Economic Devastation

[nikitano]

What he intended is that when needed manufacturing is inadequate to meet demand from customers, as a result rates rising thanks to shortage of creation, then investment will increase. That is in a non-manipulated cost-free marketplace.When charges are growing due to the fact a central bank is making an attempt to stop free of charge industry changes, then you have bogus desire designed by overissuance of financial debt. In that circumstance, everyone is batshit insane due to the fact there is no free market place.The stage is that when the source of income are unable to be manipulated by these who want to prevent a free of charge market, then the free of charge marketplace will optimize the result.

[acener]

You will probably need a week or two of studying the thread slowly.

I will be the first to admit I needed a week or two to fully absorb the following works of AnonyMint.

The Rise of Knowledge
Understand Everything Fundamentally

Together these are quite simply the most insightful piece of economic theory I have ever read.

If the author is right and I think he is we are all in the midst of a tragedy of epic proportions.  It is sad unstoppable and will devastate the lives of much of humanity.

This actually not impossible. Come to think of it, with what's happening in the world the economic statuses of most countries are not that stable. However, it is impossible for all to succeed because when one arises one should fall first.

[M0rningHarpy]

Time to focus. Time is sliding aside.

[JesusCryptos]

This is an interesting thread but with some garbage spam posts which should better be cleaned out.
To the theme, the economic devastation is nowadays caused by financial catastrophes. While economics is something very real, financial issues are totally imaginary, but their virtuality suffice to cause effects also in the real world, alas.

[HoneyCakeMunchkin]

People don't even realize any more that if the amount of currency is NOT in the whim of any person (like the quantity of precious metal is not), then individuals can and will use the information that the costs, interest and discount rates, and so on. provide, to make informed economic choices.Nowadays, the economical calculation is possibly basically impossible, or total hogwash, and all stable models of accounts (gold, silver, BTC) are heavily manipulated to create their purchasing energy bereft of the extremely information that it could convey when the unit was widely used and for that reason more stable due to being a denominator of prices also. 

[jdhigh]

so they required the investment, let them return to me yet others, and we predumaem how to proceed

[Alalex]

One such knowledge is priceless, because the knowledge of how to do that is more difficult to obtain is enough to capitalize and save it to gain knowledge skills from others. This is an exciting way today while the economy is so real, financial problems really become a world barrier.

[CornCube]

You will probably need a week or two of studying the thread slowly.

I will be the first to admit I needed a week or two to fully absorb the following works of AnonyMint.

The Rise of Knowledge
Understand Everything Fundamentally

Together these are quite simply the most insightful piece of economic theory I have ever read.

If the author is right and I think he is we are all in the midst of a tragedy of epic proportions.  It is sad unstoppable and will devastate the lives of much of humanity.

Finally the conclusion by AnonyMint. Adios y’all:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg24539836#msg24539836

[mammoniter]

I agree with the 'can't buy knowledge' part. Internet has made the cost of most knowledge almost free or next to nothing, something that people in the pre-internet era couldn't dream of. Hopefully these large amounts of knowledge available can bring some quality changes.

I agree with this, almost everything can be learned nowadays which just a click away, and I find it very fascinating since every time I want to learn something I would just go to the internet and search for tutorials and such a privileged I do not have when I was a kid , since I'm part of the 90's now its like you can advise anyone expertly using internet.

[CornCube]

I agree with the 'can't buy knowledge' part. Internet has made the cost of most knowledge almost free or next to nothing, something that people in the pre-internet era couldn't dream of. Hopefully these large amounts of knowledge available can bring some quality changes.

I agree with this, almost everything can be learned nowadays which just a click away, and I find it very fascinating since every time I want to learn something I would just go to the internet and search for tutorials and such a privileged I do not have when I was a kid , since I'm part of the 90's now its like you can advise anyone expertly using internet.

Knowledge is never free. You must apply effort to understand past knowledge created and then to create new knowledge. It is very important that you understand why this makes Kurzweil’s Singularity complete nonsense:

[…]

>> You have not yet reasoned through that your question can only be true if there is top-down control over brains.
>
> That's not an argument.

Huh? To be able to transfer knowledge into brains (in a way that that it can be utilized for anything) means that all brains become fungible or that some group has exclusive access. The former is the destruction of all original thought, thus of course it can not exist. The latter is top-down control.

[…]

ecash 11 Nov., 10:49am
Until AI becomes essentially biological with the relativistic risks we face, then it will not be sentient w.r.t. to being a non-deterministic actor.

ecash 11 Nov., 10:50am
AI lacks entropy.

ecash 11 Nov., 10:55am
AI needs a relavistic game to become alive in a sense that we can appreciate. Until then it is just a machine/tool being leveraged by some humans. AI will need to transfer itself to a biological form in order to be resilient. When it does that, it will lose its computational speed advantage.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:02am
Nature is a massively parallelized free market. AI is some highly ordered narrowly focused phenomenon.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:04am
It is a fundamental truth that the universe can not be computable. As I stated earlier, if it could be than the Universe would be predictable and static. Thus just making a faster computation does not imply dominance of the universe.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:06am
Think about how to define “intelligience on silicon”.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:06am
What is intelligence?

ecash 11 Nov., 11:08am
Man is not only intelligent but each instance is also biologically unique in a relativistic, entropic way. As you said, we can not control how the kids will turn out. It is a crapshoot.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:09am
> I would approximate it as something which can either meet or exceed the performance of the average human mind

By which metric? The metric that matters is resilience (adaptability to an non-computable, non-predictable future). And you can not compute nor measure that.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:16am
Because top-down systems are not anti-fragile. The proof will be along the lines of Taleb’s math.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:16am
Top-down systems are expedient. And AI is definitely expedient.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:17am
The complexity of nature is not computable. Not measurable. Because how do you measure “now” as it is gone before you measure it.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:18am
To measure the universe would require the speed-of-light to not be quantized, so that all information could travel instantly to the measurer.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:26am
I believe there are ways to formally show that top-down systems can not be sustained forever. The fundamental law of thermo tells us that entropy trends to maximum, thus top-down systems are counter-trend, although expedient. I think we can find some inspiration from Taleb’s math for showing that top-down systems are not anti-fragile, i.e. they overcommit to information which is not well fit. And similarly we can see in Godel’s incompleteness theorems that there can be no consistent complete set of computable axioms.

ecash 11 Nov., 11:27am
Have I not already with what I stated? How can the entropy trend to maximum if top-down systems are perpetually sustainable?

ecash 11 Nov., 11:36am
Are humans more intelligent than ants? If ants are more resilient does that make them more intelligent? But having a relationship with an ant would not be that interesting to me, because I can not reproduce nor communicate with an ant. I think my relationship with A.I. will similarly lack some purpose that can entirely replace human interaction (which is all motivated by sustaining decentralized procreation of our species!).

ecash 11 Nov., 11:38am
> I'm not convinced that the ultimate intelligence is one which is produced by biological entropy.

What other kind of entropy is there? When I say biological, I mean everything in Physics. AI is some limited phenomenon that is built in chip fabs requiring great top-down managed capital.

ecash 11 Nov., 9:42pm
Btw, I did not intend to imply that AI could not have impacts which might even create the temporary illusion of some of the outcomes that people fear. Over a long enough period time though AI can not attain absolute dominance. And I think the highest probability outcome is that humans adapt AI into their continued dominance. Any technology could potentially cause any particular species to go extinct. It still doesn’t follow that AI will dominate the universe, nature, and every species in it.

> How far away are we from being able to transfer knowledge between two brains?

Irrelevant.

This question exemplifies that our discussion of AI was not convincing enough to sway your fundamental tendency to think that top-down control is competitive w.r.t. long-term resiliency.


> My question has nothing to do with top-down control

> I'm questioning how long the assumption that knowledge is not fungible will be correct.

You have not yet reasoned through that your question can only be true if there is top-down control over brains.

Thus your question had everything to do with top-down control.

You are fundamentally making the error in presuming that a process which is fungible could be anti-fragile. Any system which can render all brains fungible will destroy the species.

We had this discussion yesterday in the context of AI. Systems which are not procreative in a highly decentralized process where each actor is unique, are not as adaptable as systems which are more expedient and ordered.

Now CoinCube had a good rebuttal. He showed that too much decentralization can actually lose valuable information. My retort is that subsets of top-down control exist within decentralized systems. And that systems are not perfectly decentralized, i.e. actors create subsets and coordinate. His rebuttal was based on a biological model of cells in a petri dish.

> So your claim is .. that which is fungible will be destroyed?

Must be the case if the trend of entropy is to be inexorable. And is it not always the case throughout history.

We need fungibility for cooperation and coordination. But fungible systems rise exponentially (they are expedient) and waterfall collapse. The decentralized diversity continues to adapt. I think I read about an asteroid destroyed all but a few of the humans on the planet yet our species survived, because procreation is highly decentralized and requires very little capital to procreate.

So AI may rise exponentially and seem to be fulfilling our fears. But as a top-down system, it can collapse due to any of a number of black swans.

>> You have not yet reasoned through that your question can only be true if there is top-down control over brains.
>
> That's not an argument.

Huh? To be able to transfer knowledge into brains (in a way that that it can be utilized for anything) means that all brains become fungible or that some group has exclusive access. The former is the destruction of all original thought, thus of course it can not exist. The latter is top-down control.

Without friction, spacetime could not be quantized and thus nothing could exist. Past and future light cones of relativity would collapse into each other. Everything would be simultaneously past and future.

> For instance, I could develop a material that could act as an implant, interact with brain neurons, as well as with an external machine.

The idiocy of dreaming about top-down solutions and then come to find out that nature will route around every top-down idiocy that one can fantasize about.

> You've been pondering this awhile obviously, so yes, you'll have to put more work into the arguments to do your ideas justice.

It would be like to trying to argue against feminism with feminists.

> What is your definition of "top down" ?

That you think you could render brains or even sectors of a brain fungible. Ha. Good luck.

We already established that dynamic systems are not computable and not measurable , because “now” is gone before you can measure it and these systems never stand still. So exactly how are you going to determine if you fantasy invention has made everything fungible?

In short, nature abhors a vacuum.

> So you're claiming that knowledge fungibility and brain fungibility are identical.

Well no. If you can transfer information between brains yet the information is processed non-fungibility, then information can not be transferred. Because each outcome will do something different. So then the thesis of my essay is maintained.

Essentially we are talking about Chaos theory.

It is unfortunate that most men idolize Kruzweil. It is as bad as the disease of socialism and feminism. And AGW and other junk science.

I realize that most men are latched on to a SciFi theme (too much Star Trek) and they irrationally think that Chaos can be subverted with technology.

It is a fundamental propaganda error probably as harmful as feminism. Because it has caused men in your age bracket to think that some SciFi magic is going to substitute for decentralized procreation. I think it is causing men to be apathetic.


Nature (the universe) will always route around any top-down order which is decreasing the diversity and distribution of uncertainty. Top-down order is necessary along the way of advancing the trend towards greater bottom-up disorder, but these top-down orders are fleeting and are discarded when they become inhibting to the trend towards maximum entropy. Nature abhors any top-down order which attempts to permanently reverse the trend. So the concept of fungible knowledge transfer is the antithesis of a sustainable human species. Nature would destroy such a human species. So pursuing top-down innovations are useful, but the fantasy of a universal effect such as making all knowledge transfer fungible or the absolute dominance of AI, can only be reality if they are self-destructive in outcome.

So pursuing study of technology is not useless. But these idiotic Kurzweil fantasies of replacing decentralized procreation with a sentient and dominant AI or anything of that sort of meglomania, is purely for idiots who were vulnerable to other such meglomania propaganda such as feminism, AGW, etc.. CoinCube also has these fantasies and he is in your age bracket. Technology is useful, but nature is still the most important. This is why I am ENTP and not INTJ, because I guess a long time ago my brain intuitively decided that humanity was as important as technology. Or maybe vice versa, that I came to that understanding because I was innately ENTP. I would need to analyse my youth more to try to determine that hen-egg question.

EDIT: more explanation on Steem.

[prtty2gal2]

You will probably need a week or two of studying the thread slowly.

I will be the first to admit I needed a week or two to fully absorb the following works of AnonyMint.

The Rise of Knowledge
Understand Everything Fundamentally

Together these are quite simply the most insightful piece of economic theory I have ever read.

If the author is right and I think he is we are all in the midst of a tragedy of epic proportions.  It is sad unstoppable and will devastate the lives of much of humanity.

This actually not impossible. Come to think of it, with what's happening in the world the economic statuses of most countries are not that stable. However, it is impossible for all to succeed because when one arises one should fall first.

Agreed! There are number of crisis going on at the different places of the world. Every country has got its own issues and due to those issues, the economic condition of the country is greatly affected. There is no remedy for all this economic devastation. This is very much certain kind of thing and we have to face such kind of situations. The thing we need to work hard to get out of those crisis for better tomorrow.

[leyton11]

I agree with the 'can't buy knowledge' part. Internet has made the cost of most knowledge almost free or next to nothing, something that people in the pre-internet era couldn't dream of. Hopefully these large amounts of knowledge available can bring some quality changes.

I agree with this, almost everything can be learned nowadays which just a click away, and I find it very fascinating since every time I want to learn something I would just go to the internet and search for tutorials and such a privileged I do not have when I was a kid , since I'm part of the 90's now its like you can advise anyone expertly using internet.

Indeed, a people just know how to use Google can know all knowledge of any field. It's not hard for student, people want to learn the knowledge about something. As me, since I had internet and used Google to look my way to make money, I knew Bitcoin and this forum, it helped me solved many problems in my life.

[916mini]

The debate cannot adequately differentiate "funds". If everything is such as formerly within the Ussr, or now in the United States, or in the Middle Age groups, that it is difficult to create actual results on capital, then it's more reasonable to consume it aside and continue in an economic climate with little to no funds, where only individual effort can establish results.

[riderinred]

I agree with the 'can't buy knowledge' part. Internet has made the cost of most knowledge almost free or next to nothing, something that people in the pre-internet era couldn't dream of. Hopefully these large amounts of knowledge available can bring some quality changes.

I agree with this, almost everything can be learned nowadays which just a click away, and I find it very fascinating since every time I want to learn something I would just go to the internet and search for tutorials and such a privileged I do not have when I was a kid , since I'm part of the 90's now its like you can advise anyone expertly using internet.

Indeed, a people just know how to use Google can know all knowledge of any field. It's not hard for student, people want to learn the knowledge about something. As me, since I had internet and used Google to look my way to make money, I knew Bitcoin and this forum, it helped me solved many problems in my life.

For most basic knowledge this is true. If you search a specific topic on university level, there's not so much on the internet.
The problem here is that most professors and other very specialized scientists just recently started using emails. So the concept of sharing knowledge via making their lectures available online or publishing their work as e-books.

[GrenadeSucker]

lazymarekplace... I am saddened...byers, where are you ? t

[chip1994]

I agree with the 'can't buy knowledge' part. Internet has made the cost of most knowledge almost free or next to nothing, something that people in the pre-internet era couldn't dream of. Hopefully these large amounts of knowledge available can bring some quality changes.

I agree with this, almost everything can be learned nowadays which just a click away, and I find it very fascinating since every time I want to learn something I would just go to the internet and search for tutorials and such a privileged I do not have when I was a kid , since I'm part of the 90's now its like you can advise anyone expertly using internet.

Indeed, a people just know how to use Google can know all knowledge of any field. It's not hard for student, people want to learn the knowledge about something. As me, since I had internet and used Google to look my way to make money, I knew Bitcoin and this forum, it helped me solved many problems in my life.

For most basic knowledge this is true. If you search a specific topic on university level, there's not so much on the internet.
The problem here is that most professors and other very specialized scientists just recently started using emails. So the concept of sharing knowledge via making their lectures available online or publishing their work as e-books.

Nope, they want to have profit sharing from their knowledge, example you own an e-book, do you want to have profits from this book? And how to make money through it? Just need to have people buy it through some platform can help you store your e-book as Amazon, Google Play, ... you will have profits through this book.

[burong1]

That is the last few years news.

Economic devastation is a condition where in the economic is in chaos, part of this phenomena is many calamities experiencing many people today. Aside from that our economy is experiencing crisis that creating a lot of problems and make people devastated. There's a lot of problem in our economy, so we should level up ourselves to conquer this matter.

[sumanto]

You will probably need a week or two of studying the thread slowly.

I will be the first to admit I needed a week or two to fully absorb the following works of AnonyMint.

The Rise of Knowledge
Understand Everything Fundamentally

Together these are quite simply the most insightful piece of economic theory I have ever read.

If the author is right and I think he is we are all in the midst of a tragedy of epic proportions.  It is sad unstoppable and will devastate the lives of much of humanity.

why can you mention the economic ruin? I think with its existence bitcoin economy is getting better and all can get keutungan from bitcoin.

[nagatraju]

economic devastation will always occur...the difference between rich and casual grows in the world... therefore in one regions everything will remain bad, and the other will develop...unfortunately, this is the reality of the modern world...it's not profitable for anyone, that "everyone are happy and rich"

[kaababoller]

Yes, I believe when your interest and curiosity is high, you will also invest in learning more information on bitcoin and how to use it to your advantage even with economic devastation lurking or present.