What's the topic?
From the video description: When most well-intentioned aid workers hear of a problem they think they can fix, they go to work. This, Ernesto Sirolli suggests, is naïve. In this funny and impassioned talk, he proposes that the first step is to listen to the people you're trying to help, and tap into their own entrepreneurial spirit. His advice on what works will help any entrepreneur. |
|
|
|
Even though this talk does not mention Bitcoin at all I still feel like it's message is immensely relevant to this community and that's why I decided to share this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chXsLtHqfdMWatch it share it and learn from it! (After a bit of time I'll move this to off topic) |
|
|
|
|
man 0.7 btc sure is tempting but I just can't go back to this game, it just took too much time from me. Also the style I played is a bit boring without a good group and I just can't see myself spend the time necessary to find one again.
|
|
|
|
If you are north american, you might like to know that you DON'T live in a democracy, but a republic.
Well, just on paper really, in reality their PR pamphlet i.e. the constitution is being completely ignored. But the rest of your post is spot on. |
|
|
|
It is my view that "democracy"
Your's isn't shared by most people... Well I disagree... I am not interested in conducting an extensive survey to prove that, and I doubt you have any interest in doing that ( I hope it isn't a dogmatic belief on your part, but its no big deal if it is ), so there we have it. I gave voice ( so to speak ) to my thoughts on the subject and others shared their thoughts and feelings. Works for me.  Thanks, everyone, for the glimpse into other reality tunnels.  Just a suggestion if you really care about reality.. pay attention to how many people demonstrate and protest in the streets demanding that the government raise taxes, i.e. steal more from those who worked hard and got rich (calling it the democratic process) which is completely incompatible with the principles I outlined. There really isn't any need to do surveys, all you have to do is walk outside and look around. |
|
|
|
I just cannot figure out how to make a brianwallet with a phrase. Anybody provide me with a simple procedure or just a clue? Thanks!
I also noticed the wallet.dat can be recorded on a paper. But I dont know how to.
http://brainwallet.org/ |
|
|
|
It is my view that "democracy"
Your's isn't shared by most people which makes it a lot harder if not impossible to spread the right ideas. Instead of clinging to a term insisting it means something most understand it not to mean, why not use a "clean" word to be able to better communicate? It is the sole reason why I vehemently insist that Bitcoin is not democratic. |
|
|
|
Whether there is any government in the world that is like that is irrelevant, as you say, it is the principles we hold dear as we move forward and strive to improve our lot that is most important.
Actually you may have misunderstood. How we define a "government" today cannot exist following those principles, by definition it can't. So it is relevant, what isn't relevant is how we'd end up organized if we adhered to those principles but we never could end up with a government and follow those principles at the same time. Ever. I call what we would end up with or not a proprietariat. My post on the subject from another forum: Propreitarian - proprietarianism - propreitariat - propreitariathood How to describe what we do want as opposed to what we don't want - a state? Instead of the often misunderstood and rejected based on preconcieved notions anarcho-capitalism, voluntarism, statelessness.., how about we want a proprietariat as antonym to a sate. A proprietariat is what would replace the government in a geographical area populated by propreitarianas (antonym to citizens) and is organized through proprietarianism (as opposed to statism). Here's where I got the idea from: http://prep4liberty.com/2011/01/what-is-proprietarianism/What is Proprietarianism?
Introduction
I’ve answered this question at some point, but I think I should probably do it again. I am going to break this up into a series. I thought at first I would write it in one long blog, but it’s hard to digest that way. This is going to be something akin to a platform to explain in more depth how a person who views the world from the assumption of private property would view various issues from a moral/ethical perspective.
Foundation
A proprietarian views his body as inherently (by definition) his own property. This is the most basic tenet in his worldview. From this flows the idea that he is the only rightful beneficiary of the skills and use of his body. All others who might benefit from his body must do so only upon his express consent. In order to remain consistent in this worldview, he must also view any act by himself or anyone else which would deprive anyone else of their rightful ability to be the sole beneficiaries of their bodies (absent expressed consent, of course) as wrong, morally. He cannot view such invasions upon others as moral while simultaneously viewing those same invasions immoral if committed against him.
Property external of the body is a direct result of benefit from a man’s own body. He either acquires unowned property by his own effort or he trade his skills/property with others. His non-body property therefore exists as an extension of the idea that he owns himself. In a world where this was the “common” moral foundation, the only “sin” against your fellow man would be attempts to circumvent the rightful ownership of property. Everything a proprietarian would find morally (or ethically) reprehensible could be boiled down to a form of theft. The reason I think it's important to have an antonym to the state is because of what's going on in the middle east right now. I didn't know this and I learned it by watching a video of Cenk Uygur, apparently Palestinians held elections and they want to ask the United nations for their "statehood", meaning they want to be recognized as their own state. And this got me thinking, what would we call what we'd want to have if we were in a similar situation and so I arrived at proprietariathood. A proprietariathood is by other entities recognized geographical area where people live under a proprietariat(antonym to state, replacement of a government), meaning they live by proprietorianism(antonym to statism), which can have many forms but always with the ground rule being respect for private property which starts with an individuals body. |
|
|
|
To answer your question, if one's goal is to live in a society that has the freedom to maximize it's potential the best social system is the one where each participant has the freedom to live, to own and be in absolute control over their body and their property, meaning no involuntary participation or taxation.
And that doesn't go against the principles of democracy given the proper supports such as those constitutions and charters of rights and freedoms I mentioned. That is pure fantasy.  What I described doesn't allow for involuntary payment of subscription i.e. theft, it doesn't allow for through violence enforced arbitrary rules every single individual hasn't explicitly contractually consented to, it doesn't include the taking from some and giving to others through violence and robbery, it doesn't include the phrase "for the common good", and it doesn't allow for the delusion that a piece of paper is going to offer any kind of protection against violent psychopaths. Neither does democracy as I, and many, if not most, understand the term. Again you are talking about specific systems which are often incorrectly given the label "democracy". How would your preferred system work in practice. Would it have rules? How would such rules be decided upon if not democratically? The answer to your questions are: I don't know. But it's also irrelevant that I don't. What is relevant are the principles. As long as people follow those principles any type of rules coming about or agreed upon in any way are fine. |
|
|
|
To answer your question, if one's goal is to live in a society that has the freedom to maximize it's potential the best social system is the one where each participant has the freedom to live, to own and be in absolute control over their body and their property, meaning no involuntary participation or taxation.
And that doesn't go against the principles of democracy given the proper supports such as those constitutions and charters of rights and freedoms I mentioned. That is pure fantasy. What I described doesn't allow for involuntary payment of subscription i.e. theft, it doesn't allow for through violence enforced arbitrary rules every single individual hasn't explicitly contractually consented to, it doesn't include the taking from some and giving to others through violence and robbery, it doesn't include the phrase "for the common good", and it doesn't allow for the delusion that a piece of paper is going to offer any kind of protection against violent psychopaths. |
|
|
|
|
Is it normal for QT to take up 900mb of ram?
|
|
|
|
"The best social system is one where everyone is given a voice and allowed equal participation." Yes such a system, which some of us might call a "democracy", does often involve something that might be called "sacrifice" but is perhaps better called "compromise". Its also called "playing nice" and "getting along with others" ... something most people learned in kindergarten. What a nice way to describe mob rule. To answer your question, if one's goal is to live in a society that has the freedom to maximize it's potential the best social system is the one where each participant has the freedom to live, to own and be in absolute control over their body and their property, meaning no involuntary participation or taxation. |
|
|
|
and the upgrade hack...
Does that affect me if I'm doing a fresh install? I didn't have QT or the blockchain on my HDD before. EDIT: ~50% = ~20min EDIT2: ~60% = ~35min EDIT3: :/ it really slowed down now, ~62.5% = ~60min EDIT4: ~66.5% = ~90min EDIT5: ~75% = ~110min EDIT6: ~85.5% = ~130min taking up 800mb of my ram and from time to time really slowing down my laptop EDIT8: Well I fked it up. I foolishly started to play around with QT and encrypted the wallet which I didn't know would prompt a restart and so I lost connection with 50 peers and probably some time before I get those back. ~87,5% = ~150min EDIT9: ~88.5% = ~180min EDIT10: ~91.5% = ~210min EDIT11: ~92.5% = ~230min For some reason the system is becoming unresponsive every 30seconds or so for a couple of seconds, and my laptop really should be able to handle this without breaking a sweat. EDIT12: woke up to a crashed QT, when I ran it again it showed ~96% = ~640min EDIT13: ~98% = ~700min EDIT14: 100% = ~740min and this is with 1 restart and 1 crash |
|
|
|
8min for 30% synchronization, was this always this fast?  |
|
|
|
|
So I'm a bit confused, is this going to work similar to the piglet or what is the difference?
|
|
|
|
Is something tangible if it can be copied?
Yes. If something can be copied it must be tangible. You can't copy the big red dragon I just imagined but you can copy the song I just sang. Information also has other properties that make it intangible.
Like? The fact that information can have value doesnt make it tangible. Never said it did. You seem to suggest that only tangible things can have a value. Seems or actually is are two different things. I did not and do not think only tangible things can have value. That's your own imagination. |
|
|
|
I couldn't agree more.
The main issue people need to move past is corporealness of goods. News flash, in the digital age we discovered a whole new type of goods called digital goods that are not corporeal but which are still tangible as in they exist and aren't merely a figment of someone imagination. And just like thousands of years ago people wanted to wear some shiny physical goods, so too they may desire to wear or otherwise value a digital good. And it just so happens that bitcoins as digital goods have perfect properties to be used as money and not just for the digital equivalent of wearing, which a small community of people, I'd argue, demonstrated were willing to do. Regression theorem is correct and applies to bitcoins perfectly fine as soon as you compare the two in the context of reality in which we live today instead of the theory based upon a reality of our past.
That is not the definition used in economics. A tangible good has its properties set in its physical presence. If you consider pure information (like bitcoins racing around the globe) you cannot call that tangible, ever. I can and I do. I don't care what is used in economics because if it's useless to me if it can't help me describe reality. The reality is we have tangible digital goods. Clearly, otherwise I don't know why people spend hours mining for some digital gold in a game which they then trade for some other digital good, why sometimes some people try to steal these digital goods, or why people get pissy if you copy their digital song or movie that isn't even scarce. Information is tangible. You can read it, listen to it, you can change it, you can store it, you can exchange it. If these action aren't enough for something to be tangible than that definition of tangible is useless and needs to be changed to fit the reality we actually live in. |
|
|
|
How does the regression theorem apply to prison 'money', eg. cigarettes, booze, drugs (not sure what is used these days)?
Bitcoin is similar to prison money, in that the Western states have gradually outlawed a freely traded digital money product and implemented a type of fiscal prison planet arrangement, whereby digital transactions are monitored and scrutinised with all the power of the state apparatus and every citizen is a suspect, presumed guilty. bitcoin monetisation is somewhat a natural reaction of the 'prisoners' seeking to trade with more monetary freedom. TSR being the obvious example as supposedly one of the biggest uses of bitcoin.
Arguing about the where, hows and whys of bitcoin being used as money without recognising the circumstances of our time, that has given birth to bitcoin, is discounting the context as surely as discounting the context of prisoners being incarcerated as having nothing to do with them monetising cigarettes.
Very, very good insight. I couldn't agree more. The main issue people need to move past is corporealness of goods. News flash, in the digital age we discovered a whole new type of goods called digital goods that are not corporeal but which are still tangible as in they exist and aren't merely a figment of someone imagination. And just like thousands of years ago people wanted to wear some shiny physical goods, so too they may desire to wear or otherwise value a digital good. And it just so happens that bitcoins as digital goods have perfect properties to be used as money and not just for the digital equivalent of wearing, which a small community of people, I'd argue, demonstrated were willing to do. Regression theorem is correct and applies to bitcoins perfectly fine as soon as you compare the two in the context of reality in which we live today instead of the theory based upon a reality of our past. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
