Economic Devastation

[username18333]

There is also the dictatorial rule, which is not necessarly plutocratic(feudal, noble republic ancestors) , based on the absolute rule of 1 individual or a small group of individuals. This differs from plutocracy in the sense that it's not wealth oriented, it's power oriented, absolute domination (soviet union ,etc.)

Josef Stalin's "standard of living" was substantially "higher" than that of those Soviets which endured the Holodomor.

I`d prefer a decentralized capitalism model, where everyone could have enough money to prosper, but not enough money to subjugate his fellow men. And since the majority of people would have equal wealth and the rich would be only richer by x50 or maybe x100 but not by x100000000 as it is now, so the income and wealth gap would be smaller.

If wealth would be correctly distributed, by merit of each individual (and not by blindless socialist redistribution which goes to the most unproductive), is by definition a free market capitalism.

(Colorization mine.)

2. Earth humans act to secure resources for themselves by, like chimpanzees, denying them to others. However, anyone that can set the "sendfreetransactions" option in "bitcoin.conf" and enter "sendtoaddress [one's GEC address] [an amount exceeding one's GEC balance]" into the debugging window of Bitcoin Core for Writcoin™ could mint quintillions of coins to themselves (and/or others) if they so wished. Accordingly, since exclusion is no longer possible, the instinct should "malfunction" and, largely, fail to manifest itself.

Since what other (financial) merit can a person have other than run a succesful business and become rich?

Already having substantive quantities of capital (or the rhetoric [and/or violence] to convince others to ensure the person does).

[username18333]

Gold simply does not back anything any more because it no longer correlates to the intangible knowledge that is valuable in an era where knowledge moves the economy.

Semi-/precious metals and stones (e.g., rose, white, and yellow gold and diamonds) are "standard of [metallurgical and geological, respectively] beauty," and beautifulness is "intangible knowledge" (TPTB_need_war) (i.e., knowledge).

[TPTB_need_war]

Gold simply does not back anything any more because it no longer correlates to the intangible knowledge that is valuable in an era where knowledge moves the economy.

Semi-/precious metals and stones (e.g., rose, white, and yellow gold and diamonds) are "standard of [metallurgical and geological, respectively] beauty," and beautifulness is "intangible knowledge" (TPTB_need_war) (i.e., knowledge).

And a miniscule (and shriveling in terms of relative growth) portion of the intangible knowledge economy.

Relative size is an important concept in economics, as well as scalability and relative rates of growth.

And that 'beauty' attribute is not the attribute that historically imparted most of the value to gold. Rather gold was a more rare, compact, fungible, durable physical representation of physical value in a physical economy where trade of physical objects was the major aspect of the economy. It was like packing a bunch of land into a compact, transportable form. Whereas if you review my essay linked from the opening post of this thread, I argue that knowledge creation is accretive, spontaneous, and the property of the creator, thus it can't be tied to money or physical value. Knowledge creation is like an end-to-end principled network in that middle men (Theory of the Firm) can only obstruct it.

[1aguar]

Since what other (financial) merit can a person have other than run a succesful business and become rich?

Already having substantive quantities of capital (or the rhetoric [and/or violence] to convince others to ensure the person does).

What you are really talking about here is "accessing your own value". We can save america without rhetoric or violence, it just takes the knowledge to see what exactly has happened to the money system, and to consider that no one can (lawfully) force you to use the debt-money system, so there must be an alternative!

Those of us in the US may have a solution...

It is called "a new currency"!

https://iuvdeposit.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/indorsed-bill-remedy/

[RealBitcoin]

It won't too long from now that physically manufactured items will be nearly free.

This is already true. Look you can go into a dollar store (or other efficient distributor) and buy thousands of manufactured items that used to have 1+ orders of magnitude higher cost. Conversely I can not think of a single manufactured item that is an order of magnitude more expensive than it used to be. Not even one.

This is only not glaringly obvious due to the (reverse?) boiled frog effect.

Well its divergent, unfortunately with keynesian economics, inflation diverges.

Common people's products go down in price (deflation in the poor strata)
Rich people's products go up in price (inflation for investors & speculators)

This looks nice and shiny (except that jobs also evaporate in the process and taxes rise), but when the next collapse hits it will reverse.

There will be deflation for stock markets, and bonds, and other financial instruments, and massive inflation for food, clothes and other. Thats why you see so many central bankers crying that there is not enough inflation, because they refer to the inflation of their own instruments a.k.a stock market pumping and bond pumping

[TPTB_need_war]

Common people's products go down in price (deflation in the poor strata)

RealBitcoin, you act as if manual labor is a nirvana that people should want to retain. Your understanding is entirely incorrect just like most goldbugs you are clueless. You have a lot to learn and the process of admitting you've been totally lied to, is not going to be an easy adjustment for you. Let me think about how I can efficiently give you an education in economics. I will post again shortly.

Haha, I searched Google and my essay from the opening post of this thread is the first listing!

https://www.google.com/search?q=repetitive+manual+labor+is+does+not+use+the+brain

Demise of Finance, Rise of Knowledge - Cool Page

Manual labor refers to repetitive physical movements that do not use the brain creatively— labor without knowledge creation. As mankind has progressed ...

[RealBitcoin]

Common people's products go down in price (deflation in the poor strata)

RealBitcoin, you act as if manual labor is a nirvana that people should want to retain. Your understanding is entirely incorrect just like most goldbugs you are clueless. You have a lot to learn and the process of admitting you've been totally lied to, is not going to be an easy adjustment for you. Let me think about how I can efficiently give you an education in economics. I will post again shortly.

Haha, I searched Google and my essay from the opening post of this thread is the first listing!

https://www.google.com/search?q=repetitive+manual+labor+is+does+not+use+the+brain

Demise of Finance, Rise of Knowledge - Cool Page

Manual labor refers to repetitive physical movements that do not use the brain creatively— labor without knowledge creation. As mankind has progressed ...

Then you misunderstood me, I know exactly what i`m talking about, and you misquoted me i think you referred to this:

(except that jobs also evaporate in the process and taxes rise)

Which is a danger to society, yes manual jobs need to evaporate with technology but here is the catch.

80% of the population has an IQ under 105 , how are you going to put these people in high mental capacity requiring jobs when most of them are braindead monkeys. Most people work with their hands and not with their brain , because they don't have one.



It would be the optimal society if everybody would be an office worker, or a self-employed entrepreneur, and the manual labour would be done by robots, BUT 80% of the people can't even tie their shoelaces without welfare and government oversight over their jobs, so it's highly unlikely that they fit for the entrepreneur job.



So what 1% of the people would be the employees and 99% would be welfare freeloader parasites, is that your dream economy? (because the 99% either dont have the capital or the intelligence to create jobs, even for themselves in this future of yours)

[TPTB_need_war]

RealBitcoin you are not entirely incorrect in the sense that a debt based fractional reserve financial system enriches the capitalists who hoard monetary capital and political power (capture of the State).

One of your errors is to assume that the increases in productivity that lower prices for everyone are most harmful to the poor. In fact, the poor spend the greatest % of their income on basic necessities of life which you admitted. You assume that deflation due to increases in productivity are causing the poor to lose manual labor jobs and thus impoverishing them. Realize that these poor need to uplift their children with education so their children can be Knowledge Age workers and earn $200,000 a year fresh out of college working for Google.

You see Knowledge Age work is lucrative, challenging, fun, creative and manual labor is slavery, drudgery, inhumane, and poverty.

So removing manual labor jobs is a positive event, because it lowers costs and enables more people to spend on education.

But due to the welfare state financed with debt, many people don't bother to act wisely and get the right kind of STEM fields education. Debt causes the "poor" to become fat and lazy.

And so when the debt collapse comes and the government must cull the fat and lazy, then everyone gets what they deserve.

The amazing aspect of this shift into a Knowledge Age, is that knowledge creation mostly can't be financed. Sure you can dangle a little bit of money in front a programmer and it might entice him to work on a project. But the best ones are going to work on what is interesting as a first and primary consideration. Because they can already earn more $ than they really need to be happy, so it more about choosing work that makes them feel happy.

I could probably say a lot more to make some better points, but I am very sleepy. Try reading my essay which I linked in the prior post.

Edit: regarding your recent post (which I wasn't replying to above), you put too much emphasis on IQ and not enough emphasis on the fact that debt and welfare makes people unmotivated. Many people have a creative knowledge attribute regardless of their test score on an IQ test. Let me quote for you from one of my essays:

http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Algorithm_!=_Entropy

Every possible model of the brain will lack the fundamental cause of human creativity— every human brain is unique. Thus each of billions of brains is able to contemplate possibilities and scenarios differently enough so that it is more likely at least one brain will contemplate some unique idea that fits each set of possibilities at each point in time.

[RealBitcoin]

One of your errors is to assume that the increases in productivity that lower prices for everyone are most harmful to the poor. In fact, the poor spend the greatest % of their income on basic necessities of life which you admitted. You assume that deflation due to increases in productivity are causing the poor to lose manual labor jobs and thus impoverishing them. Realize that these poor need to uplift their children with education so their children can be Knowledge Age workers and earn $200,000 a year fresh out of college working for Google.

No you misunderstand me again, I agree with you on that. I`m Austrian Economist, not Keynesian.

What I ment by that is that this is only temporary, and when the crash happens it will be reversed: stocks crash & food prices go up, so either it's postponed indefinitely (which is impossible)

Or you make a system without debt based ponzi schemes, that will achieve this, in a more sustainable and risk free way.

But due to the welfare state financed with debt, many people don't bother to act wisely and get the right kind of STEM fields education. Debt causes the "poor" to become fat and lazy.

And so when the debt collapse comes and the government must cull the fat and lazy, then everyone gets what they deserve.

The amazing aspect of this shift into a Knowledge Age, is that knowledge creation mostly can't be financed. Sure you can dangle a little bit of money in front a programmer and it might entice him to work on a project. But the best ones are going to work on what is interesting as a first and primary consideration. Because they can already earn more $ than they really need to be happy, so it more about choosing work that makes them feel happy.

I could probably say a lot more to make some better points, but I am very sleepy. Try reading my essay which I linked in the prior post.

This is what I was telling you, that wealth is not necessarly opportunity based (we need to help the poor with welfare because they have less oportunity) but rather intelligence based.

So basically 3 futures can exist:

1) 1-2% of the population with IQ over 140, and the wealthiest, will provide the goods & services in the more and more complex economy, the manual labour will be achieved by robots, and the rest of the people 98%, will be on permanent welfare like some freeloaders, in a massive socialist economy

2) The elite will do eugenics, and will wipe out the low IQ people with war,plague or else, and reduce the world population to a very very small level, and only keep the high IQ people alive.

3) The economy will be reset, everybody loses all their money, and we start over, but soon enough the high IQ people will again emerge wealthy even with equal opportunities, and the same shit starts again.


I`d prefer 3) but i think 1) is the most likely outcome unfortunately. I also think that if 1) will become true then it's only a matter of time until the elite will become fed up with so many freeloaders so 1) will become 2) in a matter of years.

[TPTB_need_war]

You completely ignored the point I quoted from my essay. You whoreship IQ. You don't understand entropy nor fitness.

There is work for everyone in the Knowledge Age, because everyone's knowledge is unique. There is no such thing as a superior 1 - 2%. Fuck that. Somebody brainwashed you.

[RealBitcoin]

You completely ignored the point I quoted from my essay. You whoreship IQ. You don't understand entropy nor fitness.

Sorry but there is direct, and very high! (>90%) correlation between wealth and IQ of a person, based on real 100% scientific research:

SO OPPORTUNITY , FITTNESS , AND EQUAL STARTING OPPORTUNITY DOESN'T REALLY MATTER!

BUT IT'S HARD TO FIND GOOD PAPERS ON THE INTERNET TELL YOU THAT BECAUSE SOCIALIST APOLOGETICS DON'T ALLOW SCIENTISTS TO LOOK AT UNBIASED CONCLUSIONS!

[TPTB_need_war]

Sorry but there is direct, and very high! (>90%) correlation between wealth and IQ of a person, based on real 100% scientific research:

Who said everyone had to be wealthy?

We were talking about whether they are so worthless that they can't work at all.

Also those who do well on tests do so to some extent because they are motivated to. So yes motivated people do become wealthier.

You try to claim that only 2% of the population can be motivated and can find work in the Knowledge Age. That is ludicrous.

[RealBitcoin]

Sorry but there is direct, and very high! (>90%) correlation between wealth and IQ of a person, based on real 100% scientific research:

Who said everyone had to be wealthy?

We were talking about whether they are so worthless that they can't work at all.

Ok but you still don't understand.

So let's summarize: IQ and Net worth (wealth) is very highly correlated, now you might win the lottery or become lucky and be wealthy with a lower IQ aswell but it's not the norm. Same as you can be high IQ and be born with 1 arm and 1 leg it's harder to break out of poverty.

However on average, IQ does determine how rich you will become.

=====================================

The problem with this fact is that , as I told you on the earlier posts, is that if IQ is necessary to become wealthy, then if robots replace manual labour, the now unemployed people can't uppgrade their skills and be left unemployed.

So if you have an IQ of 65 and you are a plummer, if you lose a job due better pipes (!) you can still become a car mechanic.
But if both jobs become replaced by robots and AI , then you can't uppgrade to a bank manager.

So what will happen is that these low IQ people will be left unemployed, so either they will starve to death, or you create a massive socialist welfare state:

1) 1-2% of the population with IQ over 140, and the wealthiest, will provide the goods & services in the more and more complex economy, the manual labour will be achieved by robots, and the rest of the people 98%, will be on permanent welfare like some freeloaders, in a massive socialist economy

And robotization is inevitable as better and better technology comes out, so what can we do about it?

Also those who do well on tests do so to some extent because they are motivated to. So yes motivated people do become wealthier.

You try to claim that only 2% of the population can be motivated and can find work in the Knowledge Age. That is ludicrous.

But there will be no work left, no manual work because they will be done by robots, the only work left will be "mind work": managers, directors, etc.

Which obviously the low IQ people can't perform.

[TPTB_need_war]

You assume IQ is innate. Debt and welfare can give someone a lower IQ.

You continue to make the same error over and over.

Every human brain is unique. Everyone regardless of IQ has a creative input to make not just manual labor. They may not become as wealthy as the other person, but they are not worthless.

You might be worthless though with this derogatory nonsense that has been programmed into your brain by the socialist mass media propaganda.

Malthusian crap has always been wrong and always will. Nature isn't as stupid as you think it is.

[RealBitcoin]

You assume IQ is innate.

It is, with a small variance of 10-15 points that is caused by the enviroment, that is a scientific fact.

It's genetically based, and only modified slightly by your childhood experiences, nutrition and social enviroment.

You cannot doubt that.

Debt and welfare can give someone a lower IQ.

No it's the other way around, low IQ people are indebted and living on welfare

You continue to make the same error over and over.

As in where I logically proved my points step by step and you can't come up with a good counterargument

Every human brain is unique. Everyone regardless of IQ has a creative input to make not just manual labor. They may not become as wealthy as the other person, but they are not worthless.

If you are talking about creative jobs: artists,musicians,writers, comedians, etc.. that's only a small % of the labour force.

60% of people either work in factory or do manual jobs in the same "hand & feet" using enviroment, and not mind using.


And while the artists I think you cannot ever replace, still 60-70-80% of the jobs will definitely be replaced by AI sooner or later (even actors and static people are replaced by CGI, musicians are replaced with DJ's that mix older music with digital tech, and I think there was an AI which made music based on math patterns)

You might be worthless though with this derogatory nonsense that has been programmed into your brain by the socialist mass media propaganda.

I didn't said that they are worthless, I believe in human potential, but i`m also realist, and know that it has severe limits.

Malthusian crap has always been wrong and always will. Nature isn't as stupid as you think it is.

I can't comment this, i have to read up what Malthusianism is

[TPTB_need_war]

Creative jobs are the workforce of the future.

Debt and welfare can give someone a lower IQ.

No it's the other way around, low IQ people are indebted and living on welfare

Falsify that causality.

How are you going to falsify which causes which?

I urge you to review statistics about blacks in the USA before and after widespread welfare corrupted them.

[macsga]

You assume IQ is innate. Debt and welfare can give someone a lower IQ.
You continue to make the same error over and over.
Every human brain is unique. Everyone regardless of IQ has a creative input to make not just manual labor. They may not become as wealthy as the other person, but they are not worthless.
You might be worthless though with this derogatory nonsense that has been programmed into your brain by the socialist mass media propaganda.
Malthusian crap has always been wrong and always will. Nature isn't as stupid as you think it is.

Well, I'll have to agree with this. No matter how well you have prepared your business, or a bright idea you had and decided to make money out of it; there's always the factor of "chance". YES, there's choice, YES, there's IQ, hard work, dignity, commitment, public relations, BUT... there's also pure, blind, filthy, LUCK! Whatever you do, whatever I do, whatever ANY AVERAGE JOE does, it's based 50% on luck - if the Universe decides you're not worthy, there you have it.

Unlucky events come in various forms, the most common is a love affair that went wrong. I've once met a PhD guy who got his heart crashed. He tried to commit suicide! I convinced him not to do it, after a couple of days he solved a problem that had been unsolved for the last 100 years. In a parallel universe, where he never met me, he might as well be gone, and that problem would have to wait another 100 years for another genius to solve it. Another form, is a terminal disease; cancer, Alzheimer's, a plane crash, pick your best... you're out of luck GENIUS. End of the chapter.

And, then; there are people who don't have to be THAT rich to have a wealthy life. Do you really need that 300ft boat or the Lambo? Think again. A *really* smart person doesn't need MUCH to live from, he requires LESS to live wealthy, in his own way. He doesn't even have to get a 150 IQ rating - believe me I know many of those.

Life is short. Don't go after much, only those you really need to be happy. That's smart. That's genius.

[TPTB_need_war]

You hired the man who comes by to clean your car every week, because you like his quips and personality.

Is that IQ?

Is that only manual labor?

Some of the most interesting people I've know in my birthplace New Orleans were blacks who probably wouldn't have high test scores on IQ tests.

Making life interesting is very valuable to me.

You have dehumanized it all.

Fitness means there are many myriad of values in society. If society was a xerox copy, then we would not likely survive the next near extinction event. Diversity is appreciated by mankind because it is resilient and necessary.

[TPTB_need_war]

RealBitcoin, apologies for my demeanor last night. I was sleepless and near to delirious. I've followed up with a more coherent summary as quoted at the bottom of this post.

I think you have good intentions and you are correct that socialism is causing many problems now. Your myopia is you don't yet understand the Knowledge Age. The Knowledge Age is not about a superior cathedral of superior minds. It is about moving the smarts for the human network out to the ends of the network, i.e. the End-to-end principle and diminishing the Coasian barriers that give rise to the Theory of the Firm. Simulated annealing is nature's algorithm for optimizing outcomes by allowing decision making to be local between actors and not top-down. That is why when ice is cooled slowly it doesn't crack (the local interaction of the molecules has time to find their optimal mutual arrangement).

What that means is that you and no one else can top-down decide which individuals in which situations will be worthwhile. It won't depend on just one metric such as IQ. Life is much more complex, chaotic, and higher entropy than just IQ. I explained it as follows in my seminal essay:

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

Existential Fear

The fear emotion is inherited from the primitive, post-paleozoic, hunter-gatherer time period when mortal danger was omnipresent. Fear stimulates a fight-or-flight adrenaline spike in response to extreme stress. Adrenaline rushes are thrilling and addictive, especially when the threat is low-grade, not thoroughly exhausting, and thus repeatable because it only exists in the imagination. Adrenaline (plus cortisol) shuts down rational thought in the pre-frontal cortex. Production of the steriod cortisol spikes to redistribute more energy to the muscles and nerves, depleting energy from the immune system, digestion, and toxic waste processing necessary to maintain health.

2nd Law of Thermo

All such irrational and unjustified fears are inconsistent with the trend of maximization of entropy guaranteed by the Second Law of Thermodynamics which governs our universe. Such fears include erroneous Malthusian apocalyptic predictions of overpopulation, man-made (anthropogenic) global warming, peak energy, and other resource scarcity delusions of the masses. Entropy is the level of independent possibilities, i.e. diversity. During the 1800s, the Luddites thought technology and mass production would replace all human work, because they couldn't foresee the new independent possibilities of knowledge work that employ us now.

Algorithm ≠ Entropy

Proponents of the technological singularity theory cite the exponential increase in computing hardware power such as Moore's Law and recent software advances such the sophisticated Spaun artificial brain which can pass simple IQ tests and interact with its environment; also IBM's Watson computer which defeated Jeopardy and chess masters, subsequently was recently programmed to do lung cancer diagnosis more accurately than human doctors.

However, the speed of the computing hardware and the sophistication of the software has no relevance because creativity can't be expressed in an algorithm. Every possible model of the brain will lack the fundamental cause of human creativity— every human brain is unique. Thus each of billions of brains is able to contemplate possibilities and scenarios differently enough so that it is more likely at least one brain will contemplate some unique idea that fits each set of possibilities at each point in time.

An algorithm or model can describe what and how to do and even be generalized to respond to unknown future scenarios by observing patterns and deducing rules about its environment, but it can't vary its imperfections nondeterministically, because the input entropy (to the algorithm) is known a priori and is finite. Whereas, for the collection of all human brains, the entropy is unbounded and thus the future can't be predetermined, i.e. isn't deterministic.

Imagine if life was perfect and without chance. Life would be deterministic and could be modeled with an algorithm, then failure couldn't exist, everything would be known in advance, and thus there could be no change that wasn't predictable, i.e. real change wouldn't exist and the universe would be static. Life requires imperfection and unbounded diversity, else life doesn't exist and isn't alive. Equality and perfection are the ambition of the insane who probably don't realize they must destroy life to reach their goal.

Thus the theory that it would be impossible to predict what computers would contemplate is nonsense because the input entropy of the models of the brain will always be finite and deterministic from the time the input entropy is varied.

Pseudo-random number generators are deterministic from the time the seed is changed. Even dynamically capturing entropy from the changing content of the internet would be deterministic from each moment of capture to the next, and the model of capture would be lacking diversity and static (only modified by a human).

Thought Isn't Fungible

To make the computers as creative as the humans would require inputting the entropy from all the human brains. Yet there is no plausible way to extract the future uniqueness of human brains other than to allow them interact with the environment over unbounded time, because the occurrence of creativity is probablistic (by chance) as the dynamic diversity of human minds interact with the changing environment. The term unbounded means there is no way to observe or capture that uniqueness a priori other than through the future of life as it unfolds.

Inmates can be forced to do manual labor because it is possible to observe the performance of the menial tasks. However, it is impossible (or at least very inefficient and imprecise) to determine whether a human is feigning inability or giving best effort at a knowledge task. Manual labor is fungible, i.e. nearly any person with average IQ and dexterous limbs can be substituted to do the task. Whereas, knowledge production such as programming the computer, authoring content or developing marketing plans, requires diversity of thought.

The 160 IQ genius Microsoft founder Paul Allen refers to this as “specialized knowledge” in The Complexity Brake, yet he thinks the brain is finite because he apparently didn't consider that every finite human brain is unique; thus systemic creative thought possesses dynamic unbounded entropy.

Ray Kurzweil responded that the human genome (DNA) has a finite information content, and claimed that humans possess a canonical brain which is differentiated by what is learned from the environment during each human lifetime.

Since the portion of the human genome pertaining to the brain has an entropy in the millions or billions, each human brain is potentially at least one-in-a-million or one-in-a-billion unique. Notwithstanding that uniqueness, if human evolution was entirely encoded in a finite genome, then it would be mathematically possible for a plurality of humans to have identical brains at some point in time as the brain forms before differentiation from non-identical learning environments. However, the brain is learning and exposed to the environment as it is forming in the womb, thus there is never a point in time where the brain was entirely structured from only the information in the DNA.

Thus evolution is not just an encoding from the environment to the genome, rather a continuous interaction between the ongoing environment and the genome. Thus for computers to obtain the same entropy of the collective human brainpower, they would need to be human reproducing, contributing to genome and interacting with the environment in the ways humans do. Even if computers could do this, the technological singularity would not occur, because the computers would be equivalent to adding more humans to the population.

The implication is that the creativity of humankind is enhanced as the human population grows. And culling the population to increase average IQ would reduce human creativity. Resilient systems don't have low entropy.

Claude Shannon showed us that the capacity for information content is equivalent to the entropy of a system. As elucidated above, the entropy of our universe is inseparable from life, thus information is alive.

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.

I urge you to read the above essay at its source location on my unheresy.com "blog", as there are many links cited.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-riskiest-sovereign-bonds-ranked-2015-8?utm_content=buffer25fef&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

That chart reflects speculator expectations for the near-term. It does not reflect speculator expectations for the medium-term. Thus the chart does not convey the information that the northern European banks are highly leveraged to the PIIGS sovereign debt crisis, and so if the PIIGS default then the German banks will need a public bailout. Will the bailout come from the Germans alone or will the debt problem of the EU be consolidated onto a federalized EU with new taxation powers for the EU destroying national sovereignty. For me this isn't even a question. It is clear why this crisis was manufactured by TPTB.

Back on the point of whether we will see the End of Government. No. TPTB (the capitalist network that rules the dying Industrial Age) is consolidating economies-of-scale because the Industrial Age is dying. So the large fish must eat the smaller fish in order to survive.

The people are fooled and believe they need the Industrial Age socialism model and are clinging to that, thus they will ride this NWO down into its top-down centralized, eugenics destiny with the USA declining from April 2013 at its 224-year peak (when Edward Snowden made his final plans to expose the NSA) to an eventual breakup by the 309th year of its cycle.

So no end of government for the masses. Yet many people will adopt the individually autonomous Knowledge Age and break free from that morass much sooner. That is why there will be a mixed outcome, initially with a waterfall collapse outside the USA, then with a long-term declining West and a rising East after 2020. However that East will be much more totalitarian (top-down obedient) that we were accustomed to in the West (note my comment on the linked page).

[TPTB_need_war]

The Theory of the Firm can be explained from one perspective with the erroneous theory that knowledge creation can be duplicated and redundant thus managers play an important role of making sure there are backup employees in case one gets sick, leaves, or otherwise fails.

We've needed corporations to aggregate work, because for example you don't build Mozilla Firefox with one programmer. You need a large team.

This is why I was working so hard on solving the Expression Problem for computer programming language (which I think I've solved and will be working on after I finish the crypto work), because with true modularity (no need to refactor), then programmers can work on their own smaller modules and then other programmers can combine modules into large programs. This is the Holy Grail of programming yet to be achieved.

In any case, the point is knowledge creation is becoming more autonomous, e.g. the 3D printer and 3D printer designs for download. You used to need a corporation to accomplish what you can now do individually.