Taxation is so much more than simple act of theft, of course. It is a violent act of robbery done with the approval of those, who believe will benefit from that theft.
As to being selfish and/or prick, those are absolutely inalienable human rights and very important once, especially so since the very definitions of 'selfish' an 'prick' are political terms and if we deny people rights because of their different views on politics and policy then we cannot in the same breath start moralizing about virtue. Using violence to deny human rights and praising virtue.... how hypocritical and hypocricy is the real corruption of the mind.
Words are everything, if you point at an act of violence and call it justice, then you can sell violence to people under the banner of justice and people who would otherwise not be on your side in that way now can participate in the violence with you without even understanding what they are involved in.
So words are everything, words supply meaning to actions.
What does it mean in practice? In practice it means exactly as I said, more violence against individuals, fewer private property rights, more government overreach and bigger power of the state over the individual.
So called 'positive rights' are entitlements that require that governments strips rights from some people in order to provide those 'free' entitlements to others. However I disagree fundamentally that the so called 'net neutrality' is a right (or a 'negative right' as you put it).
Net Neutrality is an entitlement, where people are trying to use force of government to strip rights from individual ISPs to shape their traffic on their networks the way they see fit. This is destructive to the competition, this is destructive to the actual human rights, this means giving more power to already overbearing government monopoly on violence. There are no 'rights' there at all.
If I build a private network and sell connectivity to my network I set my rules and then a government starts mandating how I provide the said connectivity, that I cannot come up with my own rules and ways to provide the service, that's stripping my rights as a private property owner from me by the violence of the state, that is not a right, that's the exact opposite of a right. Some people are more equal than others, ha?
I, on the other hand, want to see veterans get their revolutionary prosthetics, so that the veterans without arms could finally have a middle finger they could give to the government that sent them to die and get maimed into wars that should never have been started in the first place. Obama needs a collective middle finger and the largest hose up his ass for anal rehydration, so does Bush with Cheney and Rummsfeld and Clinton too, by the way for Yugoslavia and almost all these ass wipes who mess with other people's countries instead of following the ideas that USA was founded upon, like trading with people instead of meddling in their internal affairs.
Yes, and this shark jumping happened more than a hundred years back now. From Sherman Antitrust Act and the 'private' bank known as the Federal reserve that creates fake dollars out of thin air and IRS collecting illegal income taxes illegally and FBI and SS and Medicare and minimum wage and EPA and FDA, and departments of 'education', energy, housing, commerce and interior and more, to defaulting on the gold dollar and destroying the value of money (around the world actually, since the others were relying on the dollar to be reserve and dollar itself no longer had any backing itself once Nixon defaulted on the gold promise).
Basically USA jumped the shark when it gave up on individual liberties and started building a gigantic government machine for the sake of propping up giant companies and the empire.
Oh, it worked fine for Alan Turing but even he had Keira... I mean Joan Clarke in his team, ading a woman to the team, brilliant. If only the British had this type of quality research back then... they could have solved that enigma even faster. All they needed was replace Turing and a couple of other guys with some females and BAM, could have figured that problem out in a month.
You are forgetting something very conveniently, namely taxes. Maybe your reply is that majority of people do not actually pay taxes, the very poor do not and the very rich also find ways to avoid as much as possible on the personal level. However all taxes are paid by the employers, all taxes come from business revenues. People don't recognise this reality as such, but without businesses there can be no wealth generated (more than necessary for a primitive barely self sustaining society of subsistence farmers, hunters/gatherers) and no taxes paid.
I actually argue that corruption costs less than taxes in total cost of having a government system at all. It is cheaper and faster to deal with a corrupt, bribe expecting gate keeper of a politician than to have this 'civilised society' with enough red tape that basically created the poverty, the situation that so few people actually run their own businesses.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"
I take it it is not self evident to you that pursuit of happiness among equals means among people that are equal under law and nothing else? Yet here you are proposing that some are not equal under law to others, that there should be laws that apply differently because some, who are not you, built and are running services that you want to purchase, they have done so without any laws that you now want to see implemented to limit their freedom. You do not want tocompete with them, you want to enslave their work to your terms.
As far as I am concerned every single (without exception) thing that governments do end up hurting me because every single thing that governments do impede upon individual freedom for self determination and ability to attempt and improve individual conditions.
No, governments should not be able to violate laws, like private property rights. This means eminent domain cannot exist, this means government cannot be allowed to intervene between any parties signing a contract, this means there can be no business or labour or money regulations.
At most government can be allowed to police borders and search for murderers and rapists and isolate them. But even these functions lead to ever greater government with more and more power that it should not have.
It is not a religion, it is an ideology of individual freedom from tyranny and from oppression. 2 or more wrongs do not make a right. Destroying more freedom now, because other freedoms were already destroyed earlier does not make a better society. Instead government needs to be abolished, 99% of what it does need to be abolished.
The only way to get a wealthy and ready qnd able to withstand long term difficulties society is not to shackle individuals in it with the chains of the murderous will of the mob. Individuals are capable and smart and may even be brilliant in pursuit of their own happiness on their own terms but the mob is none of that. Decisions made by individuals have an impact on them and on a limited surrounding circle,decisions imposed by the mob have impact upon the entire society at the expense of brilliance, wealth, inventiveness, long term health of the society.
Governments must not be allowed to stand in the way of development of society but today many equate governments and society, while the reality is that governments steal power, wealth, health of society and the benefits of this theft are limited to very few very well connected individuals.
Being one of those connected individuals is great for them, but the society is diminished and empoverished because of unequal treatment.
Switzerland just cut its losses and depegged from Euro, basically it left the Euro zone unilaterally, well, this is the first correct move by a central bank (since 1981 Volker's 21.5% interest rate) in a long time. This is a call to action. Large governments fail and the larger the government the more spectacular the failure. It is an example that applies here as well. Yes, horrible things were done, eminent domain for example, but do not compoune the error, cut your losses and cut the reason of the problem, shut down most of the government, kill all business a d labour laws, kill income related taxes, yoh have to cut losses and return to the idea and ideology of individual freedom. It built the most wealthy manufacturer bases (I do not like the word 'countries' or 'nations', they imply group ownership as opposed to individual freedom), ever in history of humanity. It took a long time to destroy that wealth in the USA, the momentum was so great, momentum built in the 19th century and dissipated in the 20th.
If there is an ideology in the idea that free people in their own pursuit of happiness will build better anx wealthier societies than what is done in systems domina
Why? On a number of occasions I completely avoided a traffic ticket by refusing to talk to the cop. Regardless of what he said I was silent, not looking at him even. Eventually (3 cases) they give up and leave.
Isn't it interesting, Churchill was a fan of H.G. Wells, Churchill was fighting against Nazism, the interesting bit is that H.G. Wells was a socialist fascist, he was arguing for a Nazi version of socialism rather than the Marxist version. Marxist version of socialism is international socialism and Nazi version is purely national version, where one socialist nation becomes the de facto ruler. Nazis realised that Marxism was impossible to implement and that the only way that socialism could work for one particular nation was if everybody else was ruled by them, basically turning to open slavery where the modern version of socialism is using a 'hidden' version of slavery, such that it is not other nations or races that are enslaved, it is classes - the wealthier you are, the more you are enslaved by those who are poorer than you.
Governments are mafia and they do break legs and kidnap and murder people. Legislation? Nice business you have here, too bad something should happen to it. Blocking government from harassing private people is fighting for freedom of the individuals. What we have here is private people (uber) fighting for the rights of private people (drivers, customers) and mafia thugs (government) performing highway robbery (literally) and some thoughtless commenter (you) cheering on the side of the mafia.
Governments are outdated now, they are a concept that proved itself to be detrimental for individual liberty and they need to be denied power uber style. If everybody refuses paying the mafia its tribute, mafia will not have its power and it should be denied power.
Buying a new phone, 50 aud or so? New credit card is probably free and whatever the other costs are...
Having a government official recognized and blocked by a private corporation (by private person really)... priceless. Just priceless. All governments should be blocked by everybody, the besy way to stop government oppression is to stop participating in it. If everybody stops participating in the system actively, governments will have no power and they should be denied power.
So USA then? 19th century USA - pretty much no government to speak of (of-course the war was started to prove otherwise), no income related taxes, no business regulation, a growing economy, the country became largest producer of manufactured goods in the world, USA became biggest exporter and thus biggest creditor nation on the planet Earth, and that is only a few decades after being a debtor nation and a mere afterthought to Europe.
Then of-course all the wealth created the welfare state, destroyed freedoms and now it is becoming a military dictatorship.
My point is that the time of no government and maximum individual freedom is the time when we build maximum prosperity. Sure, we should want to maximise prosperity, but my point is also that we should have maximum individual freedom regardless of prosperity that it brings.
Should there be a structure to occupy space of government that prevents other structures like this from forming? I am no longer convinced that it is a necessity, I think with globalization, global communications, global travel, global businesses it's becoming less of a factor and eventually we will end up (I think we will) with a system that has no central governments. Sure, there will be smaller municipal governments but the central governments will lose their role in the global society, and that's a good thing, not a bad one. But before it happens there will be a huge crash and the governments will lose their credibility.
We had various bubbles and crashes and the incoming crash will be a crash of government. We have a huge bubble inflated in people trusting governments and people relying on governments, this bubble will burst and that's great, of-course it will be a painful transition, which is often the case with transitions, but it's for the best, so good luck to you.
I am completely opposed to all taxes and to all forms of government, including dictatorships and democracies, which as a matter of fact are also dictatorships, except it's impossible to oust the dictator.
You make money based on how much money you make for someone else, or how hard your position is to fill. But we won't spend money just because something is important; like teachers or quality infrastructure or mitigating climate change or whatever.
- if it's "important", then you'll be able to make money by doing it. If it's not important, you won't. AFAIC if something is actually important there is money to be made in it because there is a voluntary transaction somewhere there.
If something is not important to me I don't want to have my money stolen from me so your idea of 'important' can be realised while I have a barrel of a gun pointed at my head by the government. So no, if your country priorities are out of whack that is not the reason for it.
Overpopulation? Please, we are trying to build AI to solve that insignificant problem. On a serious note life extending technology has to be paid for by somebody and governments around the world are mostly working on improving stealing and murdering technologies.
I hope these guys succeed and it becomes possible to purchase some of what they may find in this research.
I suppose we should also give some computer a vagina/clitoris attachment, otherwise the computers will just decide to get rid of all human males unless some of the AI become GAI...
Yes, people are sometimes ruled by their glands. Maybe to provide motivation a computer will need a penis attachment and then have a random event thrown, that causes the computer to 'get hard' and have a feedback mechanism, that 'rewards' the computer if it 'gets some'. This is how motivation vector can be added to an AI and then, what you are saying is that 'we are all screwed'? So why not make AI WANT people as opposed to 'wanting to destroy' people?;)
I don't want any POTUS propose anything in the first place, it's not his job, it's Congress that is supposed to push bills and beyond that governments are not supposed to regulate any businesses or individuals in the first place. It's not a job that you would want a government to do, to regulate business decisions, that's the entire purpose of a free market and the reason the modern economies are going to hell is because there is no free market left, it's all regulated, monopolised by government laws and rules and competition is destroyed. This populous, sheeple intended idea by the POTUS will only help to destroy the economy further.
What a dumbass comment. Hey, dumbass, ever seen mothers looking after their families? If it were not for their grit many more kids would end up in jail and or dead.
Slashdot Mirror
So what they want to do is pump the value of BTC up so they can dump their 'largest holding of bitcoin'.
Taxation is so much more than simple act of theft, of course. It is a violent act of robbery done with the approval of those, who believe will benefit from that theft.
As to being selfish and/or prick, those are absolutely inalienable human rights and very important once, especially so since the very definitions of 'selfish' an 'prick' are political terms and if we deny people rights because of their different views on politics and policy then we cannot in the same breath start moralizing about virtue. Using violence to deny human rights and praising virtue.... how hypocritical and hypocricy is the real corruption of the mind.
Words are everything, if you point at an act of violence and call it justice, then you can sell violence to people under the banner of justice and people who would otherwise not be on your side in that way now can participate in the violence with you without even understanding what they are involved in.
So words are everything, words supply meaning to actions.
What does it mean in practice? In practice it means exactly as I said, more violence against individuals, fewer private property rights, more government overreach and bigger power of the state over the individual.
So called 'positive rights' are entitlements that require that governments strips rights from some people in order to provide those 'free' entitlements to others. However I disagree fundamentally that the so called 'net neutrality' is a right (or a 'negative right' as you put it).
Net Neutrality is an entitlement, where people are trying to use force of government to strip rights from individual ISPs to shape their traffic on their networks the way they see fit. This is destructive to the competition, this is destructive to the actual human rights, this means giving more power to already overbearing government monopoly on violence. There are no 'rights' there at all.
If I build a private network and sell connectivity to my network I set my rules and then a government starts mandating how I provide the said connectivity, that I cannot come up with my own rules and ways to provide the service, that's stripping my rights as a private property owner from me by the violence of the state, that is not a right, that's the exact opposite of a right. Some people are more equal than others, ha?
Science is not the only thing that does not work by democracy, very few things actually work by democracy.
Building a better car doesn't work by democracy.
Economics doesn't work by democracy.
A wealthy and healthy society doesn't work by democracy.
An individual is smart, a mob is made of idiotic, selfish, panicky, stupid animals and that's somehow is supposed to produce better results? Ha!
I, on the other hand, want to see veterans get their revolutionary prosthetics, so that the veterans without arms could finally have a middle finger they could give to the government that sent them to die and get maimed into wars that should never have been started in the first place. Obama needs a collective middle finger and the largest hose up his ass for anal rehydration, so does Bush with Cheney and Rummsfeld and Clinton too, by the way for Yugoslavia and almost all these ass wipes who mess with other people's countries instead of following the ideas that USA was founded upon, like trading with people instead of meddling in their internal affairs.
Yes, and this shark jumping happened more than a hundred years back now. From Sherman Antitrust Act and the 'private' bank known as the Federal reserve that creates fake dollars out of thin air and IRS collecting illegal income taxes illegally and FBI and SS and Medicare and minimum wage and EPA and FDA, and departments of 'education', energy, housing, commerce and interior and more, to defaulting on the gold dollar and destroying the value of money (around the world actually, since the others were relying on the dollar to be reserve and dollar itself no longer had any backing itself once Nixon defaulted on the gold promise).
Basically USA jumped the shark when it gave up on individual liberties and started building a gigantic government machine for the sake of propping up giant companies and the empire.
Oh, it worked fine for Alan Turing but even he had Keira... I mean Joan Clarke in his team, ading a woman to the team, brilliant. If only the British had this type of quality research back then... they could have solved that enigma even faster. All they needed was replace Turing and a couple of other guys with some females and BAM, could have figured that problem out in a month.
You are forgetting something very conveniently, namely taxes. Maybe your reply is that majority of people do not actually pay taxes, the very poor do not and the very rich also find ways to avoid as much as possible on the personal level. However all taxes are paid by the employers, all taxes come from business revenues. People don't recognise this reality as such, but without businesses there can be no wealth generated (more than necessary for a primitive barely self sustaining society of subsistence farmers, hunters/gatherers) and no taxes paid.
I actually argue that corruption costs less than taxes in total cost of having a government system at all. It is cheaper and faster to deal with a corrupt, bribe expecting gate keeper of a politician than to have this 'civilised society' with enough red tape that basically created the poverty, the situation that so few people actually run their own businesses.
Wrong. I can even say that a man is what a man does.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"
I take it it is not self evident to you that pursuit of happiness among equals means among people that are equal under law and nothing else? Yet here you are proposing that some are not equal under law to others, that there should be laws that apply differently because some, who are not you, built and are running services that you want to purchase, they have done so without any laws that you now want to see implemented to limit their freedom. You do not want tocompete with them, you want to enslave their work to your terms.
As far as I am concerned every single (without exception) thing that governments do end up hurting me because every single thing that governments do impede upon individual freedom for self determination and ability to attempt and improve individual conditions.
No, governments should not be able to violate laws, like private property rights. This means eminent domain cannot exist, this means government cannot be allowed to intervene between any parties signing a contract, this means there can be no business or labour or money regulations.
At most government can be allowed to police borders and search for murderers and rapists and isolate them. But even these functions lead to ever greater government with more and more power that it should not have.
It is not a religion, it is an ideology of individual freedom from tyranny and from oppression. 2 or more wrongs do not make a right. Destroying more freedom now, because other freedoms were already destroyed earlier does not make a better society. Instead government needs to be abolished, 99% of what it does need to be abolished.
The only way to get a wealthy and ready qnd able to withstand long term difficulties society is not to shackle individuals in it with the chains of the murderous will of the mob. Individuals are capable and smart and may even be brilliant in pursuit of their own happiness on their own terms but the mob is none of that. Decisions made by individuals have an impact on them and on a limited surrounding circle,decisions imposed by the mob have impact upon the entire society at the expense of brilliance, wealth, inventiveness, long term health of the society.
Governments must not be allowed to stand in the way of development of society but today many equate governments and society, while the reality is that governments steal power, wealth, health of society and the benefits of this theft are limited to very few very well connected individuals.
Being one of those connected individuals is great for them, but the society is diminished and empoverished because of unequal treatment.
Switzerland just cut its losses and depegged from Euro, basically it left the Euro zone unilaterally, well, this is the first correct move by a central bank (since 1981 Volker's 21.5% interest rate) in a long time. This is a call to action. Large governments fail and the larger the government the more spectacular the failure. It is an example that applies here as well. Yes, horrible things were done, eminent domain for example, but do not compoune the error, cut your losses and cut the reason of the problem, shut down most of the government, kill all business a d labour laws, kill income related taxes, yoh have to cut losses and return to the idea and ideology of individual freedom. It built the most wealthy manufacturer bases (I do not like the word 'countries' or 'nations', they imply group ownership as opposed to individual freedom), ever in history of humanity. It took a long time to destroy that wealth in the USA, the momentum was so great, momentum built in the 19th century and dissipated in the 20th.
If there is an ideology in the idea that free people in their own pursuit of happiness will build better anx wealthier societies than what is done in systems domina
Why? On a number of occasions I completely avoided a traffic ticket by refusing to talk to the cop. Regardless of what he said I was silent, not looking at him even. Eventually (3 cases) they give up and leave.
Yo, dawg, I heard you like your metadata, so we put metadata into your metadata, so you can metadatabase while you metadatabase.
We are considering another layer of it now.
Isn't it interesting, Churchill was a fan of H.G. Wells, Churchill was fighting against Nazism, the interesting bit is that H.G. Wells was a socialist fascist, he was arguing for a Nazi version of socialism rather than the Marxist version. Marxist version of socialism is international socialism and Nazi version is purely national version, where one socialist nation becomes the de facto ruler. Nazis realised that Marxism was impossible to implement and that the only way that socialism could work for one particular nation was if everybody else was ruled by them, basically turning to open slavery where the modern version of socialism is using a 'hidden' version of slavery, such that it is not other nations or races that are enslaved, it is classes - the wealthier you are, the more you are enslaved by those who are poorer than you.
Just an interesting tidbit.
It is an armed drone government, get your technology right. They don't man their equipment anymore.
Government is the 'AI' that is trying to destroy people by killing the humanity in them, not computers, regardless what Musk or Hawking say.
Governments are mafia and they do break legs and kidnap and murder people. Legislation? Nice business you have here, too bad something should happen to it. Blocking government from harassing private people is fighting for freedom of the individuals. What we have here is private people (uber) fighting for the rights of private people (drivers, customers) and mafia thugs (government) performing highway robbery (literally) and some thoughtless commenter (you) cheering on the side of the mafia.
Governments are outdated now, they are a concept that proved itself to be detrimental for individual liberty and they need to be denied power uber style. If everybody refuses paying the mafia its tribute, mafia will not have its power and it should be denied power.
Buying a new phone, 50 aud or so? New credit card is probably free and whatever the other costs are...
Having a government official recognized and blocked by a private corporation (by private person really)... priceless. Just priceless. All governments should be blocked by everybody, the besy way to stop government oppression is to stop participating in it. If everybody stops participating in the system actively, governments will have no power and they should be denied power.
So USA then? 19th century USA - pretty much no government to speak of (of-course the war was started to prove otherwise), no income related taxes, no business regulation, a growing economy, the country became largest producer of manufactured goods in the world, USA became biggest exporter and thus biggest creditor nation on the planet Earth, and that is only a few decades after being a debtor nation and a mere afterthought to Europe.
Then of-course all the wealth created the welfare state, destroyed freedoms and now it is becoming a military dictatorship.
My point is that the time of no government and maximum individual freedom is the time when we build maximum prosperity. Sure, we should want to maximise prosperity, but my point is also that we should have maximum individual freedom regardless of prosperity that it brings.
Should there be a structure to occupy space of government that prevents other structures like this from forming? I am no longer convinced that it is a necessity, I think with globalization, global communications, global travel, global businesses it's becoming less of a factor and eventually we will end up (I think we will) with a system that has no central governments. Sure, there will be smaller municipal governments but the central governments will lose their role in the global society, and that's a good thing, not a bad one. But before it happens there will be a huge crash and the governments will lose their credibility.
We had various bubbles and crashes and the incoming crash will be a crash of government. We have a huge bubble inflated in people trusting governments and people relying on governments, this bubble will burst and that's great, of-course it will be a painful transition, which is often the case with transitions, but it's for the best, so good luck to you.
I am completely opposed to all taxes and to all forms of government, including dictatorships and democracies, which as a matter of fact are also dictatorships, except it's impossible to oust the dictator.
You make money based on how much money you make for someone else, or how hard your position is to fill. But we won't spend money just because something is important; like teachers or quality infrastructure or mitigating climate change or whatever.
- if it's "important", then you'll be able to make money by doing it. If it's not important, you won't. AFAIC if something is actually important there is money to be made in it because there is a voluntary transaction somewhere there.
If something is not important to me I don't want to have my money stolen from me so your idea of 'important' can be realised while I have a barrel of a gun pointed at my head by the government. So no, if your country priorities are out of whack that is not the reason for it.
Overpopulation? Please, we are trying to build AI to solve that insignificant problem. On a serious note life extending technology has to be paid for by somebody and governments around the world are mostly working on improving stealing and murdering technologies.
I hope these guys succeed and it becomes possible to purchase some of what they may find in this research.
I suppose we should also give some computer a vagina/clitoris attachment, otherwise the computers will just decide to get rid of all human males unless some of the AI become GAI...
Yes, people are sometimes ruled by their glands. Maybe to provide motivation a computer will need a penis attachment and then have a random event thrown, that causes the computer to 'get hard' and have a feedback mechanism, that 'rewards' the computer if it 'gets some'. This is how motivation vector can be added to an AI and then, what you are saying is that 'we are all screwed'? So why not make AI WANT people as opposed to 'wanting to destroy' people? ;)
I don't want any POTUS propose anything in the first place, it's not his job, it's Congress that is supposed to push bills and beyond that governments are not supposed to regulate any businesses or individuals in the first place. It's not a job that you would want a government to do, to regulate business decisions, that's the entire purpose of a free market and the reason the modern economies are going to hell is because there is no free market left, it's all regulated, monopolised by government laws and rules and competition is destroyed. This populous, sheeple intended idea by the POTUS will only help to destroy the economy further.
What a dumbass comment. Hey, dumbass, ever seen mothers looking after their families? If it were not for their grit many more kids would end up in jail and or dead.