Economic Devastation

[l3552]

My main question now is if you want to help everyone or if you only feel bad that you havent been invited to the predator's party.

I don't know why you think I don't want to help.

There are plenty observations to be made on this from the distance you talk about the common folk to the qualifications you use. But I am not here to talk about you and your perceptions over topics, although it is curious and had to be mentioned on our first encounter.

Without entering unnecessary talk as we agree, there is no way to win a war against the concept of the central banks nor the global economy would archive something by getting hide of it. The world is now what it was made to be now and will change only by destructive innovation that rends the past paradigm obsolete. Having this in mind and trowing out any affections, anonymity and currency together are destructive in many ways.

The world without humans is just stuff. Money is the abstraction of human value. It is the projection of awareness into something in a way that awareness can be converted trough its projection into the awareness of greater goods. When money lose its "names" it works only alienation. In this, money can be a bridge between people or the pit. Money without name force common good people to give real value to money, creating an idol out of paper at their cost. The value of money is the value alienated from these people forced to use it not as a mere projection but the value in itself. This goes on deeper. By depriving it from "names" and substance you trow it on desires and though objects, that develops on and on until war is peace.

When it sink into you, you gonna see the reality that a central bank that inflates unnamed money is sucking awareness out of population until complete alienation, that consumer debt rapid expands on this and political capability sinks is just a development.

So, you probably know what community development banks are. They are banks "committed to serve the underserved with checking, saving accs, micro-credit trough peer pressure" and sometimes access to local currency and group debt. There are some cases of total failure out there, but also of local development. The problems go from bad loan politics to "national reserve currency" degradation that pushes their not so resilient fundamentals down. What about using your economics and code expertise to consolidate a better model of sound money for these people that cant be idolized? You see, a model that by its nature cant be seized nor taxed nor degraded nor directed influenced top-down.

[r0ach]

Where there is no usury, there is no economy and nothing moves (as was evident in the Dark Age). The Middle East was similarly stuck going no where (still riding camels and living in tents in the desert) with their anti-usury stance

I think your sample size is too low to make that claim.  The general assumption you make seems to be that with usury, some entities will accumulate tons of capital, and will then utilize that capital to somehow push civilzation forward.  That's only one possibility.  They could also just hang out like Caligula and party, which seems to be what most wealthy people do nowadays.  Luxury goods are flying off the shelves at record pace right now if you didn't notice.  

Another example is, the gilded age in America occurred *because* the increase in technology and industrialization created these wealthy people.  It wasn't the other way around as you seem to talk about.  Wealth did not get trapped in the top 1/10th of 1% (which occurs in usury) and then these people created everything.  There's no reason to expect that to happen.  Usury creates misallocation of capital.  

Reading Anonymint posts is like reading some kind of disinformation bot from the US government where half the stuff sounds intelligent, then the other half is propaganda praising the values of usury.

The wealth of a nation is not its tangible objects, but its people’s productive capacity.

This quote was basically stolen from "The Bell Curve", or related book like that I've read before.  It's generally terminology used to promote ethnocentric majorities for countries to prevent collapse of the social order.  To liberals, something like this sounds racist, but usually holds true in human sociology.

[iamback]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Mar 18: the Dunning-Kruger effect is the most damning (sheep that  "mooo")
From:   iamback
Date:    Tue, March 17, 2015 10:15 pm
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where there is no usury, there is no economy and nothing moves (as was evident in the Dark Age). The Middle East was similarly stuck going no where (still riding camels and living in tents in the desert) with their anti-usury stance

The general assumption you make seems to be that with usury, some entities will accumulate tons of capital, and will then utilize that capital to somehow push civilzation forward.

No dimwit. The general assumption I made is that the general population is contented with a subsistence lifestyle if the debt carrot is not placed in front of their nose.

Dude seriously you are not smart enough to have a dialogue with me. Please go away and be contented with your poor reading comprehension.

Another example is, the gilded age in America occurred *because* the increase in technology and industrialization created these wealthy people.  It wasn't the other way around as you seem to talk about.  Wealth did not get trapped in the top 1/10th of 1% (which occurs in usury) and then these people created everything.  There's no reason to expect that to happen.  Usury creates misallocation of capital.

I have always said roughly the same. You make proclamations about me without even reading sufficiently my archives.

Reading Anonymint posts is like reading some kind of disinformation bot from the US government where half the stuff sounds intelligent, then the other half is propaganda praising the values of usury.

I never praised usury. It is a fact of human nature, and I even stated it is the scourge of mankind.

The wealth of a nation is not its tangible objects, but its people’s productive capacity.

This quote was basically stolen from "The Bell Curve", or related book like that I've read before.  It's generally terminology used to promote ethnocentric majorities for countries to prevent collapse of the social order.  To liberals, something like this sounds racist, but usually holds true in human sociology.

You love to conflate orthogonal issues.

[r0ach]

You make proclamations about me without even reading sufficiently my archives.

Dude seriously you are not smart enough to have a dialogue with me. Please go away and be contented with your poor reading comprehension

You're an anonymous guy from the Phillipines (or something like that), and you expect everyone to have read your memoirs?  Then call people idiots that have not done so?  What if everyone on the forum acted in this manner, feigning importance while referring to themselves as geniuses, expecting everyone to read some kind of book they have written before even speaking to them?  The idea is absurd.  Your social skills are rather lacking, which I'm sure you will try to spin as a sign of genius.

You made a statement that without usury, "there is no economy and nothing moves (as was evident in the Dark Age)", then a post later you say it's "the scourge of mankind".  For a person that pretends everything he says is gospel, those are rather contradictory ideas.

We already had a discussion on whether you're exhibiting egomaniacal or sociopathic behavior before, and you said you're clearly not a sociopath because you took an online, internet test for it.  I'm not sure if I'm the only one that found that statement hilarious or not.

[CoinCube]

you expect everyone to have read your memoirs?  Then call people idiots that have not done so?...Your social skills are rather lacking, which I'm sure you will try to spin as a sign of genius.

Calling people idiots is just kind of iamback's thing. Even those who agree with his overall thesis would be hesitant to defend his social etiquette.

Nevertheless let me try to move this back and forth into a more academic and hopefully harmonious direction.

You made a statement that without usury, "there is no economy and nothing moves (as was evident in the Dark Age)", then a post later you say it's "the scourge of mankind".  For a person that pretends everything he says is gospel, those are rather contradictory ideas.

iamback has argued that finance and thus usury was useful (in the past) as a means of increasing prosperity and via allowing economies of scale to be created in situations where without usury individuals would be unable to collect sufficient capital to engage productive ideas.

He has also argued that finance eventually attempts to steal from/suppress knowledge as it becomes increasingly irrelevant as we move into an era where knowledge rather than fixed passive capital dominates production and productivity.

He is thus arguing that usury was needed to jump start the industrial revolution however going forward it will increasingly become a scourge. I have copied the relevant sections from his essay Rise of Knowledge (link in the OP).

Production with hard resources and manual labor requires financing. To the degree that knowledge production is not financed, then the value of financing declines and value of knowledge production increases relative to each's proportion of GDP.

Hunting and gathering required extensive hours of manual labor for a subsistence level of nutrition— all of mankind's time was consumed in producing food. Agriculture increased the economy-of-scale of food production, yet it still required three to six months of financing (savings) for the hard resources (e.g. seeds, fertilizer) and manual labor inputs. Mechanized agriculture still required financing the amortized depreciation of the machines. Against the violent protest of the cottage industry Luddites, mass production industry further increased the economy-of-scale of manufactured goods, a.k.a. hardware, but knowledge remained a small component of cost as explained below. Ongoing automation continues to reduce the manual labor required.

To the degree that knowledge production is not financed, for passive capital to retain its share of GDP (i.e. retain its aggregate net worth), mathematically it must steal from knowledge production.

Thus if knowledge production was increasingly not financeable, then we would expect to see top-down suppression of knowledge production by vested financing interests and widespread theft by those vested interests trying to maintain levels of net worth they would not have in an economy with more knowledge production.

I assert that is what we see today. To correctly argue that politics is the cause of allowing excessive indebtedness and its resultant misallocation of resources (which is a loss of knowledge), is as irrelevant as arguing whether the chicken or the egg is first. It is sufficient that there exists the destruction and suppression of knowledge coincident with the macro-economic failure of over indebtedness, to conclude the financing and knowledge production do not coexist. Because we know from the “Economy of Knowledge” section, that knowledge production must increase as a share of GDP for there to be increasingly prosperity.

[CoinCube]

...
Without entering unnecessary talk as we agree, there is no way to win a war against the concept of the central banks nor the global economy would archive something by getting hide of it. The world is now what it was made to be now and will change only by destructive innovation that rends the past paradigm obsolete. Having this in mind and trowing out any affections, anonymity and currency together are destructive in many ways.

The world without humans is just stuff. Money is the abstraction of human value. It is the projection of awareness into something in a way that awareness can be converted trough its projection into the awareness of greater goods. When money lose its "names" it works only alienation. In this, money can be a bridge between people or the pit. Money without name force common good people to give real value to money, creating an idol out of paper at their cost. The value of money is the value alienated from these people forced to use it not as a mere projection but the value in itself. This goes on deeper. By depriving it from "names" and substance you trow it on desires and though objects, that develops on and on until war is peace.

When it sink into you, you gonna see the reality that a central bank that inflates unnamed money is sucking awareness out of population until complete alienation, that consumer debt rapid expands on this and political capability sinks is just a development.
...
What about using your economics and code expertise to consolidate a better model of sound money for these people that cant be idolized? You see, a model that by its nature cant be seized nor taxed nor degraded nor directed influenced top-down.

The most thought provoking post I have seen in some time thank you l3552.

I am curious however just how money can keep its "names"? Are you envisioning a completely non anonymous distributed ledger?

If so in a world where the collective can and will use force against the individual I do not see how can keeping the "names" can be synonymous with non taxable or non seizable.

[r0ach]

iamback has argued that

Just call him...anonymint.  Who the hell is "iamback"?  The terminator?

Side issue, I made a long post about going to the sea instead of staying on land for all of this:

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=994951.0

It's kind of strange people like Anonymint talk about economic implosion all day, then don't really talk about solutions to prevent standing around waiting to die afterwards.

[l3552]

You see, a model that by its nature cant be seized nor taxed nor degraded nor directed influenced top-down.

The most thought provoking post I have seen in some time thank you l3552.

I am curious however just how money can keep its "names"? Are you envisioning a completely non anonymous distributed ledger?

If so in a world where the collective can and will use force against the individual I do not see how can keeping the "names" can be synonymous with non taxable or non seizable.

First you have to keep clearly in your mind what money is and its function in society. Think in terms of individuality but also in terms of group development safety and survive. Lets see the developments.

=First Round
A desires a box which is in possession of B.
A takes the box by force or deception, lessening B possessions and group safety.
A is punished, reassuring B and increasing group safety.

=Second Round
A desires a box which is in possession of B.
A offers B to trade his box for a necklace that he accepts.
A feels richer, B feels richer, increasing group total wealth and group safety.

From these first stages we see although property is related to individuality it has only meaning in a group.

=Third Round
A desires a box which is in possession of B.
A offers B to trade his box for defined job or good. He accepts.
A get the box and do the job, increasing group total wealth and group safety.

You see, a vocal contract just spawned based only on peer pressure and group safety. Already, how would you tax such transaction?

=Fourth Round
A desires a box which is in possession of B.
A offers B to trade his box for a paper in which he vows to build a fence to the holder by a date.
A get the box and B the paper because of A reputation, increasing group total wealth and safety.

Fiat money older brother just spawned and it is already based on debt and reputation. Also, we have to acknowledge on this that B, a holder, probably got the better deal, as he can wait, while A immediately got the box. Already, how would you tax such transaction?

So... the group merged with other groups and kept merging until it was almost impossible to track reputations. Peer pressure lost much of its force and by conclusion the community is weakening and total wealth decreasing.

=Fifth Round
A desires a box which is in possession of B.
A offers B to trade his box for a paper in which he vows to build a fence to the holder by a date, insured by C rice.
A get the box and B the paper because of C reputation of having rice stocked, increasing community total wealth and safety.

Everybody loves rice. It is exclusive, rival and lacks qualitative differentiation so people started to make deals direct by rice as my rice is as good as any other. And from here to no perishables. From it to metals. From metals to certified(reputation) metals. From it to pure confidence... taxable pure confidence.

=Sixth Round
A desires a box which is in possession of B.
A offers B to trade his box for a paper in which the violence monopolist vows to not let anyone trade but by that way, insured by his whip.
A get the box and B the paper because he do not want to be assaulted and because he knows that other people gonna have to accept it, increasing community total wealth and safety?

So the violence monopolist prints money out of fear and alienation and by the commodity nature taxes it.
---
I am not an expert CoinCube, but we saw together A being hit and punished by his treachery behavior on the First Round. The same A that repaired his morals and were trading goods and labor force by the Third Round. Yes, the same A that with an honest promise persuaded not only B but the whole group adding immense value by the Fourth Round, value enough, you know, to prevent civil war and starvation if we are lucky. And that is my bet.

If we can dump the commoditization of human awareness and solve the reputation problem that justified the violence monopolist to take his throne we can even go as far as Seventh Round... and by seventh Round... o My Holy Utopian Future...

What is loosely proposed here is good and urgent. It is a non anonymous truly distributed ledger of non commoditian cryptocredit insured by real people for other real people which reputations are tracked as their certification clubs... AMEM

[iamback]

Look how much fucking time this crybaby has wasted in this thread. If he posts again about this nonsense, I am going to reply "this time suckling idiot is on ignore"

you expect everyone to have read your memoirs?  Then call people idiots that have not done so?

If you don't ask for clarification and instead of accuse me of something I have not written because you are too lazy to research my writings, then yes you are wasting my time.

Can you imagine how much time I would lose from programming the solutions we need, if I had to reclarify all my 10,000 posts for each new asshole who wants to make erroneous proclamations about me because you are too lazy to read. The solutions we need would never be completed if I chose to cater to lazy assholes like you. You are so damn self-important (like many Westerners) and think you can just pop into a thread without reading it entirely and scrape off a few sound bites out-of-context and all that accomplishes is confusion and noise. You lazy ass self-important mofo.

If you don't understand how important I am to the solutions coming, that is your problem not mine. If you did some reading, you would come off your ignorant high horse.

The quotes CoinCube made of my writings are taken from one of my two essays linked in the opening post of this thread. How can you fucking comment in a thread if you haven't even read the opening post of the thread? Dude your egregious arrogant self-important laziness is over-the-top beyond incredulous.

Side issue, I made a long post about going to the sea instead of staying on land for all of this

That is not a viable solution. Again you are just a vacuous, noise machine wasting the time of those who can actually program technological solutions that are viable.

Calling people idiots is just kind of iamback's thing. Even those who agree with his overall thesis would be hesitant to defend his social etiquette.

Again that is inaccurate as you admitted upthread that I praise people quite often. I did it again today stating I love and appreciate Armstrong.

CoinCube you are so afraid of the group opinion, then you cringe when I call a lazy ass mofo what he is. The solutions we need aren't going to come from harmony and popularity contests. Fuck this isn't a beauty pageant.

If you don't understand why the two most successful people in software (Steve Jobs and Bill Gates) did this also, then you don't understand that bullshit walks and production talks.

Fuck even Linus Torvalds and Eric S. Raymond do this (fathers of open source), and this is because highly productive people don't cater to lazy ass, self-important, finger sucking, mofos who wouild ruin our productivity and ruin the productivity of the group by setting a precedent.

In the software world, if you haven't figured it all out by yourself accessing the resources we have already provided (e.g. my 10,000 posts or for programming StackOverflow.com Q & A database), then you are not worthy and just get out of way. We don't hold your fucking hand, because if we did you are just a liability for us and slowing us down.

[iamback]

So we get back on topic of this thread...

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Mar 18: two assumptions of my thesis on why usury & debt will naturally decline (computer revolution)
From:   iamback
Date:    Wed, March 18, 2015 7:11 am
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

iamback has argued that finance and thus usury was useful (in the past) as a means of increasing prosperity and via allowing economies of scale to be created in situations where without usury individuals would be unable to collect sufficient capital to engage productive ideas.

He has also argued that finance eventually attempts to steal from/suppress knowledge as it becomes increasingly irrelevant as we move into an era where knowledge rather than fixed passive capital dominates production and productivity.

He is thus arguing that usury was needed to jump start the industrial revolution however going forward it will increasingly become a scourge. I have copied the relevant sections from his essay Rise of Knowledge (link in the opening post of this thread).

In fact for example, posting in the past as AnonyMint I had linked to Nick Szabo's blogs about how the Black Death had reduced labor so that wages rose enough that it became profitable to invest in technology.

My thesis is two-fold:

A) Manual labor is fungible and knowledge production isn't.

B) Agriculture and industrial production required high amounts of fixed capital investment relative to the knowledge production component, but the computer revolution has altered this ratio in favor of knowledge production being the dominant component, e.g. 3D printing instead of mass production factories. Thus debt and stored monetary capital will decline in relative importance in the Knowledge Age. Instead stored knowledge capital will rise to dominance. The technological shift is from a top-down to bottom-up economic dominance and thus the rise of the individual (mind) in economics. I elaborated on this in the subsequent essay, Information Is Alive!, which was not one of the original two linked at the top of the opening post of this thread.

[iamback]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Mar 18: non-fungibility is why knowledge can't be stolen (can't be financed, taxed, nor expropriated)
From:    iamback
Date:    Wed, March 18, 2015 7:25 am
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

First you have to keep clearly in your mind what money is and its function in society. Think in terms of individuality but also in terms of group development safety and survive. Lets see the developments.

=First Round
A desires a box which is in possession of B.
A takes the box by force or deception, lessening B possessions and group safety.
A is punished, reassuring B and increasing group safety.

You've got the entirely wrong assumption for the Knowledge Age.

Knowledge can't be stolen. I covered this in my seminal essay, Demise of Finance, Rise of Knowledge, linked from the opening post of this thread.

http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Demise%20of%20Finance,%20Rise%20of%20Knowledge.html

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.

[iamback]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Mar 18: Armstrong admits finance has always required risk-less rents on society
From:    iamback
Date:    Wed, March 18, 2015 7:48 am
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Armstrong has now documented that the elite banksters have an incentive to take control of finance away from governments and into their own hands, e.g. a one-world reserve central bank.

My seminal essays explained that Finance (usury and debt) are the paradigm of ignorant, passive capital (a.k.a. stored monetary capital) extracting risk-less rents from the productive sector by subjugating the collective to fungible stored monetary wealth (which is always power-law distributed, thus giving rise to socialism). It is not a question of desire, the paradigm demands it be risk-less because debt is only mathematically possible with fractional reserve banking, which is an inherently bankrupt paradigm. This was possible when non-fungible knowledge production was not the dominant component of production; which was the case in the stone, bronze, iron, agricultural, and industrial age epochs. But the Knowledge Age inverts this fundamental economic relationship.

The true solution is not a one-world central bank controlled by the banksters under the ruse of international partnership. Rather it is the grassroots rise of the computer revolution enabling the individual mind as economically dominant! I pray that Armstrong will have an epiphany.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/03/18/austria-to-default-of-debt-of-10-2-billion-euros/

The documents of the Medici family clearly state “to deal as little as possible with the court of the Duke of Burgundy and of other princes and lords, especially in granting credit and accommodating them with money, because it involves more risk than profit”. Distinctly, it is clear that the text continued showing that the Medici did not wish to lend to the princes of Europe for there was no way to collect a debt from a sovereign. The contract continued warning “many merchants in this way fared badly” and that “our fathers have always been wary of such involvements and stayed aloof, unless it was a matter of a small sum lent to make or to keep friends.” The Medici policy was “to preserve their wealth and credit rather than enrich themselves by risky ventures.”

The Baring Brothers folded. The Rothschilds, despite the conspiracy theories, have been replaced by the modern merchant banking style firm Goldman Sachs. I cover in detail the rise and fall of every banking family with documentary proof – not wild rumor and speculation.

This is history unfold once again in Austria. Sorry – the Rothschilds are not in the game this time. Not a single firm that has ever gotten involved with government has survived.

[l3552]

First you have to keep clearly in your mind what money is and its function in society. Think in terms of individuality but also in terms of group development safety and survive. Lets see the developments.

=First Round
A desires a box which is in possession of B.
A takes the box by force or deception, lessening B possessions and group safety.
A is punished, reassuring B and increasing group safety.

You've got the entirely wrong assumption for the Knowledge Age.

Knowledge can't be stolen.

Why talk about Knowledge Age when I was referring to Tribal Age? Why the urge to say I am entirely wrong over things I wasn't even covering?

I'm defending a truthful method to preserve minimal economic order from now on wherever and whenever there is energy, to me, to you, to granny, to craftsman, to unemployed, to pawn-man, to broker... and not only to knowledge workers. In a way that will sure avoid pharaonic societies and the economic devastation, protecting communities and developing far more resilience to the common man than any anonymous decentralized cryptocurrency will ever do.

Contrary to your common ground, the method is based on truth, cannot be considered illegal by any measure, reopens a page of economic development where society toke a turn over commoditization allowing mass taxation and alienation, and finally solves the ancient problem of tracking reputation that lessened the power of credit and the cost of being lazy/dishonest.

I am not entirely wrong, sir. I just got sweaty to many times to think that food and shelter are granted. They are not and knowledge age will not change that, unless abominations take place.

[iamback]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Mar 18: information != knowledge (they are fundamentally different concepts)
From:    iamback
Date:    Wed, March 18, 2015 10:37 am
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Knowledge can't be stolen. I covered this in my seminal essay, Demise of Finance, Rise of Knowledge...

Information can be stolen, e.g. instructions on how to build a nuclear bomb. But information is static. Knowledge is dynamic and can't be transferred from one brain to another, e.g. you could steal my past software creations but you can't steal my future ones that I haven't created yet; and I can't teach you how I will create them in the future (you'd need a brain transplant).

http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Knowledge_Anneals

Knowledge Anneals

Unsophisticated thinkers have an incorrect understanding of knowledge creation, idolizing a well-structured top-down sparkling academic cathedral of vastly superior theoretical minds. Rather knowledge primary spawns from accretive learning due to unexpected random chaotic fitness created from multitudes of random path dependencies that can only exist in the bottom-up free market. Top-down systems are inherently fragile because they overcommit to egregious error (link to Taleb's simplest summary of the math). Given Kurzweil's sensationalized magnum opus is the technological singularity, it is surprising that he is apparently not well studied in the field of social knowledge formation.

Kurzweil states that the brain is composed of a finite number of pattern matchers and that humans train to be exceptional (unique) to think deeply about some subject matter. Whether Kurzweil is implying that computer brains could have more pattern matchers and/or process information from the environment faster thus obtaining higher levels of cognitive capability from more input entropy so as to attain the claim that computers will vastly outpace human knowledge, he fails to understand a basic fact that simulated annealing (SA) is the only known global optimization algorithm when the subject matter is not known a priori. SA requires many simultaneous, independent small (imperfect trial and error) steps. The free market optimizes better than top-down because the larger number of actors anneals better. So again, the computer brains at best can supplement the supply of humans, but they can't overpower the free market. Frankly I am shocked that Kurzweil didn't realize this, since my A.I. studies in the 1980s is where I first learned about SA.

The knowledge creation process is opaque to a single top-down perspective of the universe because to be omniscient would require that the transmission of change in the universe would propagate instantly to the top-down observer, i.e. the speed-of-light would need to be infinite. But an infinite speed-of-light would collapse past and future into an infinitesimal point in spacetime— omniscient is the antithesis of existential. In order for anything to exist in the universe, there must be friction-in-time so change must propagate through resistance to change— mass. The non-uniform mass distribution of the universe is mutually causal with oscillation, which is why the universe emerges from the frequency domain. Uniform distribution of mass would be no contrast and nothing would exist. Taleb's antifragility can be conceptualized as lack of breaking resistance to variance amplification.

Why talk about Knowledge Age when I was referring to Tribal Age?

...

I am not entirely wrong, sir. I just got sweaty to many times to think that food and shelter are granted. They are not and knowledge age will not change that, unless abominations take place.

I am ignoring bruised ego (a.k.a. butt hurt), irrelevant cavemen, "every man is an island", nincompoops who don't understand the fundamental economic concept of orders-of-magnitude differences relative value. There is a reason as a programmer I can code $10,000 per hour in profitable software, and a farmer without a tractor can't generate $10 per hour in profit.

I have identified the fundamental economics of everything that applies to organization of society.

[l3552]

My ego is but a conquered enemy. I know who I am, what really matters and how the amount of commoditization of myself does not. I am sorry if I caused you any harm my sole interest was to show the value of the people and what could be done to protect them now.

In your considerations about the world you removed any qualitative differentiation and toke out everything non-market from human environment. As the mind you are, the law of projection rapidly printed in you your worldview, in a matter that your pathological insults are a demonstration of the little morals you have left, shades of past incarnation without any roots.

So, it appears that you have identified the "fundamental economics of everything that applies to organization of society" but little about human society. Words like "goods" and "credit" have lost great part of their meaning as you climbed your tower of solitude and yelled on this forum looking unconsciously for some help.

I see now the main answer from first post. The solution the world depends on is exactly the one you most need. How beautiful are the harmonics of life.

[iamback]

(if the images below are too small, don't use Google Chrome, instead switch to Firefox. Google Chrome is supporting CSS3 which this forum is apparently misusing. I have messaged theymos about this bug.)

Another factor on where to migrate to? Armstrong's computer has correlated a 300 year solar cycle.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/03/18/are-we-headed-back-to-an-ice-age/

Are we Headed Back to an Ice Age? One of the most shocking things I bumped into in the middle of the night was when I input the data on the energy output of the sun and then correlated that into our data base back to 6000BC. Low and behold, the 300 year [solar] cycle matched up with the rise and fall of empires, nations, and city states. Suddenly, the 309.6 year cycle of the ECM made sense. What I had discovered from tracking the footsteps of mankind was not the CAUSE, but the EFFECT. Nature came blasting through as a major contributor to the equation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age#Pacific_Islands

Pacific Islands

Sea-level data for the Pacific Islands suggest that sea level in the region fell, possibly in two stages, between AD 1270 and 1475. This was associated with a 1.5 °C fall in temperature (determined from oxygen-isotope analysis) and an observed increase in El Niño frequency.

And from that follows the error CoinCube made on analyzing Armstrong's weather prediction. In fact, exactly we observed the El Niño effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Ni%C3%B1o#North_America

North America

Winters, during the El Niño effect, are warmer and drier than average in the Northwest, northern Midwest, and northern Mideast United States, so those regions experience reduced snowfalls. Meanwhile, significantly wetter winters are present in northwest Mexico and the southwest United States, including central and southern California, while both cooler and wetter than average winters in northeast Mexico and the southeast United States

El Niño is credited with suppressing hurricanes, and made the 2009 hurricane season the least active in 12 years.

Armstrong had a recent blog about this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

Effects As a result of the series of volcanic eruptions, crops in the aforementioned areas had been poor for several years; the final blow came in 1815 with the eruption of Tambora. Europe, still recuperating from the Napoleonic Wars, suffered from food shortages. Food riots broke out in the United Kingdom and France, and grain warehouses were looted. The violence was worst in landlocked Switzerland, where famine caused the government to declare a national emergency. Huge storms and abnormal rainfall with flooding of Europe's major rivers (including the Rhine) are attributed to the event, as is the August frost. A major typhus epidemic occurred in Ireland between 1816 and 1819, precipitated by the famine the Year Without a Summer caused. An estimated 100,000 Irish perished during this period. A BBC documentary using figures compiled in Switzerland estimated the fatality rates in 1816 were twice that of average years, giving an approximate European fatality total of 200,000 deaths. New England also experienced major consequences from the eruption of Tambora. The corn crop was significantly advanced in New England and the eruption caused the crop to fail. In the summer of 1816 corn was reported to have ripened so badly, no more than a quarter of it was usable for food. The crop failures in New England, Canada, and parts of Europe also caused the price of wheat, grains, meat, vegetables, butter, milk, and flour to rise sharply. The eruption of Tambora also caused Hungary to experience brown snow. Italy's northern and north-central region experienced something similar, with red snow falling throughout the year. The cause of this is believed to have been volcanic ash in the atmosphere. In China, unusually low temperatures in summer and fall devastated rice production in Yunnan, resulting in widespread famine. Fort Shuangcheng, now in Heilongjiang, reported fields disrupted by frost and conscripts deserting as a result. Summer snowfall or otherwise mixed precipitation was reported in various locations in Jiangxi and Anhui, located at around 30°N. In Taiwan, which has a tropical climate, snow was reported in Hsinchu and Miaoli, and frost was reported in Changhua. Causes The aberrations are now generally thought to have occurred because of the April 5–15, 1815, volcanic Mount Tambora eruption[15][16] on the island of Sumbawa, Indonesia (then part of the Dutch East Indies, but under French rule during Napoleon's occupation of the Netherlands), described by Thomas Stamford Raffles.[17] The eruption had a volcanic explosivity index (VEI) ranking of 7, a supercolossal event that ejected immense amounts of volcanic ash into the upper atmosphere. It was the world's largest eruption since the Hatepe eruption in 180 AD. That the 1815 eruption occurred during the middle of the Dalton Minimum (a period of unusually low solar activity) may also be significant,[citation needed] during the concluding decades of what has come to be called the Little Ice Age. Other large volcanic eruptions (with VEIs at least 4) around this time were: 1812, La Soufrière on Saint Vincent in the Caribbean 1812, Awu in the Sangihe Islands, Indonesia 1813, Suwanosejima in the Ryukyu Islands, Japan 1814, Mayon in the Philippines These eruptions had already built up a substantial amount of atmospheric dust. As is common after a massive volcanic eruption, temperatures fell worldwide because less sunlight passed through the stratosphere.[18] According to a 2012 analysis by Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature, the 1815 Tambora eruption caused a temporary drop in the Earth's average land temperature of about 1 °C. Smaller temperature drops were recorded from the 1812-1814 eruptions.

[iamback]

...[I dig canals with spoons and build stone pyramids with 100,000 slaves]...

Don't let the door hit your "life is like a box of illogical excuses" hurt butt on the way out. Bye.

I relish the day socialism collapses and stops providing the daily necessities to these "free thinkers". When they actually have to work and produce, they will suddenly become realistic about fundamental economic realities.



Actually that is 500 man-hours per gallon, so should be 2000 man-hours of labor for 4 gallons.

The combustion engine rendered mankind 3 to 4 orders-of-magnitude more productive. The computer revolution is another 3 to 4 orders-of-magnitude increase in productivity.


---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Mar 19: $8/hour = 4 gallons gas = 2000 man-hours hard labor
From:   iamback
Date:    Wed, March 18, 2015 1:31 pm
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Technological orders-of-magnitude productivity leverage paradigm shifts
explained in two photos: a teenager and a gallon of gas:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg10813925#msg10813925

[B.A.S.]

Man, I used to get excited about participating in a discussion on this board...

All it has become is a useless sounding board for quoting Armstrong all day. People can read his blog, no need to put it here too. I'll just butt out of this one from here on out. Good luck.

[r0ach]

Can you imagine how much time I would lose from programming the solutions we need

The solutions we need

If you don't understand how important I am to the solutions coming

CoinCube you are so afraid of the group opinion

The solutions we need

Read your above five quotes in a row.  This is all central planning, collectivist, control freak mentality, things you would see from maybe Marx, Engels, or Stalin if they were posting on Bitcointalk.  I've even seen you type things before saying things like top down solutions don't work, and collapse, yet here you are, trying to tell everyone how important you are, and how you need to be the central planner.  I'm sure you will claim you "just need to be elected god temporarily to launch a decentralized consensus system", but this is something people have heard before.  Maybe Caesar and dozens of others comes to mind.

People do not perform actions for no reason.  There is always a motive behind human behavior.  You generally show a misanthropic viewpoint of everything and everyone, so motive is obviously not to "help society".  Your motives are entirely egomaniacal and sociopathic in nature, the same motives you find in serial killers and a few CEOs like Lloyd Blankfein.

Fuck even Linus Torvalds and Eric S. Raymond do this

Because, like most people involved in software, they were unimportant nobodys through most of their lives, who never succeeded in anything like some kind of sport or activity as a teenager, probably develop some kind of messed up psychological problems, then all of a sudden someone tells them they're important and shovels money at them.  You can't take the bottom of the food chain of society in both social status and physical appearance and suddenly give them power.  Someone like Elon Musk, who might have been bullied once or twice in his life, but obviously wasn't the bottom of the barrel growing up in society and came more from the middle, are the people who can actually function as normal human beings.

[CoinCube]

...
the violence monopolist prints money out of fear and alienation and by the commodity nature taxes it.
...
If we can dump the commoditization of human awareness and solve the reputation problem that justified the violence monopolist to take his throne we can even go as far as Seventh Round... and by seventh Round... o My Holy Utopian Future...

What is loosely proposed here is good and urgent. It is a non anonymous truly distributed ledger of non commoditian cryptocredit insured by real people for other real people which reputations are tracked as their certification clubs... AMEM

I'm defending a truthful method to preserve minimal economic order from now on wherever and whenever there is energy, to me, to you, to granny, to craftsman, to unemployed, to pawn-man, to broker... and not only to knowledge workers. In a way that will sure avoid pharaonic societies and the economic devastation, protecting communities and developing far more resilience to the common man than any anonymous decentralized cryptocurrency will ever do.

Contrary to your common ground, the method is based on truth, cannot be considered illegal by any measure, reopens a page of economic development where society toke a turn over commoditization allowing mass taxation and alienation, and finally solves the ancient problem of tracking reputation that lessened the power of credit and the cost of being lazy/dishonest.
...

l3552 I have been recently been trying to solve a thought challenge. How does one tie together a large extended family spread out over a significant area when all individual actors are busy and geographically isolated. The natural trend of such a group even with blood ties is to maintain loose connection and for that connection to fray with time.

My first thought and the simplest solution is an annual gathering where ties are strengthened and renewed. However, with geographic separation this imposes substantial cost on all and for some the costs will be too high to participate.

My second thought was a system of labor credits exchanged over a website. These could be used for things like babysitting as family is usually preferred and perhaps even the exchange of skills and teaching either in person or  remotely via an online class model.

The goal of course is not to provide a service that cannot be replicated from strangers, but to develop something that adds value while simultaneously strengthening family bonds.
 
What interests me about your proposal is that your are essentially trying to solve the same problem on a much more ambitious scale worldwide rather then a single large family group.

However, I would note that you are perhaps wrong in at least one area. You claim that such a system cannot be considered illegal. However, should such such a system gain traction it seems certain that the "violence monopolist" would quickly reach out to crush it via tax law.

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Four-Things-to-Know-About-Bartering-1

Four Things to Know About Bartering
IRS Tax Tip 2012-33, February 17, 2012

In today’s economy, small business owners sometimes save money through bartering to get products or services they need. The IRS wants to remind small business owners that the fair market value of property or services received through barter is taxable income.

Bartering is the trading of one product or service for another. Usually there is no exchange of cash. However, the fair market value of the goods and services exchanged must be reported as income by both parties.