|
Good luck with the project. I think this will be very useful.
|
|
|
|
Notch at least seems like the type of guy we may be able to convince to accept bitcoins as a form of Payment for minecraft.
I agree. Exchanging a finite currency for functionally infinite virtual goods doesn't seem like a good idea. |
|
|
|
|
You can't transact bitcoins that don't exist.
|
|
|
|
|
I have received a similar message, although I had not made such a request. The IP address the request originated from is a tor server in Germany. Someone is definitely trying to break back into the accounts.
|
|
|
|
Corruption and criminality are the result of capitalism.
I believe they're just inherent human traits. If that were true, crime rates would be the same around the globe. That is obviously not the case. |
|
|
|
An electronic network of distributed information that is instantly accessible around the globe that anyone can use? Sounds pretty worthless to me... |
|
|
|
Why the liberal-bashing? Well whatever, good podcast overall - generally intelligent stuff.
Frankly there was very little liberal bashing a far as I can tell, but my personal departure from liberalism came when I realized that they don't believe people can make correct choices for themselves, and thus need to be told what to do by their betters. It's not usually phrased that way, but the reality is that is the thought. You'll hear me say it alot as we move forward, but I truly and fundamentally believe that if you are honest with people and give them accurate information, they will make the decision that benefits them best, and that's capitalism. I would disagree. Capitalism, as currently implemented, actively distorts information and value in the interest of private gain and profit. I advocate a resource based economy that does not rely on a distorted value system that money creates, and gives true information regarding resource availability, human needs and efficiency. I don't think you and I really disagree - We don't have capitalism right now, we have corporatism and government sponsored monopolies, all of whom benefit from people having bad information, so that's the type of information they get. Just because they call it capitalism doesn't make it so - I could call a duck a horse, but that doesn't mean you can ride it. Corruption and criminality are the result of capitalism. We agree in our desired outcomes, but capitalism will always lead to what we have now. |
|
|
|
Why the liberal-bashing? Well whatever, good podcast overall - generally intelligent stuff.
Frankly there was very little liberal bashing a far as I can tell, but my personal departure from liberalism came when I realized that they don't believe people can make correct choices for themselves, and thus need to be told what to do by their betters. It's not usually phrased that way, but the reality is that is the thought. You'll hear me say it alot as we move forward, but I truly and fundamentally believe that if you are honest with people and give them accurate information, they will make the decision that benefits them best, and that's capitalism. I would disagree. Capitalism, as currently implemented, actively distorts information and value in the interest of private gain and profit. I advocate a resource based economy that does not rely on a distorted value system that money creates, and gives true information regarding resource availability, human needs and efficiency. |
|
|
|
Pricing attached opinionated value metrics to materials, goods or services based on perceived relative worth, desirability or necessity. It is usually easier to do this when there is an agreed upon currency scale that can be used across distance, culture and time. This system hinges on the currency in which it is valued in and the entity who enforces its use, and therefor subject to abuse, waste and increasingly negative consequences.
Specifically "and the entity who enforces its use" OK, previously you agreed money was emergent. If I wasn't clear, let me clarify I meant, money existed in a stable form before governments began enforcing it, do you agree? Also do you agree that the opinion of whether I want a $5 latte even when a cheaper alternative is available, it is still my right to expend my resources on an overpriced item if I so choose? Cult or no cult, the issue of the pricing mechanism is absolutely key to this whole issue. If pricing is truly the appendix of societal behaviour then the RBE view is correct. So again; *Is the money naturally emergent or only due to enforcement? (Question to follow on this one) *Do I have the right to misspend my own resources on what someone else deems irrational expenditures? As I said earlier, money was emergent as was societal structures that developed enforcement mechanisms also. Barter had been dominant due to the simple and local nature of trading and it did not require a third party to enforce arbitrary values. Money can only exist when the dominant culture enforces arbitrary and opinion based values on others. But as with many emergent behaviors and technologies, they give way to newer and better ones. There are no "rights". You behave and act in accordance with the dominant culture and society that you have developed in. Your ability to cause positive or negative outcomes depend on what is tolerated, incentivised and punished by your environment. Your choice to be wasteful is predicated on what your environment allows for. |
|
|
|
1) Do you believe that absolute values exist?
No. In an emergent universe, things change constantly, and as such, our values must be updated according to our new found knowledge. The problem is that we have not done so, and held to the distorted values and associated institutions that began centuries or millenia ago. 2) Do you reject free trade (and thus freedom)?
There is no freedom. We all are subject to the laws of nature and the common reality we share. Anyone who promises you freedom of some sort is just looking to control you for their own benefit. |
|
|
|
Price mechanism, price mechanism, price mechanism!
RBE folks please explain to me if you think money is emergent (naturally occurring)?
And if so what fundamental problem does it solve?
Everything is emergent, as we live in an emergent universe. Money has outlived its usefulness, as it was developed in response to real or perceived scarcity, along with the development of early forms of government and society. We currently enjoy a highly technical society that can produce far greater resources for people through the full use of our technical and scientific capabilities. Unfortunately, the dominant monetary system and associated institutions resist such progress due to distorted values. Money is no longer needed, as its current dominant function is to deny people what they need to survive if they fail to have enough of it. A resource based economy requires that we learn what resources we have available on this planet and use them intelligently to provide a higher quality of life than the richest people enjoy today. Without such knowledge of our current resource availability, we are left with a flawed monetary system and a wasteful, destructive and abusive pricing mechanism that is functioning only to improve its own arbitrary and irrelevant metrics at the expense of human life and ecological stability. Let me phrase the question like this "What problem does (or did in your view) the pricing mechanism solve?" Please focus on only that question as I am aware that you believe mankind is now at the point where you believe we can function without a pricing mechanism. Pricing attached opinionated value metrics to materials, goods or services based on perceived relative worth, desirability or necessity. It is usually easier to do this when there is an agreed upon currency scale that can be used across distance, culture and time. This system hinges on the currency in which it is valued in and the entity who enforces its use, and therefor subject to abuse, waste and increasingly negative consequences. |
|
|
|
You didn't answer a sole thing. So I'll repeat it, because it looks like we've reached your soft spot: There's no scientific theory on whether you should use nuclear power plants or solar panels. You are comparing science with politics and morality and that's absurd. You might think that you haven't entered the realms of morality and politics but you HAVE. Maybe you will disagree on this subject, but then I must conclude that your reasoning is blocked by you sect/cult. Science says something like: nuclear power plants harvest a lot of energy per mass of uranium, and create nuclear waste. Solar cells are created through a process that contaminates a lot of liters of water and releases a lot of CO2, and harvest energy from the sun with a 15-20% efficiency. Science, and the scientific method, does NOT tell you which option to choose. Science just shows you how nature works, and it's you that have to decide how to apply that knowledge to fullfill your dreams/objectives/morality. Science doesn't tell you if you should gun somebody. Science just tells you that the bullet will hit that person at a certain velocity and it will probably provoke his death. Should you shoot that somebody? should you build that bridge? Should you use currencies or a resource based economy? Should you create prisons? Should you live in a planned economy society? Science won't decide any of that for you. Science will (maybe) make some predictions on the result of your decision, but making the decision is absolutely out of the realms of science, and of the scientific method.  |
|
|
|
Needless to say, I am not interested in wasting my time when such conditions apply. So, if and when you are capable of civilised discussion, I'll be happy to answer.
Jesus tap dancing Christ. Stop bumping this fucking topic. You're ruining this forum. Please, for the love of God, stop wasting your time here. I beg you. You are melodramatically absurd. |
|
|
|
I am looking at making further investment in UBX. Some company performance information will be helpful ...
Where can I see the statistics on user base growth over time, usage figures over time, etc ... ?
What are your thoughts on changing the listing fee to a % of the BTC being sold rather than the flat 0.5 BTC on the Ubitex site ?
Looking at the order books of the various exchange sites, I suspect such a high relative charge is dissuading users from utilising the site.
What are your short, medium and long term plans for marketing and development of the Ubitex site ?
What are your short, medium and long term plans for Ubitex Music ?
Where can we view latest development version of the Ubitex Music Client ?
What other projects are in the pipeline for Ubitex ?
When can we expect the next dividend payment on the UBX shares ?
Please communicate the link(s) / content via a "mock" motion on GLBSE, if you prefer not to post such commercially sensitive info in public.
Also, the Finance Sheet needs fixing - the balance column is incorrect from cell D13 down.
We are currently still running in 0-fee mode. With the deployment of escrows we will take 0.05% (identical to ClearCoin). Oh, and the seeeecret feature. Come on IRC, #ubitex-shareholders on Freenode. We'll talk there. The latest news on Clearcoin is that Gavin's shutting it down for an unknown length of time. We can totally raise the rates now that we've crushed our competition! |
|
|
|
Price mechanism, price mechanism, price mechanism!
RBE folks please explain to me if you think money is emergent (naturally occurring)?
And if so what fundamental problem does it solve?
Everything is emergent, as we live in an emergent universe. Money has outlived its usefulness, as it was developed in response to real or perceived scarcity, along with the development of early forms of government and society. We currently enjoy a highly technical society that can produce far greater resources for people through the full use of our technical and scientific capabilities. Unfortunately, the dominant monetary system and associated institutions resist such progress due to distorted values. Money is no longer needed, as its current dominant function is to deny people what they need to survive if they fail to have enough of it. A resource based economy requires that we learn what resources we have available on this planet and use them intelligently to provide a higher quality of life than the richest people enjoy today. Without such knowledge of our current resource availability, we are left with a flawed monetary system and a wasteful, destructive and abusive pricing mechanism that is functioning only to improve its own arbitrary and irrelevant metrics at the expense of human life and ecological stability. |
|
|
|
|
Good first episode. I'm really interested in exploring Atlas' views more because he seems to want to say a lot about money and society in general.
Regarding the velocity of bitcoin, it is going to be phenomenal I'm sure. A purely digital currency with no bureaucratic nonsense tying it up? At least an order of magnitude greater velocity than any old world currency could have enjoyed.
Edit: Regarding the content, I would have liked the topics listed in the agenda to be focused on a bit more and more specifics shared for those individuals who might not have kept up with all the latest news. But I would also really like to see editorializing and opinions being discussed also. I think it is fascinating for people to engage in really meaningful discussion and I hope you have more of it.
|
|
|
|
When they invented the calculator, calculators didn't take over math. Machines help us do things better and more efficiently. You also conveniently ignored the very text you quoted in which he said that this wouldn't be a machine dictatorship. Your ignorance and associated fear are propelling you to continue this nonsense. Please attempt to employ your critical thinking skills before replying. He is not saying the machines are or will become the dictators. He is saying that the people that program the machine (or whoever decides how the machine is programmed) is in control. If you answer to what he actually says, and not to what you imagine he says, the conversation will be more civil and productive. Exactly. Machines do not think, that's why machines cannot replace the complete political process nor every engineer, doctor, architect etc... And, also because machines do not think, machines won't become the dictators: it will be the ones who write their software. As you say, he didn't answer to what I said, he answered to what he IMAGINED I said... because he didn't understand the fundamental aspect of my argument: machines do not think, they just follow orders, therefore someone controls machines (in this case, programmers). Engineers, doctors and architects engage in technical processes that deal with pattern recognition and a database of knowledge. These are things that computers and machines are very good at. Machines and associated expert systems are now able to do many if not all of the things that these professionals do. Government is obsolete in my view, and I don't believe machines are well suited to that task. But they can be employed very successfully at resource management, tracking, monitoring and distribution. The emergence of open source software will also help ensure that whoever the programmers are, their code will be available for review. If you actually think about these ideas, you would understand how it makes sense. But you seem to choose fear and cynicism instead, and that makes me feel very sorry for you. |
|
|
|
Honestly, there is no point arguing with this people. I have tried in other forums and they keep repeating the mantra. Logic does not work on them. They have a dream and they will follow no matter what reality says. Its sad, but I guess some humans work that way.
I do know that, it's just a sympton of them being part of a cult. They are persistent even when they're proven wrong again and again, they do not follow logic. As I said before, I'm not trying to free their minds from the cult, just trying to contaminate their posts with reality in order to prevent new people reading the thread from falling into the cult. And I'm doing it just for fun. I love to argue with zealots, they are SO funny! They do not follow logic so I use logic against their arguments. It's just too much fun to miss the opportunity! You have not once used logic in any of your posts that I have noticed, merely fallacious and baseless assertions. In fact, your continued assertions that I am in a cult prove that you merely have an agenda, not an argument. Your admission that you are not trying to have an argument or discussion, but instead trying to influence others also bears this out. You can call me all the names you want, but that just reflects poorly on you and your positions. |
|
|
|
BTW: The Venus Projects advocates a dictatorship. The dictatorship of the people who write the AI that supossedly would substitute every political process, every engineer, every architect and every doctor (yeah I can link you to the actual Venus Project paper that states such NONSENSE).
Baseless assertion with no supporting evidence despite being hinted at and strangely not provided, again highlighting your ignorance. No supporting evidence? http://www.thevenusproject.com/images/stories/a-designingthefuturee-book.pdfPAGE 43: (title of the chapter: "Machine Intelligence")
When we use automation and cybernation more extensively, not only
industrial workers, but also most professionals can be replaced by machines.
Even today, the most visionary writers and futurists have difficulty accepting
the possibility of robots replacing surgeons, engineers, top management, airline pilots, and other professionals. Machines can easily replace humans in
government and in the management of world affairs. This does not represent
a take-over by machines, as some people might fear. Instead, the
gradual transfer of decision-making to machine intelligence is the next
phase of social evolution.
So yeah, I'm right and I'm proving it with facts. Too bad for you, now you'll have to create some kind of stupid excuse, as member of the cult/sect. You are a member of a cult/sect. No argument, that's a fact, I just proved it. I'm here not to convince you to free yourself from the cult but to warn people not to enter the cult/sect. When they invented the calculator, calculators didn't take over math. Machines help us do things better and more efficiently. You also conveniently ignored the very text you quoted in which he said that this wouldn't be a machine dictatorship. Your ignorance and associated fear are propelling you to continue this nonsense. Please attempt to employ your critical thinking skills before replying. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
