|
Gold and BTC are preparing (within next several months) to dump down to a final capitulation low some 20% or more lower.
I have been and remain a seller until next year.
|
|
|
|
TPTB, my response re Flash Crash is on that other thread. I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but if you read my response, you will note that I am quite hostile to ANY real totalitarianism, having experienced it myself in at least three countries as well as my granny having suffered BIG TIME in the late 1940s in Poland after WWII by the Reds.
CoinCube has a point re government, my inclination is closer to yours (less is better, my wording), but some .gov seems to be necessary to get some stuff done. But, there is no doubt that we have been heading the wrong way a long time.
A small .gov supervised by an alert & well-armed populace.
I replied there: Indeed, TPTB, this guy may just be a fall-guy or merely one of many involved. Not all of the facts are in, still. And they certainly were not all in when I started this thread. It has taken "just" five years after all under our pal Obama´s administration just to get this far.
OROBTC, the problem is that you trust anything that is written by government. That you believe anything from a government larger than your local white wooden church that doubles as a makeshit townhall, makes you a Marxist/Statist sheeople. The facts will never come out from the government. Don't you understand everything is propaganda? Turn off the news and turn off the TV. It is all lies. All of it. Will never be fixed. Never. The solution is only to be found in the free market as I am explaining in the Economic Devastation thread. |
|
|
|
Indeed, TPTB, this guy may just be a fall-guy or merely one of many involved. Not all of the facts are in, still. And they certainly were not all in when I started this thread. It has taken "just" five years after all under our pal Obama´s administration just to get this far.
OROBTC, the problem is that you trust anything that is written by government. That you believe anything from a government larger than your local white wooden church that doubles as a makeshit townhall, makes you a Marxist/Statist sheeople. The facts will never come out from the government. Don't you understand everything is propaganda? Turn off the news and turn off the TV. It is all lies. All of it. Will never be fixed. Never. The solution is only to be found in the free market as I am explaining in the Economic Devastation thread. |
|
|
|
Strong antipathy for Armstrong is probably motivated by circumstantial evidence and signalling cues to the effect that he is a scammer of questionable sanity and competence. I think that is unfair, although I do find some of his clearly established puffery distasteful - so distasteful that I have not, even yet, done appropriate diligence on his body of work. Also, if his model is consistently proven to be highly predictive on an on-going basis, it will destroy a lot of deeply held, almost religious, views on market behaviour, and damage the incomes and reputations of of many financial professionals and academics. I would enjoy seeing that. Also he will have scooped me. That would tick me off.
His ECM model has already proven it is highly predictive. I watched it predict the 2011 high in gold+silver, and it has predicted the coming low in them too. And many other correct predictions, some I have observed before they came true such as the prediction (first seen several months before) for oil to close at the exact price it did for the end of 2014. And current predictions are coming true as well: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/04/25/updating-the-markets-the-key-is-the-corruption-that-will-make-the-turn/Armstrong agrees with the coming Knowledge Age but he doesn't yet agree that it will transform political economics. Thus he still clings to reform of government as the only way to avoid the worst of outcomes. His reform proposals are all somewhat logical (although entirely impossible to achieve before the current system crashes and burns) if you remove the possibility of the Knowledge Age to change the everything. His proposed "solutions" would be the only option in that case. Armstrong doesn't agree with me (and my female neurobiologist email mate) that there exist globalists who are driving us towards a NWO. He thinks the powers-that-be are clueless idiots along for the ride. |
|
|
|
TPTB
Thanks for sharing some code. I will study it. I like learning new tricks with SQL, I will see if I can get something out of it for my analytical sales database (alas, MS Access, as I am not a programmer, but I do write most of my good queries with their SQL option, a lot of the info I need can ONLY come by writing SQL not via their "wizards").
Here is a somewhat tricky query I wrote last night in a groggy/M.S.-foggy state-of-mind. Haven't actually tested it yet, but I think it is correct. It employs join that will be NULL to indicate the WHERE clause is true, i.e. it is using double-negation logic. // Retrieve some to relay
$sql =
"SELECT r.MsgId, m.Text, t.Cellphone, t.FirstName AS `To`, f.FirstName AS `From` \n".
"FROM relay AS r \n".
"INNER JOIN msg AS m USING(MsgId) \n".
"INNER JOIN user AS t ON t.UserId = m.ToUserId \n".
"INNER JOIN user AS f ON f.UserId = m.FromUserId \n".
"LEFT JOIN (SELECT MsgId, ByUserId, FromUserId, ToUserId FROM relay INNER JOIN msg USING(MsgId) WHERE RelayedDate IS NOT NULL) AS d ON \n".
"(d.ByUserId = '". $user_id ."' AND d.ToUserId = m.ToUserId AND d.FromUserId != m.FromUserId) OR \n". // ByUserId relayed to same user from a different user (IS NULL: ByUserId should not retrieve these)
"(d.ByUserId != '". $user_id ."' AND d.ToUserId = m.ToUserId AND d.FromUserId = m.FromUserId) \n". // Not ByUserId relayed to same user from the same user (IS NULL: only ByUserId should retrieve these)
"WHERE \n".
" r.RelayedDate IS NULL \n". // not relayed
" AND m.IsRead = 0 \n". // not read
" AND m.IsDeletedByToUser = 0 \n". // not deleted by recipient
" AND t.CarrierId = '". $query->quoteable($_GET['CarrierId']) ."' \n". // note CarrierId could have changed to NULL since record was added to relay
" AND d.MsgId IS NULL \n". // IS NULL:
"ORDER BY m.CreationDate ASC LIMIT ". $num_retrieved;
$query->query($sql, __FILE__, __LINE__); Also, TPTB, I have been more diligent about reading Armstrong's blog almost every day now. * * * I recommend Armstrong for anyone interested in liberty, freedom and economics/finance. Note that he is very controversial and many people seem to hate him, I don't know why. I can understand disagreement, but HATE?!?!?http://armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong_economics_blog/He is hated for different reasons. 1. He agrees with me that the hard-money (goldbugs, fixed money supply, no fractional banking, etc) folks are clueless. 2. He promotes "reformed" Statist "solutions" to the current crisis which include a one-world reserve currency outcome. 3. His economic cycles model is always correct and trumps the banksters. For example, he taught the Japanese corporations how to hedge against the New York banksters. Etc.. |
|
|
|
OROBTC, you are naive Marxist simpleton. Please learn to read. I doubt you will ever understand. Sigh. I give up.  TPTB is there anyone in this thread who you have not yet called a Marxist idiot?  Yes the female neurobiologist. Well she isn't exactly in this thread, only I quoted her. The fact that most all people today are Statists (a.k.a. Marxists) even if they don't admit it to themselves, is why the world is headed into a tempest. The gorilla roar male chest thumping strategy loses its effectiveness when it is repeated in every post.  You wish, but the fact is it is very effective. Men only respect someone who can dunk on them at will. I guarantee you Coinits will never forget me and I also guarantee you my legacy some years from now will be, "damn he was correct, we could have listened". Calling a spade a spade is very honest and admirable way to conduct oneself. (I do make mistakes of course and I acknowledge those who point them out) I am very willing to be amicable and I love to joke around and am very friendly and loving to people in general. But here we are having a serious discussion about political-economics amongst men who claim to be very interested in this very important topic (at this juncture especially). This is serious. |
|
|
|
CoinCube,
My points are irrefutable.
I do not believe they are. However, to go further we will need to take this discussion to a more technical level and clarify some terms. Please provide your definition of entropy. Here is mine: the information you dont have access to. If that data is irrelevant to a particular actor’s contribution to maximum entropy then it is not information. See the Industrial Age required us to have information about political collusion of stored monetary capital that we couldn’t have because of the Dunbar limit, but the Knowledge Age renders that data irrelevant and thus destroys that information while replacing it with exponential growth of information with network effects. Entropic frame-of-reference is a deep topic. I am not going to try to do a comprehensive essay on it today. I need a lot of thought time to make sure I cover it from every possible perspective and nuance. |
|
|
|
Excellent you killed my boner! That captures well the decadence of the baby boomer generation at this stage and the impending death of the Industrial Age system including pensions and all that. Hey now it is time to grow up and stop quoting the person who was replying to me in order to pretend you don't toggle ignore to read my posts.  Come on man, you are apparently a reasonably smart and creative person. Ego won't help you at all. There are so many examples where you were disproportionately offended. You will lose the bet.
Sir Richard is one of them. He is their poster boy. He has already front run the coin and I have shown you the hard evidence even though they scrubbed it. You accuse others of not reading yet you do the same. Bitcoin is their baby. Bitcoin was not created by one individual named Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin was created by DARPA and I can prove it
...
So there you have it. Quit denying what is right in front of you. I have shown how they are going to denote it and it will be worth trillions, perhaps more.
You can not stop it. It is coming full steam ahead. I am out to grab as much as I can and just before they reel it all in I will tune out and disappear into the hills.
I do not see anything about the derivatives bubble popping nor BRICS nor rehypothecated gold. I think that the derivatives fraud is the lit fuse to spread the contagion like a wildfire in tinder dry conditions.
I did allude to that. See the underlined text below: |
|
|
|
P.S. anonymous who corrected me and caused me to admit she is correct, is an extremely high IQ, fellow X-gen female (neurobiologist) whom I met when commenting online in 2005 about immigration reform. Who is the misogynist? I call a spade a spade. I just this year finally saw her pic; she is attractive and very sporty in Colorado. I now agree with you that the coming "wars" will mostly be propaganda. This is a circus show for the masses to drool over. The actual bloodshed will be much more limited than the millions killed in WW1 and WW2 (or % wise the Civil War), because minds can now be won with always-on media, and the brunt force approach is not as efficacious. anonymous replied in email: > He doesn't admit to problem reaction solution or apparently thesis, antithesis, synthesis and its well established historical role in geopolitical theater. Only an intellectual lightweight wouldn't be able to discern 9/11 was a false flag attack, stemming from a long history of false flag attacks (particularly well documented is Gladio). Of course, as far as PRS goes, false flag scenarios are only the tip of the iceberg yet highly illustrative given the clear motives and rapid evolution. In a similar way, Princes of the Yen was rather instructive showing contained examples via relatively rapid monetary policy shifts. > It can't even be said that Armstong's thinking is anachronistic, it's more profoundly limited than that - wearing pinhole glasses and a mindset that caters to the infantilization of society (babies wanting their pablum and paternal security). > > > >> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 08:46:05 -0400 >> Subject: Marty (Armstrong) is fooled by the propaganda war in the information age ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Marty is fooled by the propaganda war in the information ageDate: Thu, April 23, 2015 8:46 am To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... |
|
|
|
Some relevant discussion I am excerpting from the Economic Devastation thread: It is true that before the Knowledge Age, the economic incentives (i.e. “efficiency” in your incorrect nomenclature — most economic != most efficient) in the free market were aligned towards a consolidation of stored monetary capital, and since we know the (Max Weber’s canonical definition of the) State controls legal tender through its monopoly on force, this enabled the stored monetary capitalists and State to collude against the People (e.g. oligarchies, monopolies, regulatory capture, etc). The capitalists and the government officers are populated by sociopaths due to the incentives of the power vacuum of control/power we give to our representative government, and we even have a DEEP STATE now behind the curtain for example funded with $trillions that Donald Rumsfeld admitting was missing from Defense budget on the eve of 9/11 (with all evidence and investigators so conveniently destroyed at the Pentagon the next morning by the airplanemissle impact).
However, the Knowledge Age alters the fundamental incentives because production will require predominantly the individuals knowledge and not stored monetary capital. And this knowledge is not transferable nor aided by finance, i.e. knowledge production (not static knowledge but the creation of new knowledge) is not fungible the way manual labor is (see my quoted essays below for the reason).
Autonomous actors in the free market in the Knowledge Age will attempt to maximize their knowledge, but therein is the more crucial distinction from the Industrial Age. An individual can not buy nor take with force another individual’s knowledge. The reasons are explained below in the quotes of my essays.
The only way to aggregate more knowledge in the Knowledge Age is to leverage the knowledge of other experts, i.e. maximizing the division-of-labor.
Knowledge capital will still be non-uniformly distributed (and perhaps even power-law distributed as for monetary capital due to difference in hypermotivation of A-listers compared to B-listers), but the crucial distinction is that it can’t be used as means of theft with force on the collective.
Sorry your ideas are antiquated now and must be retired. Stop being a dinosaur!
Path of least resistance, i.e. most degrees-of-freedom, is not necessary the most efficient even though it may be the most economic. This is because Coasian barriers create economic incentives which are misaligned with maximum efficiency. The 2nd Law of Thermo tells us that the trend of entropy is to maximum, thus efficiency is precisely that which maximizes entropy. Any other definition is hopelessly specialized and insufficiently general.
Discussions about entropic frame-of-reference, referential transparency, and closed systems will have to wait because that is going to require me to get much deeper than I want to write today.
Nonsense on information being conserved. The universe is trending towards maximum entropy. Energy is conserved but efficiency increased or decreased. That proves my definition of efficiency. ▮Q.E.D.
See the pre-Knowledge Age was enslaved by energy conversation. Unlocking unconserved information growth enables the exponential scaling of network effects.
The world is about to change so dramatically that is going to blow your fucking mind! That is why the old world is dying into a one-world reserve currency enslavement paradigm. It is toast. The Knowledge Age is going to obliterate it.
...
|
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Post-industrial era is going to be amazing!Date: Sat, April 25, 2015 2:17 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- You have to understand that decentralized experimentation is extremely resilient and can not spiral into total destruction of information. If you show me you are putting on your thinking cap and being more open minded to reason, then I will explain to you analytically why this is the case. It has to do with the fact that spread of local experimentation encounters friction when propagating to global change (e.g. individual taste and circumstance is a friction), i.e. local degrees-of-freedom don't convey probabilistic global information; whereas, the incentives in top-down, collectivized control is self-reinforcing to 100% global coverage, i.e. the friction reduces over time. Moveover it is because the universe has no external vantage point and everything is relative, thus there is no way to define the distinction between information and noise on the whole.
In the evolutionary error threshold theory thought-experiment (not real world, and really just masturbation junk science), the hypothetical (not real world) mutation rate is ramped up from centralized, top-down control. In the free market, no one can say whether the information is being created or destroyed because there is no absolute point to measure from.
What you need to understand, that iexperimentation doesnt matter, if you have succesfully reached the optimal, you need to defend it. After experimentation comes implementation, and if you fail you are wiped out. And this is what efficiency is all about and this determines who persists. So here comes the whole collectivism charade... Even in networks the paths that have less friction are chosen regardless of the connectivity ( dof), Eventualy patterns that achieve efficiency records will be replicated and thus lower entropy even if the number of nodes is high and connectivity is high. Agents will always try to maximize efficiency not entropy, even in the knowledge age. Information is neither destroyed neither created There is the information content of the environment, there is the information an agent knows about the environment, there is the information an agent knows about itself, there is the information the agent doesnt know about the environment (environment entropy) and there is the information about itself an agent doesnt know (internal entropy), *so entropy is in the eye of the beholder, not actual quantity anyways.* do we agree on this? You are drawing me back into the high IQ, generative essence discussion. I doubt this will be productive for most readers, but I will oblige you briefly in hopes of perhaps making a breakthrough in mutual understanding. It is true that before the Knowledge Age, the economic incentives (i.e. “efficiency” in your incorrect nomenclature — most economic != most efficient) in the free market were aligned towards a consolidation of stored monetary capital, and since we know the (Max Weber’s canonical definition of the) State controls legal tender through its monopoly on force, this enabled the stored monetary capitalists and State to collude against the People (e.g. oligarchies, monopolies, regulatory capture, etc). The capitalists and the government officers are populated by sociopaths due to the incentives of the power vacuum of control/power we give to our representative government, and we even have a DEEP STATE now behind the curtain for example funded with $trillions that Donald Rumsfeld admitting was missing from Defense budget on the eve of 9/11 (with all evidence and investigators so conveniently destroyed at the Pentagon the next morning by the airplanemissle impact). However, the Knowledge Age alters the fundamental incentives because production will require predominantly the individuals knowledge and not stored monetary capital. And this knowledge is not transferable nor aided by finance, i.e. knowledge production (not static knowledge but the creation of new knowledge) is not fungible the way manual labor is (see my quoted essays below for the reason). Autonomous actors in the free market in the Knowledge Age will attempt to maximize their knowledge, but therein is the more crucial distinction from the Industrial Age. An individual can not buy nor take with force another individual’s knowledge. The reasons are explained below in the quotes of my essays. The only way to aggregate more knowledge in the Knowledge Age is to leverage the knowledge of other experts, i.e. maximizing the division-of-labor. Knowledge capital will still be non-uniformly distributed (and perhaps even power-law distributed as for monetary capital due to difference in hypermotivation of A-listers compared to B-listers), but the crucial distinction is that it can’t be used as means of theft with force on the collective. Sorry your ideas are antiquated now and must be retired. Stop being a dinosaur! Path of least resistance, i.e. most degrees-of-freedom, is not necessary the most efficient even though it may be the most economic. This is because Coasian barriers create economic incentives which are misaligned with maximum efficiency. The 2nd Law of Thermo tells us that the trend of entropy is to maximum, thus efficiency is precisely that which holistically maximizes entropy. Any other definition is hopelessly specialized and insufficiently general. Discussions about entropic frame-of-reference, referential transparency, and closed systems will have to wait because that is going to require me to get much deeper than I want to write today. Nonsense on information being conserved. The universe is trending towards maximum entropy. Changes in entropy are generally an irreversible process. Energy is conserved but efficiency increased or decreased. That proves my definition of efficiency. ▮Q.E.D. See the pre-Knowledge Age was enslaved by energy conversation. Unlocking unconserved information growth enables the exponential scaling of network effects. The world is about to change so dramatically that is going to blow your fucking mind! That is why the old world is dying into a one-world reserve currency enslavement paradigm. It is toast. The Knowledge Age is going to obliterate it. OROBTC you are really wasting your time with your archaic value of gold. One reason that readers have this cognitive dissonance is because they conflate the power wielded by corporations in the capitalist system with free markets in general. Yes it is true that the Industrial Age required large stored monetary capital and only a very small component of individual knowledge capital, thus power was naturally centralized amongst those who could enslave society with money. But the Knowledge Age changes the natural outcome of the free market, because the incentives are realigned by the fact that the primary cost of production has become the indivdual’s knowledge.
My thesis is that the Knowledge Age (we are leaving the Industrial Age) reduces the demand for stored monetary capital and increases the demand for stored knowledge capital. The Industrial Age (which is moving towards 0 or negative profit margins in China) required large amounts of fixed capital investment, thus a high demand for stored monetary capital. The factory worker and factory engineer are economically insignificant compared to the NAV capital costs of the factory infrastructure.
Whereas the high profit margins are moving towards the knowledge production sector (software programming, marketing, etc). The Industrial Age is dying economically and along with it will die the demand for stored money. The larger the capital, the less effectively one will be able to invest it with a positve ROI.
Thus we don't need crypto-currency to be a reserve currency. Let the oligarchs (and the socialist sheeople/masses) have their reserve currency and enslaved nation-state governments. That is all part of the process of that paradigm dying.
The Knowledge Age will rise with competing crypto-currencies.
Bitcoin will not "winner take all". I guarantee you that.
Instead of playing into the elite's goals with his Solutions Conference. Armstrong as a programmer should be helping us to create crypto-currency solutions.
Specifically the way to counter the worse effects of the one-world currency are to study my writings about the Knowledge Age which were linked from the opening post of this now 45 page forum thread.
You will probably need a week or two of studying the thread slowly.
I will be the first to admit I needed a week to fully absorb the following works of AnonyMint. The Rise of KnowledgeUnderstand Everything Fundamentally Together these are quite simply the most insightful piece of economic theory I have ever read. If the author is right and I think he is we are all in the midst of a tragedy of epic proportions. It is sad unstoppable and will devastate the lives of much of humanity.
http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Thought_Isn%27t_Fungible
The Industrial Age relied on large economies-of-scale for manufacturing, which meant that fixed capital investments and NAV calculations sufficed for investment. The world was structured around a fixed return on capital model. This meant that large capital could find economies-of-scale for investment.
The Knowledge Age destroys all that! Big passive capital becomes dumb and impotent. Active capital (actual knowledge) is required in the Knowledge Age.
Thus those who invest in the reserve currency unit-of-account are in a dying paradigm. That one-world currency and eventual failure of the nations into a one-world government will be paradigm of death and eugenics (exactly as predicted in the Bible).
What is rising to take its place is... The only solution to this problem is for the Knowledge Age to rise and say "I don't need stored monetary capital, I need knowledge". I will quote from myself about this as follows. The Rise of KnowledgeFinanceability of Knowledge
As explained in the “Economy of Knowledge” and “Energy of Knowledge” sections, knowledge doesn't exist now if it isn't dynamically adaptable in the future. The only systems in nature which can do this, are those that are composed of autonomous agents without top-down control, e.g. ant colonies, the neurons and synapses of the human brain, free markets, and unregulated social networks.
Due to aggregating and concentrating capital via an interest rate, as opposed to dispersing and scattering capital, finance mathematically must over time reduce the quantity of autonomous decisions (at least decisions about who receives funding to produce). Thus if financing were the predominant long-term trend, knowledge could not be.
The more potential energy in the knowledge capital, the more priceless it is sell its future. There are knowledge producers such as the creator of the open-source software movement, who absolutely refuse to work at any price where they don't have sufficient ownership of their knowledge, so as to prevent limitations of its potential future use. Due to the transactional cost Theory of the Firm which provides for the economic existence of the corporation, corporate capital accumulates by defending or increasing the transactional cost between otherwise autonomous knowledge producing actors. Thus increasing corporate control of knowledge is the antithesis of increasing knowledge. Knowledge can only increase by increasing the autonomy of the knowledge producing actors. This tension is depicted graphically.
Thus, finance and corporations are inherently ownership centralization paradigms. Whereas, knowledge ownership can not be centralized without destroying it.
For example, if a corporation purchased a huge library of software modules or books, written by different authors, the managers could create nothing with this without the authors (or others) who are knowledgeable of these modules or books. If these authors were not already organically interacting, then they would not be able to at any price, unless there was interoperability knowledge potential enumerated by some knowledgeable person(s). Thus always the knowledge is owned by the knowledge producers. When a knowledge producer is gone, the knowledge previously produced is destroyed, if it was not adopted by another sufficiently knowledgeable producer.
The Inverse Commons explains that unlike sharing of hard resources, the sharing of knowledge increases the value of the shared knowledge. Current knowledge becomes more valuable as it gains more future potential uses, and only autonomous knowledge actors can maximize diverse use cases of interoperability.
Software has minimal financing requirements, e.g. one or two humans with computers can write software that launches a $millions start-up. I did this once or twice by myself with no employees (e.g. CoolPage.com by 2001 if in Shadowstats inflation-adjusted dollars).
Knowledge Investing
Since the ownership of knowledge can't be transferred with money, financing incurs the risk of guaranteeing knowledge to spontaneously create itself where it did not already exist. No level of guaranteed interest rate can compensate for this lack of knowledge in the act of financing. What attracts savers to be passive capitalists is the economy-of-scale, where the due diligence effort (i.e. knowledge production) applied does not rise significantly with the amount saved (i.e. loaned) at interest. The collective politics will guarantee (insure) the return by debasing the money as necessary to pay for the lack of knowledge production— another evidence that financing is a centralization paradigm because knowledge can't be owned with money.
Whereas, equity investment has no guaranteed return and requires knowledge production.
“Equity investments” that are based on consistent dividends, are essentially a low knowledge production investment decision with a semi-guaranteed return similar to financing. It is instructive to note that as of 2008 “No stockholder has made a real inflation-adjusted penny in equity in Coca-Cola in 46 years.”.
Passive capitalists will find it nearly impossible to venture into high-tech knowledge investing, because they necessarily must approach it from the financing perspective, as their objective is to deploy large quantities of capital passively, i.e. to approach the theoretical constant marginal utility of gold. For example, Buffett's BYD (which makes electric cars) investment has performed poorly. A scientifically knowledgeable person knows that the energy-density of batteries is not ROI competitive with petrol.
One general rule for investing in knowledge production, is to invest close to what you know well. Because knowledge is inherently local and autonomous. If there is some popular investment theme, then it must have a very low relative knowledge production— the extreme case is depositing money in the bank, where the depositor doesn't even care how the money is invested.
The creator of the open-source software movement enumerated some business models that apply to knowledge production. The general concept is to not own the preexisting base of knowledge (it is always owned by the individuals and can't be transferred with money), rather to create a market for the services of the preexisting knowledge producers. In short, top-down fund some incremental advance in knowledge production and own the market for it. Remember that in the Theory of the Firm, corporations only exist where there is a transactional cost (barrier) to the autonomous knowledge producers achieving the same market organically. So the key is to identify these market barriers and invest to solve them.
Passive capital is financing those hard resources in the internet space, e.g. the massive server farms that serve the billion users of Facebook and Google, funded by collecting ad revenue rents on all internet activity— an implicit attempt to make knowledge capital subservient. Yet given the non-autonomous top-down control of thousands of knowledge producing employees, and the requirement to defend the transactional cost that sustains the corporate profit, Facebook and Google can't produce software diversity fast enough to service all the features that users want. Diversified software start-ups will flourish. |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Government will always be corrupt; freedom only comes from reducing not reforming governmentDate: Sat, April 25, 2015 11:58 am To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I surrender on educating my highly abstract (higher-order generality, generative essence) conceptualizations. The result is no different than if I was writing in the Klingon language. It is pointless here because it is well known that most humans can’t think in abstractions. My bad (mea culpa) for trying to share or teach conceptualizations that readers don’t have the capability or inclination to understand. Since it seems my upthread generative essence logic is incomprehensible to mainstream minds (perhaps aminorex or other very high IQ lurkers might be excluded, and since I don't yet have free time to compose a well structured essay to try—ostensibly in futility to—overcome the cognitive dissonance), I will attempt to raise this discussion down to the primates’ “primitive, post-paleozoic, hunter-gatherer”, hindbrain Twitter soundbite level of reasoning which I surmise commentators here seem capable of semi-cognitively consuming. CoinCube’s primative folk illogic (i.e. not based on any rational generative essence but we can’t go there because of the incapacity to comprehend) writes that we should err on the side of caution because of the tail-risk that anarchy (a.k.a. free markets, high entropy, or autonomous freedom) could become unstable or otherwise cause great harm if wasn’t balanced with top-down control. Nevermind that CoinCube doesn’t seem to appreciate that the math that free markets anneal to a plurality of decentralized, top-down control as demanded and supplied by the people in a continuously self-adjusting, highly resilient system (i.e. no tail-risk of collapsing to 0 entropy in a Dark Age as governments do). That generative essence entropy discussion will fly right over his head, at least perhaps until I take the time to make the presentation irrefutable (but even then it might be futile, so I may not even bother because I have more important work to do on actually providing solutions that we all need). One reason that readers have this cognitive dissonance is because they conflate the power wielded by corporations in the capitalist system with free markets in general. Yes it is true that the Industrial Age required large stored monetary capital and only a very small component of individual knowledge capital, thus power was naturally centralized amongst those who could enslave society with money. But the Knowledge Age changes the natural outcome of the free market, because the incentives are realigned by the fact that the primary cost of production has become the indivdual’s knowledge.But wait. There is a simpleton argument I can make. Did CoinCube ever bother to contemplate what about the everyday risk of the top-control control doing harm well before any totalitarian collapse rather just as a normal outcome of the inalienable fact that centralization of power/control (is a power vacuum that) attracts to the positions of power/control those who will abuse power? http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/04/25/just-us-its-a-business-exploiting-others-for-personal-gain/The Ohio Project Innocence has won a victory where men have finally been released holding the record for the longest wrongfully held – 39 years. In 1975, ...
In a prosecution of Italians, this one guy subpoenaed his own phone calls from prison which are all taped. By mistake, they gave him is co-defendant who had turned to be a “rat” I listened to the tape where the prosecutor was telling the rat he needed him to testify against someone else as well. The rat said he did not know that person. The prosecutor replied, “don’t worry, by the time I am done with you, you will know him like he’s your brother.”. The tape was given to Judge Kaplan. He ruled it was irrelevant for that was a different case even though it was the same rat testifying against him. You quickly realize, nothing is real and the press supports the system for they just regurgitate whatever the government tells them.
When there is no means to defend yourself or your property, the game is over – it is checkmate. Society cannot function when there is no means to address corruption. That is where the United States now stands. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/04/24/police-do-not-rat-on-police-neither-do-judges-richard-owen-above-the-law/Police misconduct is everywhere and nobody seems willing to prosecute any officers for outright murder. This same code of protecting their own exists even more so among judges. After watching the “The Forecaster”, many people are shocked at how Federal Judges are totally out of control, sending emails commenting on new articles appearing on Judge Richard Owen. Far too many judges believe they are some demigod... Can a simpleton even understand it is insane to hand the keys to sociopaths? And if you build a government more populous than your Dunbar limit, the sociopaths will populate it. How many examples do you need from 6000 years of recorded human political-economic history? Why can’t OROBTC and most simpletons comprehend that the sociopaths you can’t see because the government is more populous than your Dunbar limit, who are lurking and in control of the government, will offer to prosecute and attack scapegoats to keep you appeased while they retain the control behind the curtain. Reform is always a lie. For example, it was a lie even when Napoleon promised to liberate after the French Revolution. The banksters have always been in control of collectivized government behind the scenes and always will be. It would be a lot more productive and beneficial to all of us, if we move on with creating the technological solutions we need and stop wasting our time trying to change deeply ingrained (even willfully ego driven, stubborn) cognitive dissonance. |
|
|
|
I surrender... it is an entire waste of time to try to teach... OROBTC, you are naive Marxist simpleton. Please learn to read. I doubt you will ever understand. Sigh. I give up. While we already noted that the CFTC and the DOJ have gone full scapegoat retard, by blaming the entire flash crash on one solitary trader (operating out of the UK no less), which means that Waddell & Reed should now sue the SEC for hundreds of millions in lost fees and defamation, it is worth re-emphasizing the hubris and the audacity that these "regulators" have, to assume that sophisticated market participants are truly dumb enough to believe any of this is just shocking.
In any event, going with the bullshit story concocted by the confused brains at the CFTC (whose former head when all this happened, is now being groomed by Hillary Clinton to be America's next Treasury Secretary), and for all those who wish to follow in the "rogue" ES trader's footsteps, here is how Navinder Singh Sarao singlehandedly crashed the entire market, leading to the single biggest loss in market capitalization in history.
So now that you know how to crash the entire stock market single handedly, please do. Because this is not a "market." |
|
|
|
OROBTC, you are naive Marxist simpleton. Please learn to read. I doubt you will ever understand. Sigh. I give up. While we already noted that the CFTC and the DOJ have gone full scapegoat retard, by blaming the entire flash crash on one solitary trader (operating out of the UK no less), which means that Waddell & Reed should now sue the SEC for hundreds of millions in lost fees and defamation, it is worth re-emphasizing the hubris and the audacity that these "regulators" have, to assume that sophisticated market participants are truly dumb enough to believe any of this is just shocking.
In any event, going with the bullshit story concocted by the confused brains at the CFTC (whose former head when all this happened, is now being groomed by Hillary Clinton to be America's next Treasury Secretary), and for all those who wish to follow in the "rogue" ES trader's footsteps, here is how Navinder Singh Sarao singlehandedly crashed the entire market, leading to the single biggest loss in market capitalization in history.
So now that you know how to crash the entire stock market single handedly, please do. Because this is not a "market." |
|
|
|
I was feeling low energy and that fatigue I get from M.S., I just ran a reasonably fast mile and now am energized to work. I have naturally overactive endocrine function and my dopamine is nearly always super stimulated. The M.S. has taken its toll, but I suppose I function at such a high level with M.S. because I was always hyperactive before it. My hyperactivity can be drilled down into intense focus and quiet and then all the energy gets focused to the brain. My ability to instantly move that energy between body and brain has been the backbone of my achievements in life. But it wasn't a complete control over mind/body, because I did struggle with the physical distraction of intense spontaneous erections too much until I got chronically ill (but the "problem" returns still sporadically). Also there are times where I can't work because I am too intensely craving for some physical activity. On the erotic topic, may I disgress (since I know this is male only demographics) how does the thought of depositing inside of Hillary (in her fertile years) sit with you all?   I am hoping for some humorous replies (this thread needs some banter). |
|
|
|
I now agree with you that the coming "wars" will mostly be propaganda. This is a circus show for the masses to drool over. The actual bloodshed will be much more limited than the millions killed in WW1 and WW2 (or % wise the Civil War), because minds can now be won with always-on media, and the brunt force approach is not as efficacious. anonymous replied in email: > He doesn't admit to problem reaction solution or apparently thesis, antithesis, synthesis and its well established historical role in geopolitical theater. Only an intellectual lightweight wouldn't be able to discern 9/11 was a false flag attack, stemming from a long history of false flag attacks (particularly well documented is Gladio). Of course, as far as PRS goes, false flag scenarios are only the tip of the iceberg yet highly illustrative given the clear motives and rapid evolution. In a similar way, Princes of the Yen was rather instructive showing contained examples via relatively rapid monetary policy shifts. > It can't even be said that Armstong's thinking is anachronistic, it's more profoundly limited than that - wearing pinhole glasses and a mindset that caters to the infantilization of society (babies wanting their pablum and paternal security). > > > >> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 08:46:05 -0400 >> Subject: Marty (Armstrong) is fooled by the propaganda war in the information age ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Marty is fooled by the propaganda war in the information ageDate: Thu, April 23, 2015 8:46 am To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Ideology destroying our world originates with hating natureDate: Fri, April 24, 2015 1:09 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Let me give a hint to CoinCube and l3552 so perhaps they might choose to ponder and figure out their myopia[1] in the interim time before I have the time to spell it out in great detail irrefutably. You can see that I am not against (autonomously reset-able or voluntary opt-in) reputation nor am I against plurality of competing, local communities enforcing their local laws. But what CoinCube and l3552 want is absolute 100% coverage, i.e. coercion and force of the State or an inviolable perennial blockchain history, because they don't want any of nature's randomness to seep in (i.e. the hideous "human trafficker", etc). Their goals require them to have global and 100% coverage of enforcement. Thus it is not surprising that CoinCube would reach for a research model of mutation which requires a global control and metric on error. But that model can never be tested (verified to be valid) in the real world because there is no global metric of error on autonomous experimentation (the conceptual system doesn't even exist because there is no non-relativistic observer in our universe). It is junk science. Analogously climate change models are junk science (this needs more detailed argument). You see Marxists invent (conjure) globalized model strawmen in order to support their insane political philosophy of wanting to squelch nature's serendipity and cycles. They delude themselves into believing this junk science lends support to their insanity. It is insanity because as I have explained, the power vacuum of globalized control aligns the economic incentives of all to act selfishly and drive the entropy of the system towards 0, i.e. total collapse into a Dark Age. Sorry I will admonish these Marxists until my dying breath. CoinCube you are entirely wrong. Sorry. [1] This is my assertion and I have no doubt about this. |
|
|
|
OROBTC, You mentioned upthread you dabble a bit in SQL. Here follows some PHP code from my new venture, wherein I am setting up a MySQL query. I will share with you a trick that not everyone knows, on how to select the record that corresponds to the MAX() or MIN() result of a GROUP BY clause. I also used this trick in my Scala code employing SQLite for my yet unreleased Android app also (another few 1000s of LOC). I am also sharing this snippet to address those who doubt whether I am a talented and accomplished programmer. I realize it may not satisfy Coinits but that his problem, not mine. The following code selects for the signed-in user ( User::userId()) the most recent sent message for each conversation (i.e. each recipient ToUserId). case 'sent':
// http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1313120/retrieving-the-last-record-in-each-group#1313140
$sql .=
", FirstName, Visibility, PhotoFile \n" .
"FROM msg \n" .
"INNER JOIN ( \n" .
" SELECT FromUserId, MAX(CreationDate) AS CreationDate FROM msg WHERE FromUserId = '" . User::userId() . "' AND IsDeletedByFromUser = 0 GROUP BY ToUserId \n" .
") AS t USING(FromUserId, CreationDate) \n" .
"LEFT JOIN (SELECT UserId, FirstName, Visibility, PhotoFile FROM user) AS u ON UserId = ToUserId \n";
break;
...
$sql .= "ORDER BY CreationDate DESC";
$query->query($sql, __FILE__, __LINE__);
$msgs = array();
while(($msg = $query->fetchNextAssocArray())) $msgs[] = $msg;
Output::toCallbackJSON($msgs);
Note MySQL requires the unreferenced AS t and AS u (I presume so it can report errors non-ambiguously). After using Scala, I really loathe PHP's semicolons at line endings, break in switch blocks, and the inability to assign the result of a switch block to a variable! |
|
|
|
CoinCube,
My points are irrefutable.
I do not believe they are. However, to go further we will need to take this discussion to a more technical level and clarify some terms. Please provide your definition of entropy. On the drive from my new rental house ( the 4 bedroom, inverter-type aircons, fully furnished, Western-quality for $350 per month I recently rented)—where I just recently got a landline DSL connection installed ( but no aircon in the office room yet)—to my chicken cot house ( the 2 bedroom, no floor tiles, no hot water, low-life abode for $73 monthly that I been hunkered down in since Nov. 2013) which is already fully setup with window type aircon, my multiple computers, and DSL connection, I contemplated that I need to write a new well composed essay on my blog dealing with how to distinguish junk science from real science. It is really simple actually. The generative essence is that if the theory can't be measured and verified extensively in the real world, then it is just junk science theoretical nonsense from cathedral academics who want a Technocracy where they can top-down micromismanage nature. But that needs to be expounded upon in a detailed and convincing manner. That future essay will trounce all your misunderstandings which you now hold as objections. I am extremely overworked right now trying to launch a website that is in some respects equivalent to a Facebook. Imagine programmed by one man, not a team. I need relaxation time to compose high quality English prose and to organize my presentation of concepts such that the epiphany light bulb will turn on for readers, as it did for you when you read my seminal essays which you linked from the opening post of this thread. I wrote some of those seminal essays (at least the ones of my blog) when I had a relaxed environment in 2012 living in the mountain at 1000 meters elevation near to Mt. Apo— the tallest peak in the Philippines. I think perhaps the ones you linked from the opening post were written in 2010 or 2011 before the downward spiral into the Multiple Sclerosis accelerated. So, I need to put this discussion on hold (pause) for now. |
|
|
|
Lithium is also used to treat bipolar disorder but at higher doses around 1800mg per day.
It bad reputation at high doses is well deserved. Small amounts are probably needed. Its mechanism of action is not well understood.
I had wanted to comment on that I don't feel comfortable with people recommending Lithium, but I held back because I don't know much about it. But it does concern me. I was so cautious that I avoided the high dose vitamin D3 cure for my Multiple Sclerosis for 3 years, even I had tested the regimen in Sept 2012 and put M.S. symptoms into ≈100% remission within a week. Apparently my MS was much less severe then. I got cautious because of experts warning me about potential permanent liver and kidney (renal) damage. The regimen is working for me now but it is not an instant remission as before. This could be exacerbated by me basically pushing myself to complete exhaustion every day (I mean 18 hours nonstop programming to the point where I am falling asleep and fighting my sleep with my eyes open). I have a lot of soreness if I touch my skull. Also I feel my (especially the back of my, and I have egg shaped, alien-like back of) head not really aching but sensations that I are more like pressure or something moving around inside. Btw, my head is very large in the back and tapers narrow in forehead. This is hidden by my full head of hair. I mention this because I think my analytical skills are (IQ is) more in terms of being a philosopher (IQ tests say very high in Mathematical Visualization) and not a great computician or pattern matching brain such as rpietila (which is typically what IQ tests measure which is why I believe some IQ tests fail to capture my strengths). I mention this because I want to explain that I think people have different strengths and they need to recognize their weaknesses and leverage those who are stronger where they are weak. And this ties into my frustration in this thread as I will explain below. I think the reason I am a good programmer is because I can hold a map in my head to all the complex relationships relating the concepts of the program. Also I have very very strong logic skills because I can "see" conceptual relationships. Note if i am exhausted of course I am more likely to commit an error in reasoning. Amphetamine is a potent CNS stimulant. Like all stimulants it can transiently improve attention and alertness and is used to treat conditions such as narcolepsy. Recreational use of any CNS stimulants including the more potent cousin drug methamphetamine "crystal meth" (which is metabolized into amphetamine in the body) has substantial potential downsides.
Thanks for backing up what I wrote earlier about this. That is my personal experience with them too. What works better for me is aggressive exercise. I mean raising the heartbeart to 160+ and pushing myself to my limits. This releases HGH and other numerous positive benefits. There are no shortcuts with supplements that will give the same benefits. I understand that most people loathe intense exercise. I crave it. So I am blessed that way. I really love the God (serendipitous universe) who gave me my attributes. I love myself. Narcissistic? Maybe so, but not in terms of dwelling on it. Just in terms of being thankful and in balance with myself.
It seems that TPTB_n_w agenda is to drive away everyone with an ego.
Well, I don't know why that is so important.
When I first called Jason Hommel in 2006 to introduce myself, he asked me, "What is your goal?". I think he was trying to determine if I wanted to be rich. I replied, "I want to find the truth". What bothers me is I struggling to work 18 hours a day to dig myself out of a terrible financial hole, a terrible Multiple Sclerosis hole, and terrible global collapse hole coming. And I am trying my best to discuss and convey truth. Ego (and also Dunning-Kruger ignorance where the well-intentioned dolt doesn't respect his weaknesses and strengths) is noise that further burdens my very scarce availability. I am also not offended so probably my problem is not that big.
But if I tried to contribute to the thread with my limited understanding, and got such slander in return, I might get discouraged.
If someone is offended when it is pointed out that they are not respecting their strengths and weaknesses, then it means they are not honest with themselves. Personal dishonesty is the bane of successful and productive life. Coinits' animosity started to build inside of himself over a period of weeks where I was correcting or disagreeing with him on numerous points. For example where I told him that ZeroHedge is an adrenalin addiction provider for males. And in the "one world reserve currency" thread he was asserting that I have no clue about what is really going on behind the curtain and I told him he was preaching to the choir, because for example I wrote Bitcoin : The Digital Kill Switch back in 2013 when you first drew me into this community. He let his ego and emotions get in the way of our rational discussion. Coinits finally exploded when I started to really admonish l3552, CoinCube, and thaaanos recently. Sorry I am just speaking what I rationally understand to be the facts and the truth. I am not even trying, I am not that intelligent.
Yet I am pretty intelligent.
You are very intelligent. Your IQ appears to be more focused in the pattern matching and computational realm than mine. Remember you trounce me in any games about computing chance (probabilities) in real-time. My brain doesn't work that fast on that. My brain is average at sequential processing of information, e.g. I sucked at that game that required me to memorize sequential tones and repeat them. I loathe taking the time writing out sequentially what my brain sees in a visual map. It is so slow and excruciatingly tedious for me. The fun stuff for me is all inside my brain. My brain is moving so fast internally but I can't possible type it all out. My IQ is very focused in conceptual relationships. I can abstract concepts to their generative essence almost without thinking. It is just like I see the map instantly. My I/O engine is particularly handicapped now by the M.S.. It reduces the energy and focus to process sequential details such as written text. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
