Bitcoin Forum
February 06, 2016, 03:35:01 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.11.2 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 [42] 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 ... 368 »
821  Economy / Economics / Re: The end is near on: July 19, 2013, 09:17:06 PM
Quote
Selfsufficient communities within Dunbar's Number are always nuclear, related by blood.


While that is generally true, it's not absolutely true.  There have been some very real 'intentional communites' that have come together with only a common idea, and did fine.  Still, your opinion seems valid here, as any community with any staying power is certain to develop said blood relations over time, regardless of how they start out.

Quote

But the civilizing of the homines sapientes destroyed these nuclear communities and replaced them with a Society (organised violence). To rebuild them would be a long, painfull process. Even in this forum you'll find collectivists only: trade-collectivists (homo oeconomicus), education-collectivists, progress-collectivists, capital-collectivists etc., but zero people who are interested in freedom and selfsufficiency.

Once again, you have a strange notion of both "society" and of "collectivists", IMHO.
822  Economy / Economics / Re: The end is near on: July 19, 2013, 08:09:27 PM

The other question that comes to mind.  Why is Z. alone in this?  Isn't there likely a Dunbar number of folks that would join?  Why all the waiting and complaining?  If it is right and better, make it so, and others will recognize that.

There certainly is, but they don't hang around a digital currency forum.
823  Economy / Goods / Re: [WTS] Honey Caramels on: July 07, 2013, 10:26:46 PM
Ordered a 1/4 lb bag of Raspberry Honey Caramels (with my scrap PayPal cash). Smiley Will be ordering more with Bitcoin if it is good!

Oh, they're good.  Downright addictive.

Unless, of course, you're allergic to raspberries.
824  Economy / Economics / Re: The end is near on: July 05, 2013, 04:00:11 AM
Zarathustra is a true believer.  He doesn't come here and make his statements because he needs to convince himself, he comes here because he thinks it's his duty to convince you.  I recommend use of the ignore button to the left.

Yes, that's the difference. Moonshadow is somebody who believes that he is writing to convince himself instead of others.
So funny.

Not quite, I just don't consider it my duty to convince you or anyone else of my position.

Not entirely incorrect, however.  I'm an INTP, and as such I'm ever capable of reassessing my position based on new information, and suffer little due to cognative dissonance.  As such, an INTP can't remain so flexible unless there is some degree of doubt in the validity of his/her position, and I'm no exception.  I have no problem admitting that I don't consider myself perfect, in thought or action.  I've changed my position on some things over the course of my adult life, including my position on economic theories.  That's why I'm an Austrian now, I used to be much more of a classic monetarist.  Although I can't recall holding positions similar to your own at any point in life.
825  Economy / Economics / Re: The end is near on: July 05, 2013, 03:50:38 AM
And there is no harm, or effect, of beliefs like his.

That is far from true, unfortunately.
826  Economy / Economics / Re: The end is near on: July 04, 2013, 01:59:32 PM
Zarathustra is a true believer.  He doesn't come here and make his statements because he needs to convince himself, he comes here because he thinks it's his duty to convince you.  I recommend use of the ignore button to the left.
827  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Capitalism. on: July 01, 2013, 10:44:28 PM
This has devolved into childish fight.  I've had enough of it.  This thread is now locked.

BTW, Crumbs...

You're a dick, and I've not yet seen another side of you.  If you have any redeeming merit, start clinging to that side of yourself.
828  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Capitalism. on: June 29, 2013, 01:17:56 PM
[...]
I know it's possible to disagree with something and still not interfere. However, to me it seems like he's preaching:
"hands-off policy" -- the car is designed to drive itself so you should never touch the steering wheel.
while really practising:
"hands-off approach" -- if you want a stretched spring to recoil back, stop stretching it and let go for now.

^^^Too subtle.  You're arguing against a guy who doesn't understand springs.


Just because you say it, or read it somewhere on the Internet, or listen to some guy who said it in some cute way, doesn't make it so.

I'm finished arguing with idiots about this.  I'm just wasting my time.
829  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Capitalism. on: June 28, 2013, 08:43:14 PM


Since exponential population growth necessitates matching or better economic growth, which, you point out, "can not be sustained indefinitely," either all economic approaches are doomed, or your assumption of continued population growth is bad.  Are you prophesying doom or Huh


Again, you fail.  I said nothing about exponetial population growth.  While that might happen if we manage to get off this rock, it certainly doesn't have to happen.  The natural world all has limits, and humanity isn't really an exception.  If that is "doom" in your eyes, then doom it may be.  But I'm not going to cry over what cannot be avoided, and if we can avoid it (by getting of this rock) nor will I be disappointed to be wrong.

Quote
Quote
To myself, and in this context, 'stable' would mean that the natural 'forces' that result in the business cycle be left alone, so that the magnitude of those oscillations don't have the chance to compound.

What, exactly, are you basing this on?  Other than the colorful allusion to "compounding" oscillations?  As most of us who've driven a car know, bad shock absorbers (oscillation dampers) make for a lousy ride.  Undamped oscillations are typically disastrous.  Armies, when walking on bridges, are made to break march to prevent bridge collapses.  Unchecked parasitic oscillations in electronics cause ringing, or worse, turn entire circuits into oscillators.  Bad model to pick. Smiley


And ham radio operators could never do what they do without a 'stable' oscillation, and a car engine would never go anywhere without it's 'stable' cycles.  An economy is much better compared to a machine in operation than a static construction such as a bridge.

And shock absorbers are not oscillation dampers.  Bumps in the road aren;t oscillations, they don't have a predictable pattern.  Talk about your bad model.

Quote

Quote
And that is what I mean by the 'right' economy.  The one that develops naturally from the people and conditions that are present and develop in the future, without influence of well intended politicos and self-interested powers.  It would be possible for some of those oscillations to be particularly harmful, even to the point of severe social strife, but over the truely long term, such oscillations (by definition) balance out.

See above.

Edit:  "Well-intentioned politicos"?  Really?  I always assumed that politicians were, at least, given ulterior motives, but you feel that they're just ... simpleminded?  Not quite up to the mile-high bar set by the esteemed politicos of this forum? Smiley


I was giving them the enefit of the doubt, because most certainly some of them are basicly 'simple minded' after a fashion, and are often taken advantage of by others.  It's actually an established rule of politics, often called the rule of the Baptists & Bootleggers.  Feel free to look that one up.
830  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Capitalism. on: June 28, 2013, 08:32:16 PM
 No matter how smart Ben may be, which no doubt is smarter than any of us, he doesn't merit that level of authority.

You give him and his like too much credit.  While there is a certain kind of 'smarts' required to obtain and maintain these positions of power, there are many different kinds of 'smarts'.  The kind of 'smart' required to succeed in a social position of power (i.e. politics) is decidedly distinct to the kind of smarts required to analyse a complex economy.  The latter kind of smarts is both rare and humbling, as the end result is usually that, no matter how well you did in school nor how many times your mother told you were so smart, you're not smart enough and you can't be.  And that is the fundamental lesson not taught in economics courses.  Those classes teach the students methods of simplyfying the overal picture, in such a manner as to be able to approximate the massive issue.  But just like chaos theory implies that the choice of direction a butteryfly may take can impact the course of a typhoon halfway around the world and 6 months later, the long tail of data in the economy cannot be rounded off and accurately approximate such a huge and dynamic system for any real timescale.  Oftentimes, the long tail of data isn't even available for analysis.  How do you know what deals that the recycler in Africa makes, if he is not willing to tell you the truth?  What if you never ask?
831  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin is clearly degenerating into anarchy on: June 28, 2013, 06:05:01 PM
Degenerating?

Bitcoin was designed to be a tool for 'anarchy'.  Your choice of words exposes your bias.

EDIT:  Oviously, this is a trolling post thread, intended to evoke a response.  It obviously worked.  Well played.
832  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Capitalism. on: June 28, 2013, 06:01:26 PM

The problem which the Anarchocapitalists is that they want two systems which mutually exclude each other: Anarchy and a progressively increasing economy.


I don't want a progressively increasing economy.  I want the right economy.

OK, let's have a quick look at what that might entail. Say you want a 'stable' economy,

You've already failed the test.

You're obviously not an engineer.
In general terms stable just means feedback loops don't cause exponential growth, decay, or oscillation. Try again, Moon (obviously-a-liberal-arts-major) Shadow Wink

I'm pretty sure you're well aware you're misrepresenting my educational background.

The problem with "stable" is that it is a subjective valuation.  All economies oscillate, it's called the business cycle.  Unfortuantely, there are many people who will make well intended, but ill advised, attempts to suppress that oscillation.  The result of which is that 'forces' become pent up, and create greater havoc when they are finally released 'out of phase'.  Still other people stand to make huge profits from the timing of changes in teh business cycle, and have a perverse incentive to encourage the realses of such 'forces' on their own timescales, thus making things even worse for everyone else.  George Soros famously made an even bigger fortune doing exactly this to England.  To most poeople, 'stable' would mean that an economy grows at or slightly better than the population rate.  By better, most people would say somthing around 2% APR.  The problem is that even 2% annually is an exponential growth rate, and cannot continue forever.  By definition, that which is not sustainable cannot continue indefinately, no matter the best wishes of  anyone.  To myself, and in this context, 'stable' would mean that the natural 'forces' that result in the business cycle be left alone, so that the magnitude of those oscillations don't have the chance to compound.

And that is what I mean by the 'right' economy.  The one that develops naturally from the people and conditions that are present and develop in the future, without influence of well intended politicos and self-interested powers.  It would be possible for some of those oscillations to be particularly harmful, even to the point of severe social strife, but over the truely long term, such oscillations (by definition) balance out.
833  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Capitalism. on: June 28, 2013, 04:39:31 PM

The problem which the Anarchocapitalists is that they want two systems which mutually exclude each other: Anarchy and a progressively increasing economy.


I don't want a progressively increasing economy.  I want the right economy.

OK, let's have a quick look at what that might entail. Say you want a 'stable' economy,

You've already failed the test.
834  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Capitalism. on: June 28, 2013, 04:29:01 PM

The problem which the Anarchocapitalists is that they want two systems which mutually exclude each other: Anarchy and a progressively increasing economy.


I don't want a progressively increasing economy.  I want the right economy.  The best way to have that is to take a 'hands off' approach, because politicos really don't know as much as they think they do.


This makes some sense.  If trade is mutually beneficial, the economy ought to increase.  When it isn't it decreases.  Over time this also includes the non-trading third party that share the environment, which if harmed decreases the economy too, yes?


If by that, you mean real ecological damage, than yes.  In such a case, such 'externalities' do, indeed, negatively effect an economy of any nature or size.  The cavet here is that not all claims of environmental harm are, in fact, harmful.  Burning firewood, for example, isn't actually net harmful, even if human beings in the near environmental space may find it uncomfortable, or even personally harmful.  Inasmuch as fossil fuels are burned for energy, they are not necesarily harmful either.  Burned 'clean' such actions only produce CO2, which itself shouldn't rationally be considered a pollutant.  It's a greenhouse gas, yes, but it's also so difuse in the atmostsphere that it's actuall net contribution to global climate changes is highly debatable on scientific grounds.  But that is a huge tangent.

Quote

 It doesn't seem to necessitate an unsustainable growth or even any growth, and the growth is just a measure of the participant's good faith dealing.

Perhaps the political class needs it to increase to win elections and so may sacrifice long term for the term of the next election important to them.

He can be taught!

"War is the health of the state."
835  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Capitalism. on: June 28, 2013, 02:51:09 PM

The problem which the Anarchocapitalists is that they want two systems which mutually exclude each other: Anarchy and a progressively increasing economy.


I don't want a progressively increasing economy.  I want the right economy.  The best way to have that is to take a 'hands off' approach, because politicos really don't know as much as they think they do.

Quote

They deny that stateless communities beyond the state (rain forest) don't increase production. They produce the same amount as they did thousands of years ago, because they are not enforced to produce ever increasing surpluses. That's enforced and needed in collectivist societies exclusively.

I don't deny this either.  I don't know anyone who has besides your claims that someone has.  I just don't find such a society to be ideal.  If you do, why are you still here?  There certainly are groups within the US and elsewhere that prefer the kind of "natural" lifestyle you think is appropriate, and some of them will even accept you.  You just have to find them.  Or create your own.

The obvious answer is that you really don't believe that you would be better off without modern industry and/or the Internet, or you would be doing so.  You certainly are still free enough to do so, despite you claims to the contrary.  It costs you almost nothing to go hiking into the wilderness, and 'camp' in public parks.  There have literally been cases of people that have been found camping in national parks that have been there for years.  Camping isn't illegal, yet.  People have done it in city parks, although that is certainly illegal.  I've even seen a tent that is shaped to resemble a car, put up in a city parking spot.  I've seen people camp in freeway medians; which if you have ever driven though Kentucky, you would realize is not very difficult to do undetected.  Learn to set up trappin snares, there are such books in the public library, and you would never even have to 'hunt' for your food.  There are tribes in Africa that get most of their food from simple snares, because they still use an atlatl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spear-thrower) instead of the more effective bow and arrow for hunting.
836  Economy / Economics / Re: The end is near on: June 28, 2013, 02:33:20 PM
It will end as all civilised societies ended: with a collapse. I call it Tainter's Law. It ends by the diminishing return on additional investment in additional complexity. The difference to earlier collapses is the fact, that today 500 nuclear reactors will blow its nuclear inventory around the northern part of the planet as soon as nobody will cool them anymore.

This is a rediculous idea.  Again, nuclear power industry accidents across all of the history of the world do not exceed the amount of radioactive material that is launched into the atmostphere by the worlds coal plants in a single year, and we have been burning coal for almost 200 years, and seriously powering industry with it for over 100 years.  Modern nuke plants don't really 'blow', and even if 100 of them had leakage accidents similar to what happened in Japan (very, very unlikely) we still wouldn't exceed what humanity has already dosed our environment with over the past 100+ years.  That plant had a quadruple redundant emergency cooling system, which we now know isn't quite good enough for a 1:10K year tsumami wave.  It's certainly more than enough for a global economic breakdown,

Dream on! (your ridiculous dreams).
 Fukushima blew out a significant part of its inventory. In case of a black out of the whole power grid, which is a question of when but not of if (sun storm, economic collapse and  panic/revolution etc.), it would have blown out its inventory totally, and so would have all the other reactors. Power grids become more and more fragile to maintain the 50 Hertz, totally depending on the computerised, hypercollectivised communication system.
 Societies collapse, because societies are problem solving societies (Tainter). Each solved problem increases the complexity in the system, and increased complexity generates diminishing returns until the end (bifurcation point), when additional investion in additional complexity generates negative returns. Forget at least the northern part of this planet if this society will not end the nuclear industry.
Probably it won't, because society means collective stupidity, which until today always ended collapsing. This society will also end abruptly in a worldwide, globalised panic with worldwide bank 'holidays' and nobody will go to work anymore; not to the banks and not to cool the nuclear reactors. Nuclear reactors need each other to cool them, but after a black out you'll have to cool all of them. The collective stupidity will not be able to do this.

You obviously don't have an accurate understanding as to what actually went wrong with that reactor in Japan.  That reactor was designed with a multiplely redundant emergency cooling system.  It was specificly designed to suffer an earthquake of a power of 9.0 on the Riecther scale within 20 miles or so of the epicenter.  It was desgned to suffer through a tsunami.  It was designed to suffer though a complete failure of grid power support, as well as total failure of all of the AC water pumps.  What was never considered was the incredible odds that all of these things would happen in the same day.  It was a harsh lesson learned, and many heroic engineers and techs working for a private company lost some or all of their remaining lifespans in concerted efforts to save public lives.  It sucks to be that tech, when that crap happens at your plant; but just like joining the military, they knew what they signed up for.  If you don't thik that there are equally heroic corporate employees of every other nuclear powerhouse in the world, then you don't really understand why these men and woman get paid the salaries that they do.  But know that the nuclear industry knows that such a one in ten thousand odds event can happen, they are already reconsidering their own emergency cooling plans because reglatory agencies require them to and because they don't ever want to be the next set of guys to have to die to save humanity.  For that matter, the complete breakdown of civil society is one of the most common emergency scenarios that nuke plant disaster planners have long considered, and one of the easiest for them to plan for.  It's way harder to plan for a 35 foot high tsunami wave.   Fukushima power plant had diesel powered pumps that could run underwater, and generators that could survive an earthquake; but not both at the same time.  And furthermore, none of those failues would have mattered at all, had  Fukushima  not been involved in their once in a three year refueling cycle when the bovine fecal matter made contact with the rotating cooling device.  The other reactors were all automaticly in emergency shutdown stage 60 seconds after the earthquake was detected, and never caused any problems; but that one (number 4, IIRC) was not set for automatic shutdown due to being involved in a fuel rod exchange that very week.  Fresh, hot fuel rods were waiting in the storage pool, while engineers and tech were running all over a damaged and dangerous reactor trying to get the emergency neutron sheild down into the remaining core, and everyone managed to forget about the storage pool.  The water in the storage pool evaporated enough that the tops of the fuel rods were exposed to air, and then they caught on fire due to their own internal heat.  It was not really a 'mealtdown' in any practical sense, but radioactive smoke is no small thing.  To the best of my knowledge, Fukushima could still be in operation today, if the populist government had not halted all nuclear power in the nation, as teh damage to the reactor itself was not really significant.  Nothing like Chernobel for example, or even Three Mile Island (which didn't actually release any radiation BTW, but did damage the reactor)
837  Economy / Currency exchange / Re: (WTS) $30 STAPLES GIFT CARD on: June 28, 2013, 12:08:51 AM
I'll offer 0.2 BTC, if you're willing to mail it to me before I pay.
838  Economy / Economics / Re: Peter Schiff on Bitcoin on: June 28, 2013, 12:06:35 AM

In short, there can be heavy deflation before the onset of hyperinflation. This Schiff does not take into account.


This is, almost word for word, Mish's complaint with Schiff and other hyperinflationists today.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/05/hyperinflation-nonsense-in-multiple.html
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/08/reader-questions-on-hyperinflation.html
839  Economy / Economics / Re: The end is near on: June 27, 2013, 10:05:48 PM

http://www.ted.com/talks/taylor_wilson_my_radical_plan_for_small_nuclear_fission_reactors.html

This late guy really got me you know. He's like 21? Watch the whole video. It worths it.


Great kid, very smart.  But that isn't an original idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S

No, it's a bit different. The idea is to use depleted nuclear waste (ie: plutonium) together with its relevant salt (ie: Ca or Na). The metal forces the nuclear waste to form a high temperature which in a few minutes turns the salt to its liquid form. The heat continues on and a Stirling device converts the produced heat to energy via adiabatic process thus not losing energy. The reactor can go on for as long as 30 years...!


Nope, not a new idea.  The 4S was specificly designed to run unattended for 30 year refueling cycles, and is quite capable of utilizing downgraded weapons fuel.  It can also use a Strirling engine at the surface generator house, although it's actually desinged to use a liquid salt to boiling water heat exchanger.  Stirling engines are more efficient, but they are also more expensive to build, so the 4S can do either.  The early test version, such as may eventually be built for Alaska, assumes that the waste heat is used for municipal hot water distric heating.  This is more commonly called 'cogeneration' and the total energy efficientyc is much greater than that of a Stirling engine producing electrical power alone.  And the 4S is just one example of this style of small, unattended reactor design, other companies have similar designs.  Another design that aims towards similar ends, but uses a classic deep pool unpressurized light water design is the SLOWPOKE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLOWPOKE_reactor), intended primarily for municipal district heating and is largely incapable of electric power geneartion because it niether operates at a high enough carnot efficiency to use a stirling nor is it designed to biol water for pressure, since it's an open top design exposed to atmostphere at the top and boiling water is used as super-critical limiting feature in the core.  It's literally impossible to 'meltdown' the core in this one, because it depends upon the presence of a precise amount of water in the core space for the proper regulation of neutron flux, and either the presence of steam bubbles, or the pressence of normal air (in the event of pool water boil-off) permits too much neutron flux to escape the core to maintain a critical reaction.
840  Economy / Economics / Re: The end is near on: June 27, 2013, 06:00:37 PM

http://www.ted.com/talks/taylor_wilson_my_radical_plan_for_small_nuclear_fission_reactors.html

This late guy really got me you know. He's like 21? Watch the whole video. It worths it.


Great kid, very smart.  But that isn't an original idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 [42] 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 ... 368 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!