that work out every damn time over the 6000 years of recorded history.

Dumbfuckery indeed.

Do you fucking Marxists even have a brain stem?

Why fool yourselves in an excrutiatingly slow decline into eugenics and megadeath (as the State is bankrupted). Just go directly to the end game and kill nature. Drop the nuclear bomb and be done with life. That is really what you are driving towards, but like dumbass sheep you can't even see it. You only see the ass of the sheep in front of you with your linear "thinking".


P.S. the anonymity age will provide an elegant solution to above problem. She can offer an anonymous bounty for his execution. You will need to be more careful about offending people in the Knowledge Age. You won't sleep well at night if you do evil in the Knowledge Age. The more people you do evil against, the more your odds of suffering will increase. Justice indeed.

CoinCube you don't want to give individuals the power to enforce justice (surely the 97.5% can slaughter the 2.5% sociopaths)? So then you prefer JustUs instead? Hand over the keys of power to the sociopaths my friend. Enjoy your insanity.

Where is the poll so I can vote that she is a sociopath?

And anyone who votes is an idiot.

Amazing how much time and effort you fools waste in this forum discussing shit that can't be fixed and doesn't matter nor accomplish anything.

Can't you fools do anything productive with your time?

BYE!

DEEP STATE of the US gov. Dick Cheney played a vital role.

Why can't I vote?

I am going to attempt to formally and analytically address the issue of potential energy vs. entropy, because I think I may have the mental acuity to do it this morning. First I need to go for a run, then I will dig into it and see if my strategy is feasible. But I will be limited to about 2 hours to expend on this, so I can't promise I can get it done in that time window.

Btw, I posted more details about my health and note I was having a groggy/foggy day yesterday which is perhaps why my last discussion with CoinCube didn't go directly to an irrefutable analytical rebuttal.


Note Armstrong is concurring with my "solutions" post yesterday that gold will align with dollar cash (and dollar denominated stocks and real estate) as private assets. My point is the powers-that-be must destroy anonymously held, untaxed gold and move to electronic currency in order to continue to get their required usury ROI.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/04/27/gold-v-dollar-2/

CoinCube had made a very astute communication to me in private some months ago wherein he argued very convincingly that he had at least until 2017 in the USA before needing to make any big changes.

I think CoinCube is correct to leverage the collective and the highest quality cities for some period of time, just as long as he doesn't wait too long and lose the opportunity to make any shifts that he wants to make later. This is why Armstrong is correct that there will be ingress into the dollar and USA as the rest of the world turns down.

The powers-that-be want a slow burn with propaganda to slide the masses into the NWO.

Thus the greatest disruption should come the soonest to those areas which are not Western mainstream and which are outlets for freedom that the powers-that-be wish to suppress.

Thus I would expect the powers-that-be to encourage a rise in threats to personal security (e.g. kidnappings, muggings, violence, paramilitarism, and other conflicts) in for example the wide open spaces in South America.

I see a slow burn of closing off all the outlets for individual freedom to funnel the mainstream masses into the cities and the NWO.

So if you play along, you can buy some time. The general thesis is that the NWO paradigm is not going to collapse overnight. It will slow burn and be juxtaposed against a rising Knowledge Age that won't assert itself entirely for some decade or more (Oxford U. predicted 47% share of job automation not be reached until 2033).

Eventually I believe that mainstream system turns into a eugenics paradigm, but it won't be there overnight. Even totalitarian, fascist Nazi Germany had to first be spawned through some 15 years of a socialist, communist Wiemar Republic. Roughly I would say the USA's Wiemar Republic began on Sept. 11, 2001. So we would be looking at some where between 2018 and 2024, before the USA turns internally violent. The turn towards overt fascism (hence they no longer even try to hide it) began on April 2013 with the Snowden revelations, but this is still in the very early stages of development towards fascist, totalitarianism.

Asia (to have a decline starting about now or 2016) will bottom by 2020 and begin to grow again. It appears this will be done in the context of a scripted fake proxy war between China and SE Asia neighbors with the USA & Japan pretending to be the antagonists. The point of this is to bring Asia into a Technocracy controlled by the global elite (the banksters) and the NWO trajectory. The economic bottoming of Asia in 2020 will coincide with a capitulation towards accepting the loss of a lot of freedoms on personal liberty, while in exchange granting the very high entropy free movement of people between all nations in Asia with the Asian Union to be launched in 2015 and gradually ramped up. For example expect the Philippines to effectively lose its bank secrecy as their banks harmonize with ASEAN norms.

All those who are buying gold and bullets, these won't even be needed (if you are in a high quality city) for some years yet and then later when you would need them, they won't be effective.

Think it out. No man is an island at least in the physical world (in the virtual world a man can be autonomous by leveraging expertise and anonymous but still not an island). If it is you defending your abode against reoccurring waves of roving paramilitaries, you have no chance no matter how many rounds of ammunition you've stockpiled. Your community is protecting you else you are toast. Ditto gold. If you community is against it, it is useless. As soon as you make one trade, word spreads you have gold and so the hunt begins to track you and mug you. The mainstream system is heading towards electronic money and outlawing all forms of physical black markets which can be easily ferreted out with stings, etc.. It simply won't be efficient to use gold to live off of.

The Knowledge Age virtual economy can easily adapt to anonymous crypto-currency. There are none of the insoluble issues as there are with gold being adopted as a currency.

So the bottom line is you should be investing in crypto-currency and not gold.

Gold should begin to rise in 2016 and you could probably safely hold it until 2017 or so, and sell out before the battle against gold intensifies. My stance is not to hold extensive stashes of gold into the tempest period of 2018+ (or when ever it begins), except for holding a small quantity of recognizeable coins for a "get out dodge" emergency stash you could use to perhaps trade for a safe passage. Gold will never again become worthy for individuals (it will remain worthy for institutions). We are entering the transition to the end for gold. Gold will probably rise to $5000 (max) but I would be a seller way before that probably on a double from $1000 to $2000 (or if luckily enough to buy the coming bottom at roughly $850 so perhaps hold for a triple if circumstances are favorable).

Gold will be worthy perhaps in high net worth cliques that agree to anonymity (or are insiders of the NWO) and use it as a physical accounting with which they can trade between other assets such as the NWO currency (if they are insiders) or anonymous crypto-currency (for the crypto-currency $billionaires perhaps). But I am not really confident that gold will be embraced by the crypto-currency $billionaires. I think they will prefer to buy businesses and code instead to hold as real assets and a basket of crypto-currencies (to counter risk of any one evaporating into thin air).

Moreover, make sure you are tax compliant. And make sure you don't fall into the upper 10% in terms of the net worth that the system knows you have. My stance is to be a nobody and be basically invisible.

So you will need to move your excess stored wealth into anonymous crypto-currency and Knowledge Age investments. I will be waiting there for you with my arms open waiting for you to make me a $billionaire (my fantasy lol).

The Knowledge Age won't destroy all stored wealth. It will destroy stored wealth that doesn't want to be actively invested. So any simple plans for investment, i.e. buy and HODL are destined to fail. You need to be able to think out what types of ventures and investments will succeed and work out the timing too. Sorry there are no shortcuts to being an investor, because you are only given that wealth if you are helping the knowledge to anneal to maximum entropy (see the Parable of the Talents in the Bible).

As for example OROBTC mentioning the thought of investing in another condo in Peru, I can't comment on the local market. I can only say that the entire world will shift radically socialist as the global economy turns down, and net worth will be targeted. Investing in the future of the developing markets seems fundamentally sound but don't know to what extent countries will diverge before they converge back towards growth.

My overriding thought is that net worth can become a dangerous liability. I am eager for anonymous crypto-currency because I don't wish to worry about the social liability my stored wealth can cause (I don't have any more stored wealth lol, so this more hypothetical for me at the moment). However, we don't yet know anonymous crypto-currency will be reliable. Thus I am more eager to invest myself into actual businesses and code in the Knowledge Age. But investing in ventures can be risky, so I can understand others will want to look for more generic investment choices. Short-term it appears buying BTC and gold at the coming final lows is a NO BRAINER.

That will provide a window of time (2 years?) to appraise developments and look for alternatives. The downside of investing in BTC is that it is not anonymous so any net worth there is going to have to be reportable to the society. Gold maybe could be done anonymously, but not forever. It might be possible to buy some gold anonymously on the coming low and cash out of anonymously in the near-term. It will vary according to each person's locale and circumstances.

It is possible to buy BTC or Monero anonymously. But it must be done very carefully.

So in summary, I say be invisible in a quality community, unless you are sure you can be entirely isolated and self-sufficient. Stockpile BTC and enjoy life, keeping an eye out for better Knowledge Age investments to diversify into but being very cautious about risk of fledgling ventures. Keeping in mind that the Knowledge Age is not only about programming, it is also any sort of entrepreneurship that incorporates mental effort as its main asset, e.g. Hoverbike.

I welcome feedback on this post. I like to see what the reaction and opinion of others.

Add: you might want to consider how your local community will adapt to the Knowledge Age. It seems perhaps we should be building virtual communities of ourselves within communities. For example, CoinCube astutely points out that his community's risk is primarily coming from the Federal level. For example, my risks in the Philippines is that I am not a citizen (still a USA citizen) and the changes coming with the rising Technocracy to be installed in Asia by the powers-that-be.

Then you haven't created any new information content with the output of those random generators.

In short, random generators don't exist.  

(I am a Renaissance man. Expect me to make off-the-wall statements that are shockingly or surprisingly true. My greatest fear is that I will someday exhaust my creativity and then please do me the favor of shooting me. In the interim time, work and play hard.)

Citing special cases of localized efficiency doesn't vacate my assertion (and informal proof) that generalized, global efficiency is the maximization of entropy. Over the long-term systems self-organize (anneal) to prioritize global efficiency by eliminating Coasian barriers.

So sorry your view is too simpleton.

The generalized definition of efficiency does incorporate any domain (including capital formation) that is relevant to maximizing global entropy.

I was working on trying to solve the problem of not having to commit so tightly coupled to a platform, because I know how important this could be for scaling in the Knowledge Age. In that linked thread, I was getting deeper into the concept of the Theory of the Firm, why corporations exist and why the Knowledge Age eliminates them. Unfortunately I've had to put that on the back burner and it is very ambitious.

Ah I just bumped into my 2011 prediction on Google, which seems to be coming true. Yet another in my long list of correct conceptualizations that come to fruition.


Bravo! You got that aspect of the concept.  


Please read the "Financeability of Knowledge" section of the Rise of Knowledge essay linked from the opening post of this thread. Also understand that knowledge comes into existence serendipitously and thus it can't be centralized.

The one-world reserve currency NWO huddle of the masses will try its best to parasite and control the Knowledge Age, but will fail (and that is why I say the one-world NWO will be a eugenics death program). Nature will not allow the trend towards maximum entropy to reverse.

For example, ObamaCare is already gearing up to euthanize boomers. Obama already did it with the vet scandal. Much more of that to come.


Your conceptualizations are always too simpleton.

You are thinking that a connection is a flow of entropyheat, as in the concept that the probability of walking into a room with no oxygen is very unlikely because a vacuum is an unstable state and the higher entropy of distributed oxygen molecules will rush into the vacuum at the first opportunity. This was essentially CoinCube's myopia also, although (I surmise) he was already functioning at a higher level of understanding (and so if my assumption is correct, then it won't take him much effort to come to understand my perspective).

But connections between humans are not a flow of physical matter, but rather an interaction that increases the possible divergent paths of the outcomes, thus entropy increases (or it doesn't hahaha  ). For example, imagine two humans talking on the phone about possible ideas. The meeting of the minds synergizes and much more complex possibilities spawn (new information content is spawned serendipitous that couldn't be predicted a priori by the prior information content and that is a key difference between "random" generators regurgitating information content from the environment).


Black body radiation is so insignificant (except under acceleration where it is critical to phenomenon of gravity) to what is going on to maximize entropy it is not worth mentioning.

The Knowledge Age alters the economics such that usury is no longer viable. Please read the following. I think it is fundamental that you be exposed to the specifics of this concept:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg11193804#msg11193804

After you've consumed that, ping me and I will dig up the link to the futures argument. We need futures, but they must expire as soon as margin is exhausted. We can do this with technology. Then all your complaints against them evaporate. And they are very necessary, because without hedging farmers would be destroyed by the 7 lean years (by the serendipity). See a farmer has fixed investments. Review the link above so you can gain some insight into how fixed capital inertia (a form of liability) is a fundamental generative issue.

Elimination of usury at the time when fixed capital liability was unavoidable due to lack of Knowledge Age technology put society into a Dark Age. Usury can only go away when the reasons for its demand have been vacated by technology.

Anonymous (not the female, but rpietila can surely guess who this is) wrote:
> usury can't be eliminated with force.  Different concept than "can't be
> eliminated".
> usury was eliminated through education in the Bible, in the book of 
> Bible Gateway passage: Nehemiah 5 - New International Version

CoinCube,

That is really brave of you. You have done a service of showing how academics are trained to view humans as dumb-downed cells and thus why they think we have to controlled like cows in a corral.

Your academic cathedral entirely missed the point that the potential network effects of billions of unique human minds is an unfathomably high entropy. I suspect that potential energy efficiency exceeds the number of atoms in the universe, but I haven't tried to calculate it. Perhaps I should try to think about how to calculate the human entropy. Would be a very interesting thought experiment.

Again the frame-of-reference is critical, because the entities that are creating the most entropy in their system decide what is information content and what is not because they are maximizing the overall entropy.

Does a tree fall in the forest if no one ever sees it and it decays before anyone does? In what relevance did it exist?

A random generator could spit out zillions of "books" but do they exist if no one reads them?

But even that is not the rebuttal (well actually relevance is exactly what I write below so the above is the same point as below but that is too abstract for most readers).

The actual rebuttal cuts straight to the meat of the issue. All those random books can be described by the instructions on how to create the random generator.

Again you are commiting a similar error as CoinCube.

It is the humans who are creating the entropy, not the random generator.

TADA!  

(Don't even try to win a debate against me that I've already told you that I can't lose)

(For any readers that didn't understand the above point, remember entropy is the minimum information required to describe the outcome, thus instructions on building the random generator is the compressed information content and thus the actual information content)

You've made no point. My accusation was backed by my prior factual rebuttal. You've tried to say entropy is only about 3D information. Duh!

P.S. I am very much aware of my rebellious nature and also I am aware of where I need to toe the line and where I don't. In the case of the Knowledge Age and the fall of the old world into a one-world eugenics and the Knowledge Age breaking away into the new world, I am confident I am aligned with reality. My correct understanding of entropy and economics tells me this.

Add: Attaining a 4.0 GPA (and with a dual major!) is not easy and I applaud your achievement. Surely you have learned many things that can be usefully applied to the real world. And since you have real major in Math and I only dabbled in a minor in math, then surely you can run rings around me in areas where I haven't formally studied, e.g. Topology, etc.. Before I got ill, I had intended to go back and complete all the academic books for a Math major on my own. But unfortunately life robbed me. I suppose I am getting too old now (although this may be more the effects of the Multiple Sclerosis). The mental dexterity for Math declines precipitously after age 40. I never claimed that I don't have weaknesses nor am I trying to boast. My emphatic point is that you are debating me on a topic I spent years thinking about and even wrote 3 essays on. And this information content topic falls right into my career vocation of computer science. So please don't feel bad if you lose this debate.

Good slaves always give the "correct", indoctrinated answers.

rpietila, wait i am not done editing that post. Continue reloading the page until I have addressed every point in his post.

Being admissible in Wikipedia is not always a badge of honor. Wikipedia is often incorrect.

I will also address your post soon after.

CoinCube,

That is horrendous. I give you a D grade.

You characterize increasing information content as degradation.

I can see now why you are so blinded and deluded about free markets. Your conceptualization is all wrong. More microstates doesn't imply less of anything. For example, we can get more macrostates at the human level by increasing the population. The wisdom in the Bible of "go forth and multiply" combined with the fact that every human is unique.

Entropy is the information content of a system, or in other words the minimum pieces of information required to specify the state of the system. In the digital world, it is the maximum theoretical compression of some data.

Who taught you that nonsense? At the university?


The quality of the matter of the universe is constantly trending to maximum information content irreversibly.


Low information content organization of matter -> Higher information content organization of matter


Low information content -> Higher information content


Certainly few chances -> More chances


These principals outline a beautiful universe competing to create more diversity and chances for life to prosper.


Thermodynamics demands constant and progressive increase in the diversity of systems, i.e. higher information content, giving rise to a universe teaming with life and growth.


The fractal nature of life is such that high information content microstates can also be formative of lower information content macrostates without lowering the overall information content of the system thus being congruent with the irreversible trend of entropy towards maximum information content.
 

Correct, except you use scary terms that deceive and I stated it more simply at the top of this post.

Entropy is not mixedupness. You are trying to misconstrue information content as being disorganized. The randomness is simply because there are more chances for diversity. The system is still optimally organized to maximize efficiency. The only way we get efficiency is by being congruent with thermodynamics.

There is no uncertainty per se. The uncertainty is only because information about the microstates has been excluded, i.e. that is the information content.


You've definitely proven that you've been indoctrinated with Marxist bullshit at the university!

Life is in competition to create more diversity and information content. You made a similar error as Ray Kurzweil in that you are only looking at the body as physical system and failing to factor in the information content of the uniqueness of each individual brain; thus the resultant diversity and information content that spawns from it. You are welcome to reread my essay Information Is Alive! more carefully.

What I mean specifically is that you think the higher entropy state is returning the body back to dust, because you may suppose that dust has more information content   Your simpleton mind is conflating micrograins with microstates. Dust may not have more microstates (i.e. may not need more information to describe its states) than the internal entropy of the body. Moreover (same error as Kurzweil), dust is static, non-interacting and life is dynamic (and exponential interaction via network effects and Reed's Law) thus the information required to describe life is orders and orders-of-magnitude greater. Thus death without reproduction is actually the trend that is not congruent with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

You Marxists don't seem to understand that natural function of life and renewal is already perfected by nature. It isn't in any danger, except when you Marxists think you need to save it (and then you destroy it by lowering the information content of the system).

Perhaps someone forgot to inform you that we don't live in a 3D universe (and the earth isn't flat).

I am sure you agree that entropy is dimensionless. So why did you forget that spacetime is 4D and besides the interaction of larger things via network effects (and over the time domain) is much more complex than just breaking 3D shapes into smaller parts.

You've approached entropy as a 5 year old would (except even when I was 5 I was probably already thinking about the fact that 3D shape has much less information content than time, relativity, and wave interference).


Genetic repair exists because the result is higher entropy than without it, because as you correctly point out that with unconstrained mutation the species would mutate away from acquired evolutionary functionality because the feedback loop of survival-of-the-fittest can not anneal too fast due to the roughly constant gestation and lifespan. Note that species with much shorter lifespans can mutate faster.

The key point that you are missing is the underlined one.

You attempt to paint entropy as dangerous on a microstate level without factoring in that the overall entropy is higher with the genetic repair in place.

Life isn't on any razor's edge. You Marxists (and your “primitive, post-paleozoic, hunter-gatherer” contrived false flags and FUD) are![1]

This is why I stated you are misapplying a theory about genetic microstates to the overall entropy of the society. Major, major, major error on your part!

This is what I meant upthread when I said I would need to talk about the entropic frame-of-reference. I knew you were committing this error in your thinking. I was going to address it in my proposed future essay. Any way, now you know.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c&t=73


Simpleton nonsense. Also, you may mean to say that the cells in the organism are collectivists (which is not the same as nonsense that the organism is a collectivist).


Correct that in order to grow larger in 3D then microstates must be amalgamated in fractal structures but again focusing only on 3D size is very myopic and off-topic.


This is a relevant analogy because it elucidates why my theory about the Knowledge Age says that collectivization of humans will soon become unnecessary and undesirable.

Cells can't accomplish much by themselves. An individual cell without its brethren in the body can't even produce. Thus a cell has no choice and its optimal choice is to be in a collective.

Humans in the Industrial Age were in a similar predicament. They couldn't produce much by themselves. The home (cottage industry, i.e. Luddites) production of the 1800s couldn't produce at the same low cost as factories and individuals couldn't start their own factories because there was a large upfront capital cost. Naturally this capital had to be concentrated.

Whereas production in the Knowledge Age only requires a brain and a computer. Thus humans no longer benefit much from nor need top-down control. And the exponential network effects of Reed's Law promises exponentially higher entropy once we break away from the paradigm we have now.


Again attempting to misapply microstate biology to the entropy of human society is simpleton nonsense.


Except human organization is not a decrease in entropy. Again you are myopically focused only on 3D shape. Refer to my prior explanation on your myopia.

Collectivized society in an Industrial Age is a decrease in entropy and that is why it can't stay forever. Fortunately we now have the technology to move to the next paradigm in decentralized production.


Hahaha.   That is entirely nonsense and bullshit. Since that is your worldview, it explains all your stubborn nonsense upthread.

As I already explained, this randomness is naturally constrained as necessary to maximize overall entropy and not just 3D entropy but entropy measured over every dimension including the time and network effects domains (and many other domains). There is a natural entropic maximizing reason that only about 2.5% of the population are sociopaths.

No the police don't do a damn thing. The functional equivalent of the immune system is your neighbors and their baseball bats. Remember the police never arrive to the crime on time (except in the Philippines where they are somehow always there before the crime begins  , although I read about Civil Asset Forfeiture and other instances where this phenomenon appears to be spreading Westward at an accelerating rate  )


Don't assume you know how the entropy will be maximized. It could even be virtual worlds.

In summary, you are oversimplifying the concept of entropy as being one about 3D spatial order. The information content required to describer higher forms of life is not dominated by the 3D states.

Sorry. I told you that you will never win this debate. I knew already what your myopia was even before you wrote this post.