Is a Madmax outcome coming before 2020? Thus do we need anonymity?

[BitcoinFreak12]

CoinCube is describing that unconstrained dynamic systems composed of autonomous actors can't always converge....

A little bit flawed, why do you need a constraint, i mean surely the people will gravitate towards the better outcomes/solutions and the unpopular crazy ideas would always be in the minority.

In fact anarchy is the best solution for evolution, because then nothing would constrain the human evolution, and the human race could evolve democratically.

For example:
1) The state taxes highly people and people have small incomes so they have to work extra hours
2) Because of this, stress levels in humans could reach critical points
3) Stress levels cause heart problems and in longer terms it may evolve our species into the wrong direction
4) In long term this could cause a decrease in live expectancy, and new infants could also be born with heart problems

So you see how this could affect evolution in the long term, surely you dont want the working drones that work 18 hour/day to cause bad mutations in the human genom, so obviously if you give infinite number of choices to the people and not constrain them into something negatitive, then the majority will decide and will evolve into that, based on our current adaptation.

First we were hunters gatherers, then we were laborers, now we are mostly office workers or service sector employees.
We are not fit for survival in a jungle, most of us, but we dont need it, because we have tools that protect, enhance us.

That is what evolution is about, to circumvent our flaws and enhance our intellect and knowledge.

For example if a worldwide catastrophe would occur and all people got into the streets rioting, then we dont really need to make spears and arrows for ourselves, and tools like hammers and stuff to build a new society, because we already have knowledge of better technology: guns and 3D printers.

If atleast 1 people knows or has backed up the blueprints for our current technology, then even if we destroy our current civilization, we wont have to start from square 1.

See thats the beauty of evolution

[contagion]

CoinCube is describing that unconstrained dynamic systems composed of autonomous actors can't always converge....

A little bit flawed, why do you need a constraint, i mean surely the people will gravitate towards the better outcomes/solutions and the unpopular crazy ideas would always be in the minority.

I suspect CoinCube agrees with me that it is best not to argue with someone who doesn't understand the math and science, because it is impossible to have an intelligent discussion when the other person doesn't know the math background.

I was not really disagreeing with you. I was mostly agreeing and then was trying to teach you something extra, but you apparently (and I don't say this in a snotty tone, just politely) still don't understand the math of how dynamic systems converge on a pattern distinguishable from disorder (a.k.a. noise or lack of information). Study for example Differential Equations and the concept of Q for example in audio systems along with the terms critically damped, underdamped, etc..

People gravitating (i.e. inertia) is a constraint.

I agree with you that decentralized systems are more resilient, but you need to understand that all decentralized systems also have order, e.g. the ants have a rule-based order to their decision matrix. Do you know what 100%indiscernible disorder is? A black hole where nothing discernible exists.

[contagion]

Folks we are frogs being slowly boiled to death. Only a few of us see what is coming in terms of 90% taxation and confiscation of wealth.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/18/japan-considering-exit-tax-to-leave-country/

So what are our options, what's the solution(s)?
Is there no hope?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg9884655#msg9884655

[BitcoinFreak12]

CoinCube is describing that unconstrained dynamic systems composed of autonomous actors can't always converge....

A little bit flawed, why do you need a constraint, i mean surely the people will gravitate towards the better outcomes/solutions and the unpopular crazy ideas would always be in the minority.

I suspect CoinCube agrees with me that it is best not to argue with someone who doesn't understand the math and science, because this devolves into a shouting match.

I was not really disagreeing with you. I was mostly agreeing and then was trying to teach you something extra, but you apparently still don't understand the math of how dynamic systems converge. Study for example Differential Equations and the concept of Q for example in audio systems along with the terms critically damped, underdamped, etc..

Hey i`m not really a math guy, but also i think you dont understand what i mean. By anarchy i dont mean total chaos, there would be some organization sure, but it would be voluntary.

You see nowadays anarchists are depicted as street rioters /vandalizators or hippies, which is a totally flawed view. Mostly propaganda, as the state discourages people to join them, besides those street rioters in Greece are not anarchists.

True anarcho-capitalism, means an agoric society, where everything is voluntary, and there is no initiation or force, for assault, only for defence.

There would be no vigilant mobs on the streets, because there would be just as now a civilian militia to protect it, there could also be armies mostly with mercenaries, but only for defensive purpose, and very organized in such case that the general of the army should not go powerhungry and conquer the world.

Hierarchic ranks are needed, but it can be organized in such manner that their powers could be immediately ceased.

I`m mostly saying here direct democracy, where all legislation is passed by referendum, and no parliament would exist with bribed greedy politicians in it with hidden motives to control us.

Ok some appointed members are needed, but definitely not in the organization as our current governments, which is a clone in every country in the world.

I would say similar as it was organized in Ancient Greece, Athens (before the greedy kings came), where the people got into the streets and argued there. But instead of streets we would use the internet to argue.

Some kind of decentralized voting system, like the bitcoin network, where you would have all the current issues, a debating forum, and a voting function, and then everyone would see the new legislation , it would be public, and everyone would have a fair vote in it.

It would be very good if we would have this, as this would eliminate voting frauds completely and every legislation would be 100% transparent

PS: your analogy is bad with the black hole, as the black hole is actually centralized as all particles go towards the singularity, forced, by gravity. Gravity is the supreme cohesion force in the universe, but atleast its transparent and not corrupt and doesnt discriminate between particles  

[contagion]

Hey i`m not really a math guy,

I knew that. No offense your posts were astute and appreciated.

...but also i think you dont understand what i mean. By anarchy i dont mean total chaos, there would be some organization sure, but it would be voluntary.

Hierarchic ranks are needed, but it can be organized in such manner that their powers could be immediately ceased.

I already wrote that.

Unlike the unabortable collectivized constraint models, decentralization technology (e.g. open source, PoW, and end-to-end principle) enable bottom up competition for leadership.

I`m mostly saying here direct democracy, where all legislation is passed by referendum, and no parliament would exist with bribed greedy politicians in it with hidden motives to control us.

I don't view that as a comprehensive solution. Armstrong was pitching that too, since he thinks representatives voting for us is the problem, e.g. they can be bribed. Voting is always collectivization and centralization. Voters can be bribed too! If there is a centralized expenditure or laws, then the masses will be manipulated by those vested interests that can gain from the expenditures and laws. We need to eliminate centralized action as much as possible, because as I explained upthread that in collectivized action the self interest incentives are misaligned with the global optimization.

Learn about new decentralization concepts and technologies that replace voting, e.g. there is no voting in proof-of-work yet there is still consensus. See the quote of myself above.

PS: your analogy is bad with the black hole, as the black hole is actually centralized as all particles go towards the singularity, forced, by gravity. Gravity is the supreme cohesion force in the universe, but atleast its transparent and not corrupt and doesnt discriminate between particles  

The matter inside the black hole is all the so called anti-matter "spread throughout" the universe (and which is estimated to compromise most of the matter of the universe). Entanglement "at a distance" and superposition principles apply in the sense that matter behaves as though it doesn't occupy one one position in space-time, i.e. matter behaves like a wave that is omnipresent throughout all (a continuum in) space-time. The black hole disorders the matter so completely that it no longer directly discernible in space-time reference frame. You can sort of visualize this as distributing that matter instantly and randomly throughout the "extent" of the Universe, even though that is not mathematically precise. Also it might be that the disorder in the black hole is only to the resolution of Planck's constant so that no discernible light can escape, but it is not likely absolutely disordered (nothing in the Universe can be absolute, but that is deeper discussion).

You are conflating space-time with 3D dimensional position. Please understand that gravity and space-time are not described by your 3D space + elapsed time perspective and can only be understood in the context of relativity (try to understand the light cones) or recently a proposed emergent entropic derivation. You can read my blog essay on The Universe.

http://unheresy.com/The%20Universe.html#Spacetime

Edit: you are probably correct that a blackhole contains some order, not a 100% disorder.

Edit#2: The dawn of trustworthy computing (about block chain technology from Nick Szabo, the man who invented Bitcoin before it was invented).

[contagion]

Is H7N9 the next pandemic?

Armstrong's highly accurate cyclic computer models predict the peak of a global pandemic to occur in 2019.

The plague cycle appears to be reaching an important high in 2019. This may be the preparation stages right now for it and it may be Ebola. We are attempting to gather the historical population and death numbers of past plagues to try to gauge this as a percentage of total population to see if we are talking about WWI epidemic levels or 14th century levels of a 50% death rate.  It is not just the plague. It appears that everything that can go wrong – will go wrong. It is the collapse in pensions, the sovereign debt crisis, the war cycle, plagues, it just seems everything is coming at the same time. Strangely enough, we are running models on countries to see where is the best place. So far, New Zealand and Scotland are showing up. This is not a forecast yet. We have a lot of countries to run.

The Black Death (Bubonic Plague) reduced Europe's population by some 50 - 60% which ended the problem of oversupply of agricultural labor (thus slavery and wages below subsistence levels) which was preventing the rise of the Industrial Age:

http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2010/10/malthus-and-capital.html
http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2011/06/trotting-ahead-of-malthus.html
http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2014/10/transportation-divergence-and.html

You see once excess capital could get into the hands of the masses, then ingenuity that can only come accretively from the bottom up was enabled. I explained in the following links why knowledge is suppressed by top-down structures (and even direct voting is a top-down structure, because the thing voted on is a collective action, i.e. in collectivized action the self interest incentives are misaligned with the global optimization).

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

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=365141.msg9874688#msg9874688

Note those pestilent economic conditions in medieval Europe were perhaps the fundamental cause of Europe's low fertility west of the Hajnal line, which is ironic because now Europe's plummeting fertility and huge demographic and economic ramifications are ostensibly caused by the economic conditions being too artificially rich funded by a massive unsustainable debt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line#Economy

http://i0.wp.com/armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Dollar-Vortex.jpg?resize=259%2C194

So I was thinking what is the Malthus ball-and-chain hanging around society's neck that is driving us towards this viciously collegial downward spiral of economic implosion and trying to suppress the fledgling knowledge age with totalitarian omniscient snooping national security agencies and internet kill switches? Boomers! Old people with life-time tenure jobs, fat pensions, and state-guaranteed health care — the product of rampant socialism. They have put our political systems into gridlock which is allowing the banksters to run amok because the boomers don't care for as long as they get theirs too: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/19/banks-win-again-delay-repeal-volcker-rule/ For example, as a result there is up to 60% youth unemployment in southern Europe (and this will spread to at least France if not all of Europe by or after 2016).

So I thought to myself "hmm, how would nature deal with this pesky species? Viruses, they seem vulnerable to viruses...":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4TUO0s1xG8#t=180

So I was wondering if any of the recent surges of bird flu viruses afflicted predominantly old people. And voila! H7N9 with a 30% mortality rate affects a median age of 64, with 62% over the age 60:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza_A_virus_subtype_H7N9#Age.2Fgender_distribution
http://www.wpro.who.int/wpsar/volumes/04/2/2013_PE_EMT_Arima/en/

And the vaccine is expected to be 59+% effective for healthy adults, except past experience portends that efficacy can fall as low as 9% for those over the age of 65:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/779816
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/05/experts-offer-dim-view-potential-vaccine-response-h7n9

So if H7N9 can kill over 30% of the boomers, that would perhaps be one way of bottoming of this downward economic spiral by 2024 or so. Also it could potentially remove China's demographic problem of elderly scheduled for 2030, and help China bottom by 2020 and as predicted by Armstrong's computer model become the new financial capital of the world by 2032. So far it also afflicts males 71% so perhaps it could solve China's gender imbalance (the artifact of the one-child policy and an economic preference for boys).

Also H7N9 has a similarity to the Bubonic Plague in that its zoönosis is facilitated by the extremely overconcentrated population of the animal carrier in proximity to humans. In medieval Europe the rodents were in proximity due to poor sanitary conditions (symbiotic problem of delayed Industrial Age) and highly labor intensive agriculture. Today we mass produce animals (e.g. Mad Cow disease) in extremely crowded and unnatural conditions, and these domesticated animals have no naturally diverse immunity to these viruses that the wild animals spread — which has apparently facilitated inter-mutation from H9N2. Also like Bubonic Plague, H7N9 doesn't kill the animal carrier. There is some evidence of potential human-to-human mutation in H7N9, which is necessary for pandemic.

http://outbreaknewstoday.com/an-avian-flu-primer-83074/

Just a guess.

[BitcoinFreak12]

I don't view that as a comprehensive solution. Armstrong was pitching that too, since he thinks representatives voting for us is the problem, e.g. they can be bribed. Voting is always collectivization and centralization. Voters can be bribed too! If there is a centralized expenditure or laws, then the masses will be manipulated by those vested interests that can gain from the expenditures and laws. We need to eliminate centralized action as much as possible, because as I explained upthread that in collectivized action the self interest incentives are misaligned with the global optimization.

Learn about new decentralization concepts and technologies that replace voting, e.g. there is no voting in proof-of-work yet there is still consensus. See the quote of myself above.

I dont know but i think that voting in itself is not bad, there is just no other way to make a collective decision for every person in that collective. If they elect a leader from a group, or the alpha male is electing himself as the de facto leader, that is both bad and tyranical leadership, because it might not serve the interest of that group for a longer period.

Voting itself is pretty decentralized, the problem is that the current methodology is not, the election campaign is manipulative propaganda, then there is election fraud, stores or other commercial agents who support a party might promote them in their stores (it might be illegal but i`ve seen plenty of similar things in my country). And the worst is the demagogue speech of the politicians always playing the "safety for children" or the "our great nation needs this..." joker propaganda cards, which the dumb 70% populus always accepts. This emotional manipulation BS is just too big, and most stupid herd people get brainwashed easily by this.

So voting itself is good, but i think that a decentralized voting system based on bitcoin network technology is pretty good. While to avoid demagogue influence, you could raise the approval level to 80% , not 50%+1 as it is now.
50% to me is a silly number, as it can be easily reached with voting frauds, for a real political ideology to take place, i think atleast 80% of the population must accept it.

I just see no other alternative to make a decision for the society, both representative and tyrranical rulers are bad and corrupt.

The matter inside the black hole is all the so called anti-matter "spread throughout" the universe (and which is estimated to compromise most of the matter of the universe). Entanglement "at a distance" and superposition principles apply in the sense that matter behaves as though it doesn't occupy one one position in space-time, i.e. matter behaves like a wave that is omnipresent throughout all (a continuum in) space-time. The black hole disorders the matter so completely that it no longer directly discernible in space-time reference frame. You can sort of visualize this as distributing that matter instantly and randomly throughout the "extent" of the Universe, even though that is not mathematically precise. Also it might be that the disorder in the black hole is only to the resolution of Planck's constant so that no discernible light can escape, but it is not likely absolutely disordered (nothing in the Universe can be absolute, but that is deeper discussion).

You are conflating space-time with 3D dimensional position. Please understand that gravity and space-time are not described by your 3D space + elapsed time perspective and can only be understood in the context of relativity (try to understand the light cones) or recently a proposed emergent entropic derivation. You can read my blog essay on The Universe.

http://unheresy.com/The%20Universe.html#Spacetime

Edit: you are probably correct that a blackhole contains some order, not a 100% disorder.

Edit#2: The dawn of trustworthy computing (about block chain technology from Nick Szabo, the man who invented Bitcoin before it was invented).

Hmm i`ve never heard this theory yet with dark matter, but it seems plausible, of course we need more experiments to prove it, for now i think the singularity is just a cluster where the matter gets cramped in.

And i find this more plausible, because the matter itself in its normal state is so uncompressed (like 99.9999% of the atom is just empty space), that the matter near the singularity might just be a state of the matter which is 100% compressed without space between the particles. An the singularity just be a concept, the gravitational centre of that mass cluster, but its not a physical object to say, jsut a mathematical point.
Besides what i`ve read across the internet, especially about the Hawking radiation, this theory seems more plausible than the one with dark matter, because as the BH evaporates, the energy comes from around the blackhole's event horizon, not from a dark matter cluster which is light years away, so the matter itself must be inside the black hole, not wandering around the universe.

I think the dark matter is just nothing more than an unexplored matter, it is nothing special, it is just ordinary matter with different properties.

[contagion]

I dont know but i think that voting in itself is not bad, there is just no other way to make a collective decision for every person in that collective.

If everything that needed to done collectively is instead provided by private enterprise, then no need for collective action.

One way to force that to happen is to make money anonymous in the new knowledge age economy (not physical transactions), thus individuals can ignore paying taxes.

Thus there is no longer any way to fund MANDATORY collective action.

The problem with MANDATORY taxation is the flies are drawn to honey.

Voting itself is pretty decentralized,

I disagree. Someone always has to set up the technology to tally the vote and decide which issues go to vote and which issues don't go to vote and how the proposed laws are worded. Some wolves will always be in control, and control the mass media spins on the referendum. Economics assures us that where there is a pot of honey, the ants and flies will find a way to get to it.

Switzerland has direct voting. Hasn't stopped the government from doing many corrupt things such as turning over their banks to the USA authorities and their people voting in support of their central bank buying Euros and selling their gold.

Direct voting can be worse than what we have now, because at least now you can find a bureaucrat to bribe your way out of a dilemma. Once the voting is entirely control by just a few wolves at the top, we will be entirely enslaved to the banksters.

I don't Armstrong comprehends how he is unwittingly offering an idea that will make the problem much worse and even more catastrophic in the future. That is why he must not be allowed to succeed. We hackers must win.

Sorry Armstrong is incorrect on this one. The solution going forward are decentralization technologies that render government dissolved, i.e. decentralized block chain technology, end-to-end principle which puts the smarts at the edge of the network and makes intermediaries dumb relays, open source, etc..

http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-dawn-of-trustworthy-computing.html
(Nick Szabo, the man who described Bitcoin before Satoshi invented it)

P.S. I agree any unifying theory must explain all matter with the same theory, not inventing a new special theory for each new type discovered.

[youngmike]

Armstrongeconomics looks like a bullshit site   Full of moral agendas and opinion based crap 

[farfiman]

Armstrongeconomics looks like a bullshit site   Full of moral agendas and opinion based crap 

remember that at 2015.75

[BitcoinFreak12]

If everything that needed to done collectively is instead provided by private enterprise, then no need for collective action.

One way to force that to happen is to make money anonymous in the new knowledge age economy (not physical transactions), thus individuals can ignore paying taxes.

Thus there is no longer any way to fund MANDATORY collective action.

The problem with MANDATORY taxation is the flies are drawn to honey.

Sometimes its needed: natural disasters, alien invasion (no joke, it may happen in the future), pandemic, etc
Sometimes we need a collective organizative structure, but thats about it, 99.99% of the time we dont, so i partially agree

I disagree. Someone always has to set up the technology to tally the vote and decide which issues go to vote and which issues don't go to vote and how the proposed laws are worded. Some wolves will always be in control, and control the mass media spins on the referendum. Economics assures us that where there is a pot of honey, the ants and flies will find a way to get to it.

Switzerland has direct voting. Hasn't stopped the government from doing many corrupt things such as turning over their banks to the USA authorities and their people voting in support of their central bank buying Euros and selling their gold.

Direct voting can be worse than what we have now, because at least now you can find a bureaucrat to bribe your way out of a dilemma. Once the voting is entirely control by just a few wolves at the top, we will be entirely enslaved to the banksters.

I don't Armstrong comprehends how he is unwittingly offering an idea that will make the problem much worse and even more catastrophic in the future. That is why he must not be allowed to succeed. We hackers must win.

Sorry Armstrong is incorrect on this one. The solution going forward are decentralization technologies that render government dissolved, i.e. decentralized block chain technology, end-to-end principle which puts the smarts at the edge of the network and makes intermediaries dumb relays, open source, etc..

http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-dawn-of-trustworthy-computing.html
(Nick Szabo, the man who described Bitcoin before Satoshi invented it)

P.S. I agree any unifying theory must explain all matter with the same theory, not inventing a new special theory for each new type discovered.

Wait a minute, you misunderstand me i said completely decentralized voting ,not decentralized voting with centralized ideas.
In the current parliamentary system you only get ideas put before the P if the politicians want it. Heck you cant even draft your own laws and put it before the parliament so that they can vote it, only the members can.

I actually meant completely decentralized voting, meaning that anyone could draft laws and then put it before this decentralized network, and then the network would vote about it.If they vote it, then it becomes actual law, if they reject it then it will be rejected, and anytime he can put it back modified, and require another voting session.

It would not be hard to code it, using bitcoin network technology it would be very easy, the hard would be to convince the population to use this legistative system and not the parliament which is full of bribed thugs.

I see no drawback of this, nobody can bribe nobody here, everyone would have equal opportunities to participate in politics, and also it would dissolve political parties and make people more individualistic, which is alot better as political parties are really corrupt.

[contagion]

I actually meant completely decentralized voting, meaning that anyone could draft laws and then put it before this decentralized network, and then the network would vote about it.If they vote it, then it becomes actual law, if they reject it then it will be rejected, and anytime he can put it back modified, and require another voting session.

You still haven't gotten CoinCube's and my point upthread, that if the entropic mutation rate is too high no order converges.

You'd end up with chaos and the voters would tune out.

Always you will need competition amongst leaders, because only leaders can filter the noise and present people with coherent choices that are manageable. Who will decide which proposals go out to all voters? You see you are always back to the same generative essence dilemma. My IQ is very good at dissecting the root essence of something. I visualize instantly that which takes other people many discussions and examples back and forth to finally realize.

You are essentially trying to defeat the principle of the maximum division of labor, by forcing every person to be an expert at everything and be involved in the details of everything.

Only the decentralized leaders paradigms I suggested will really move humanity to a new paradigm in social organization.

[youngmike]

[CoinCube]

OTOH, government is the most egregious human trafficker, bribing our women (with inequality employment laws, welfare, subsidizing hypergamy, and divorce battering ram) to ignore men forsaking child rearing (birth rates have collapsed in Western nations where government is > 50% of the economy) and conscripting our men to kill each other in silly wars.

http://blog.jim.com/economics/the-future-belongs-to-those-that-show-up/

This is more likely the result of the widespread use of contraceptives.

Beginning in the 1960s, the Japanese used more condoms per capita than any other nation in the world.

Is H7N9 the next pandemic?

Armstrong's highly accurate cyclic computer models predict the peak of a global pandemic to occur in 2019.

Most pandemics occur when a pathogen jumps a species barrier to a new host (humans) that are not adapted to it. Such a process should be random and follow a Poisson distribution. The expected time between pandemics should therefore follow an exponential distribution. I am skeptical of the validity of a cyclical model predicting a definitive pandemic date.

[contagion]

OTOH, government is the most egregious human trafficker, bribing our women (with inequality employment laws, welfare, subsidizing hypergamy, and divorce battering ram) to ignore men forsaking child rearing (birth rates have collapsed in Western nations where government is > 50% of the economy) and conscripting our men to kill each other in silly wars.

http://blog.jim.com/economics/the-future-belongs-to-those-that-show-up/
http://blog.jim.com/images/JapanFert4.png

This is more likely the result of the widespread use of contraceptives.

Beginning in the 1960s, the Japanese used more condoms per capita than any other nation in the world.

You are citing the obvious first-order effect and not the generative essence. What leads to massive use of contraceptives? It is when women are supported by the State so they don't have to worry about who is going to provide for them (they State even legislating them to receive preferential treatment in school, workforce, and marriage), so they can have affairs with bad boy losers and use contraceptives with their enslaved, good boy beta-male husbands so they force their slaves to financially support the children he didn't know he didn't procreate.

Women have a strong preference for hypergamy. It is only the reality of the market that they can't support themselves that causes them to behave and serve a man to raise a family. When the State removes the effects of the free market and attempts to establish women as equal to men (which they are not), then fertility and society collapse. Watch 2016 onwards the horrific outcome...

The high genius Eric S. Raymond has written extensively about this on his blog, esr.ibiblio.org. He explains it better than my summary above.

Is H7N9 the next pandemic?

Armstrong's highly accurate cyclic computer models predict the peak of a global pandemic to occur in 2019.

Most pandemics occur when a pathogen jumps a species barrier to a new host (humans) that are not adapted to it. Such a process should be random and follow a Poisson distribution. The expected time between pandemics should therefore follow an exponential distribution. I am skeptical of the validity of a cyclical model predicting a definitive pandemic date.

The Poisson distribution is the Binomial distribution at the limit of infinity, so the trials must be independent:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisson_distribution#Related_distributions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution

Armstrong says the random walk hypothesis is bullshit and the events of life are not independent random variables:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/18/deep-learning-analytics-v-random-walk/

It is not likely random because I explained how it was likely man's economy that caused the Black Death, because of the overconcentration of fleas and squalor in proximity to humans, because over the overpopulation meant less than a subsistence wage for agriculture meant the Industrial Age did not occur yet meant that squalor was worse (e.g. no plumbing and sewers yet population was exploding and getting too dense). And now we have overconcentration of domesticated fowl in proximity to humans and neither of them have immunity to the viruses carried by the wild fowl (and other species).

Have you looked at the overcrowded, inhumane way we farm raise poultry and other farm animals?

http://www.seattleorganicrestaurants.com/vegan-whole-foods/images/chicken-in-cages.jpghttp://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6-MLwIpO5gQ/TrjOdA6RSMI/AAAAAAAAAD8/k0evfzu5k54/s320/chickens-4.jpg
http://www.green-blog.org/media/images/uploads/2010/07/factoryfarming11_thumb.jpghttp://www.green-blog.org/media/images/uploads/2010/07/factoryfarming7_thumb.jpg

You see man's economy was the driving force that required changes. The Black Death reduced the population, which allowed agricultural wages to increase above subsistence, which allowed investment and ingenuity to be more diverse and thus lead to the Industrial Revolution, which thus reduced the squalor.

Please read my posts more carefully. I already had stated (or implied) all of that. Thanks though for raising the issue so I could clarify.

[contagion]

I actually meant completely decentralized voting, meaning that anyone could draft laws and then put it before this decentralized network, and then the network would vote about it.If they vote it, then it becomes actual law, if they reject it then it will be rejected, and anytime he can put it back modified, and require another voting session.

You still haven't gotten CoinCube's and my point upthread, that if the entropic mutation rate is too high no order converges.

You'd end up with chaos and the voters would tune out.

Always you will need competition amongst leaders, because only leaders can filter the noise and present people with coherent choices that are manageable. Who will decide which proposals go out to all voters? You see you are always back to the same generative essence dilemma. My IQ is very good at dissecting the root essence of something. I visualize instantly that which takes other people many discussions and examples back and forth to finally realize.

You are essentially trying to defeat the principle of the maximum division of labor, by forcing every person to be an expert at everything and be involved in the details of everything.

Only the decentralized leaders paradigms I suggested will really move humanity to a new paradigm in social organization.

Armstrong replied to me.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/21/people-v-leaders/

Each proposal first needs to get 100,000 signatures to be put on the ballot. It is  not total chaos. There is structure. The key is that you do not have 50 things that would never stand alone stuffed into a bill.

Centralizing structure controlled by the vested interests who control the mass media and monetary system and can fund the mass movements.

Armstrong doesn't understand that reputation is always centralizing. He doesn't understand that voting is not a decentralization paradigm. Voting doesn't solve the The Byzantine Generals' Problem of how to achieve consensus without trust (without reputation). Voting is a reputation paradigm, and thus centralizing.

Sorry Armstrong is a dangerous man when it comes to politics, because he simply can't wrap his mind around what I wrote last above about the maximum division-of-labor. Humans who can't understand details form their decisions based around trust and reputation. And who do they trust? Right now the US DOLLAR!!! And it will be the same in the future with Armstrong's brain dead idea for direct voting.

And he can not comprehend what decentralized leadership means. And how it enables paradigm shifts. I guess he doesn't understand that the green line in the following chart is a paradigm shift, because the competitors had walled gardens and not open systems.

http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/chart32-640x429.jpg

You see decentralized paradigms such as proof-of-work decentralized consensus (without voting), end-to-end principle, and open source enable decentralized leaders to compete.

I guess Armstrong forgets that he himself wrote that the best outcomes in history have been often from benevolent dictators such as Caesar who crossed the Rubicon and did the reform that saved from Rome of a debt collapse (until he was murdered). The distinction is that with anonymity and decentralized technologies, the bad folks can't find the leaders and thus can't kill them. Voila!

Then in his rebuttal of me, Armstrong proceeds to create a strawman non-argument:

We do not NEED perpetual life-time leaders, kings, or pretend elected officials. This is just nonsense.

Hey Armstrong can you read? I wrote decentralized leaders competing with each other in a free market to serve the people. Not one size fits all. Constant competition pitting paradigm shifts against market inertia.

Duh!

Somebody please hand Marty a red pill.

Sorry Martin. As astute as you are on A.I. programming, cycles, and market analysis, you are naive and unenlightened on the generative essence of political economy.

And I have run out of time to explain it to you. Now is time for action, not words.

Thanks for all your great work and sharing. I do appreciate it. I wish you weren't such a hard-headed obstinate fool on this issue.

[contagion]

Armtrong is Missing the Big Technological Paradigm Shift Underway Since 2011!

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/21/will-the-hang-bankers-again-on-wall-street/

Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon because of the corrupt bankers in the Senate and the people cheered him as the bankers fled to Asia.

One a time scale, the Panic of 1896 came 13 years into that 51.6 year wave. Relating this to the current wave that began with the formation of G5 in 1985, that brought us to 1998 and the first bailout of Long-Term Capital Management. Then 26 years into that wave brought us to 1908. It was the 1907 Crash that shifted the focus from the Railroad to the Industrial Age. Currently, 26 years into this wave brought us to 2011 and the peak in all commodities from gold to oil. This has marked the beginning of the Euro Crisis with the first crack in 2010 being Greece.

Armstrong is missing the shift to the Knowledge Age that began just before 2011 when someone bought a pizza with 10,000 Bitcoins:

http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-pizza-day-celebrating-pizza-bought-10000-btc/

He is missing the massive paradigm shift underway with the decentralized technologies underway.

This will be his major mistake of his lifetime. Mark my word!

Marty are you listening? You better be. Your clients are going to miss the opportunity of a lifetime. 3X gains in the USA stock market and then hounded by global confiscation of gains, versus 100X gain in decentralized technologies.

The OP is that knowledge can't be financed and the future capital is knowledge. People won't save in money, they will save (invest) in (their own) knowledge (e.g. their software projects, etc). Money will be a language for directing knowledge resources to where knowledge can develop the fastest in the maximum division-of-labor. Those who value knowledge will refuse to accept the debased language that was used to misallocate knowledge resources with debt, because they will find they can't invest knowledge resources with it, i.e. the audience of that form of money are the lazy people with less knowledge to bear.

Unlike fiat of yore backed by gold or promises of State order, the knowledge age has no use for open-ended promises that could be hidden in fractional reserves and instead wants immediately incremental conversion of the money language into knowledge production.

Thus fractional reserves will become impossible.  The fractional reserves will concentrate into the dumbest sector of the economy and that sector will fall away into an abyss. This is exactly what I expect to happen going forward in this coming global crisis.

And that is why anonymity is critical.

[contagion]

Time To Sign Off From This Form. Adios Todos Amigos! Love ya.

The shit is hitting the fan in 2015. There is no more time for words:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/20/coming-emerging-market-debt-meltdown/

[bigtimespaghetti]

Gonna really miss anonymint's musings.

[farfiman]

Gonna really miss anonymint's musings.

He'll be back ....