Devaluation isn't possible in deflationary currency. Devaluation only occurs in inflationary currency.
The reason why BitCoin is working in China is because people don't want to be beholden to externally manipulated currencies and rapid devaluation. By moving their wealth to deflationary currency, they are taking a buy/hold approach to wealth accumulation. And wealthy people cannot be controlled.
Guess what my prediction is for China? It tries to ban (make illegal) and confiscates BitCoin (and other Crypto Currencies) from its people.
I'm in IT, and people often ask me about CryptoViruses, I basically tell them, use GoogleDrive, OneDrive, Box, DropBox or any number of other "cloud" based systems, and back their important shit up. Also, get a External Drive and back up (and take offline) their shit to that too. I tell them, if your computer Hard Drive died tomorrow, what would you lose? The same is true for CryptoVirusus, only that is more likely these days.
The fact is, too many people don't want the inconvenience of backing their shit up, or doesn't even know to do it.
As a deflationary currency, we wouldn't need social Security or other "retirement" programs. The people who work earn currency, and save it, deflation rate becomes a savings incentive, and wealth building. The down side, is that accumulated wealth of deflationary currency tends to not work (velocity of currency) where debt based currency does.
My view, is that it is much easier to control debt riddled people than those that own their own wealth.
No News is an accurate source of information. Only source of information is raw data that is unfiltered by biased people, allowing me to apply my own filters as I see fit. Raw unfiltered data is accurate, and meaning is applied only after we put our own bias on it.
Once you realize this, then you can actually expand your worldview in such a way to minimize your own bias, and stop seeing things in binary (R) vs (D), Conservative vs Liberal, MSM vs Faux News.
Take the Gorilla story (not right vs left), I didn't hear about it until well afterwards. And the initial reports I heard was that a busy mom lost sight of her kid for just a moment, who crawled over a fence and fell down into the cage. And the heartbreak of a dead Gorilla. Then I saw the various "Should have saved the Gorilla" and "Mom wasn't at fault" to "irresponsible zoo" to "irresponsible mom". And having all that "filtered" by media, and people with agenda's I came to an early conclusion. That being said, the more I've looked into (not much, but a little), I heard that there were three barriers between the public, and the Gorilla (don't know if that is true), I've heard it happened very quickly. Now, those two things are not related (IMHO, my bias) so, something isn't fitting here.
I've heard Gorilla experts say, that the Gorilla was a "wild creature and dangerous, needing to be killed to save the kid" and "Gorilla was protecting the scared child in a Gorilla sort of way". Again, two opposite things. I am 100% sure that both opinions are of pure intention, but only one of them can be right, and both can be wrong.
I don't know gorillas, and I don't know the kid or the parents. The only conclusion I can come to, is that it was a tragedy. It could have ended in another kind of tragedy or in a way that everyone would be "happier" about. Any "opinion" I might have is actually irrelevant.
And you know what? My view would have pulled the story from the airwaves about 30 minutes after it hit. But that doesn't drive ratings! MUST DIVIDE AND CREATE CONTROVERSY!!!!
The capital is being sucked up by financial institutions, and accumulating there. It is also being held captive overseas. The problem isn't the supply, it is velocity. And until people realize that when the government is confiscating wealth (via taxes), the situation isn't going to change.
I have a solution that would greatly increase velocity, but conservatives wouldn't like it, and liberal/socialist would hate it, because it would require actual responsibility and not kicking the can down the road to the next President/Congress is elected.
So, instead of having depression (correction) every 25 years, we have a banking system bailout by the Federal Government every... 25... years.
The only difference is, those responsible don't lose money now. And you seem to think this is better.
I have seen three such "corrections" in my 52 years on this planet. This last one, has lasted nearly 14 years (started after 9/11) by my reckoning. The economy is stagnate, and unresponsive.
The Fed is not the Federal Government. It is a private banking system. This is a common misunderstanding.
The Debt (Federal) is a function of spending and taxes. Increasing the debt is a function of the House of Representatives and the President, with the Senate in a consent role. These debts are covered by bonds issued to private people.
What is really happening (IMHO) is that The Fed loans money out at 0% (or near that) and those people buy up the Federal Debt Bonds at whatever the going rate is. It doesn't matter how much debt is issued, if you can borrow money to buy it, and you'll always be making a profit, even if it is very small. The Fed can't raise Interest, without exposing this problem, and so we're stuck in this cycle.
Yes, the debt has doubled under Obama and the Republicans, and is more than likely to double again in the next 8 years (Clinton/Sanders/Trump). It doesn't matter which of the two irresponsible parties are in office, which is why it isn't a real campaign issue. Remember, Obama call the Bush Debt, "unpatriotic", which IMHO was one of the few things he said that was correct. The debt more than doubled under his watch, and perhaps he meant it was unpatriotic that it was so low (who knows??)
The SSA is a different problem all together. The wealth that has been taken and put in a "lock box" is all a nice shell game. There is no lock box, its just a shoebox full of IOUs. The congress, has already spent that money elsewhere on other things. It is just an accounting gimmick. There is no surplus, it has been repurposed.
The reason all of this works, is because the American people are willingly ignorant, and trust our leaders to do the right thing. The American people have abdicated their role as leaders, and handed it over to our public servants, because we can't be bothered (as a whole) to pay attention. And the few of us that are paying attention are called "kooks" and "nutjobs" and "extremists" and.... precisely because it marginalizes us.
And people want to know why Trump, Sanders, and Hillary are our "Best" candidates? It is simply a reflection of how little our citizens care about what our country is doing.
That is still a semantic argument. How long is too long?....
"You've held your stream too long, we're sending ED209 for corporate enforcement of our policies. Please stop what you're watching. You have 30 seconds to comply"
You sound like my boss, who refuses to patch anything in a timely manner, because patches might cause problems. This kind of logic ignores the fact that unpatched systems also cause problems.
People like you do not know how to perform risk assessments properly. So, while it is possible that a patch may (and can) cause problems, there is also the risk that not patching may also cause problems. In our case, we have a system, and he never green lighted updates to a component after we updated the main system, because "something might go wong" (always undefined worst case scenario that has a 99.99% chance of not actually materializing), meanwhile those systems without the updated component are not working right (or at all).
So, instead of proper risk assessment, and always assuming that change might cause worst case scenarios, we instead have systems in a non-functional state, which is actually worse than the undefined "worst case" that might happen (but probably won't).
However, that is the reason he is now the PHB we make fun of, because that level of caution is what his superiors (who know nothing about IT) like. And when it all comes crashing down, I'll be safe, because I have my recommendations all in writing, along with the bosses rejection of them. As always, make sure you document everything.
The #1 indicator of how well a kid does in school, is parental value placed on education. If you have parents who care about education, their kids do much better than kids whose parents don't give a rats ass about education.
All the standardized testing does, is find out what schools have parents that don't give a shit about their kids, but they can never actually say it that way. Political Correctness says that you can't shame parents for being lousy parents, and not caring about their kids, because that means spending more money trying to educate kids whose parents suck will never work. It would be MUCH cheaper to identify those parents early, so that we can break the cycle of bad parenting. But since we can't really say "you suck as a parent", we'll spend stupid amounts of money beating around the bush, in a vain.
And that is only a "guess". My guess, is humans, at least the smarter ones, will survive by migrating to the more temperate zones. The rich with their Miami Beachfront homes will try everything to save their lifestyles. Meanwhile, all those liberals fleeing to Canada when Trump gets elected will suddenly have nice weather in winter. So, in a funky way, Liberals should be all for AWG!;)
It won't be used until it is needed by the Government to suppress the will of the people, and then it will be used against the enemies of the state (aka us citizens).
That is how all these things work. And instead of preventing abuse by not allowing it in the first place, people (I'm guessing you're okay with this) like you allow such things to go through, under the illusion that they won't ever be abused. Naive at best, delusional at worst.
For Complete safety, one must move to North Korea, where the Government dictates everything. And since you are against Liberty, I suggest that is the perfect example of what a world without liberty looks like.
Obviously, you think North Korea is the prime example of good government. Somolia isn't a Libertarian Government, it is Anarchy. However, North Korea is a fine example of unlimited Statism, which is what you seem to support.
What, exactly, do you believe the (D) and (R) parties differ on, in areas like this? There are a few people on both sides that vehemently oppose laws like this, and are summarily pushed to the edge and called "kooks", and "extremists". And it works, because too many politicians are more concerned with getting reelected than doing what is right for our country.
The problem is, we keep trading in our liberties, for the illusion of security, creating a monster state that has limitless power to enslave us all. I mean, if you're not doing anything wrong, what could you possibly want to hide?
So, to Opt out of being tracked by you, I have to go to yet another place (which is not obvious) and sign up to not be tracked. Fuck you world which allows this shit to be acceptable.
1) Use Tor 2) Use Incognito Mode 3) Time to block cookies, delete cookies, and so on.
The trouble in this case is that it is frequently the armchair quarterbacks who are pushing the curriculum, and the teachers trying to pick up the pieces within that context.
IT guy working in Education here
First off IMHO we have people in far away places (DC, State Capital etc) who see "trends" in education, and have to implement them without really understanding the whys and more importantly, the why nots of current theories and trends. These are the people that have decided that testing three weeks a year to gather data that doesn't help a single child is a "good thing" and don't understand why it sucks for everyone except those people in far away places.
Meanwhile, you have people in college who don't know anything about history (See Mark Dice YouTube) . And if you know your history, people who Do Not Learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
So, while we are teaching our kids about "sociological issues" and filling their heads with information that is truly irrelevant, we are neglecting the basics of reading, writing, and math. No wonder the US is so far down the chain of education in first world countries, our schools are a cesspool of political correctness. Nobody is crying for our illiterate kids, but instead are warring over who can use a fucking bathroom. And thus, our nation's collapse is nearly complete.
I would think that in a modern world, that sound is one of the most predictable sets one can choose from. Our world is filled with white noise that is actually cyclic in nature, which produces random noise, but with very little variation, which makes the sample set much smaller than you would think. This is why sound engineers can filter ambient sounds from audio to isolate the actual sounds they want to hear.
My guess, is that the best way to generate truly random numbers is to combine several sources together, from a larger pool of available sources, in such a manner that it makes it almost impossible to guess. This is the approach being used here (from my understanding).
He used Government resources appropriately. Gawker lost the suit.
Libertarians aren't against government, contrary to popular leftwing statists views. The purpose of the government is to provide equal application of laws (something it has abrogated) and ensuring the rights (in the case Hulk Hogan) of individuals are upheld. The fact that the lawsuit was funded by him is irrelevant, except to statists who don't understand libertarianism.
The case here is one where an individual asked the state to protect his rights, and the state found Gawker in violation. The only reason why I think you could even protest this, is because you're a shill for Gawker and think leftwing organizations can do not wrong, because ends justify the means. Or you just kneejerking "anti-liberation" catch phrases because you can't actually think for yourself?
Leftists believe only Government power is right, and the power of the people to defend themselves is a crime, because people defending themselves subverts the very nature of socialism (statism actually)
Gawker lost to Hulk Hogan, and big time. Are you suggesting that Gawker should have won simply because it is a leftwing rag spewing shit, and Hulk Hogan should have just taken it?
As a libertarian, I see "Might makes right" a lot more coming from leftwing side of things, like when idiots block traffic to protest something nobody in traffic has any connection to, and thinking that is just fine and dandy. And for once, someone takes on a leftwing rag spewing crap and takes them for huge losses. Gawker deserves to die simply because they were wrong, and lost in court.
Unless you're saying courts are not functional and filled with biased judges who spew their own prejudices. But only when it isn't leftwing agenda items that is.
It is funny how people view things that when it is their side, it is fine and dandy, but when it is against them, how the system is rigged and corrupt. I'm trying to figure out which "might makes right" is the right might, that makes right.
When you post about your life, to Facebook, and Facebook wants to eavesdrop on your living-room, you have the choice, to not post anything. That is the choice. Stop pretending that someone is holding a gun to your head, making you post on Facebook.
My suggestion is, don't post to Facebook. Don't post online at all.
As an aside, you should watch the TV Show "Person of Interest" (syndication/netflix, last season on air), as it really exposes how things really are. Yes, it is a tad Sci-Fi, but the concepts are already in place.
Slashdot Mirror
Devaluation isn't possible in deflationary currency. Devaluation only occurs in inflationary currency.
The reason why BitCoin is working in China is because people don't want to be beholden to externally manipulated currencies and rapid devaluation. By moving their wealth to deflationary currency, they are taking a buy/hold approach to wealth accumulation. And wealthy people cannot be controlled.
Guess what my prediction is for China? It tries to ban (make illegal) and confiscates BitCoin (and other Crypto Currencies) from its people.
I'm in IT, and people often ask me about CryptoViruses, I basically tell them, use GoogleDrive, OneDrive, Box, DropBox or any number of other "cloud" based systems, and back their important shit up. Also, get a External Drive and back up (and take offline) their shit to that too. I tell them, if your computer Hard Drive died tomorrow, what would you lose? The same is true for CryptoVirusus, only that is more likely these days.
The fact is, too many people don't want the inconvenience of backing their shit up, or doesn't even know to do it.
As a deflationary currency, we wouldn't need social Security or other "retirement" programs. The people who work earn currency, and save it, deflation rate becomes a savings incentive, and wealth building. The down side, is that accumulated wealth of deflationary currency tends to not work (velocity of currency) where debt based currency does.
My view, is that it is much easier to control debt riddled people than those that own their own wealth.
No News is an accurate source of information. Only source of information is raw data that is unfiltered by biased people, allowing me to apply my own filters as I see fit. Raw unfiltered data is accurate, and meaning is applied only after we put our own bias on it.
Once you realize this, then you can actually expand your worldview in such a way to minimize your own bias, and stop seeing things in binary (R) vs (D), Conservative vs Liberal, MSM vs Faux News.
Take the Gorilla story (not right vs left), I didn't hear about it until well afterwards. And the initial reports I heard was that a busy mom lost sight of her kid for just a moment, who crawled over a fence and fell down into the cage. And the heartbreak of a dead Gorilla. Then I saw the various "Should have saved the Gorilla" and "Mom wasn't at fault" to "irresponsible zoo" to "irresponsible mom". And having all that "filtered" by media, and people with agenda's I came to an early conclusion. That being said, the more I've looked into (not much, but a little), I heard that there were three barriers between the public, and the Gorilla (don't know if that is true), I've heard it happened very quickly. Now, those two things are not related (IMHO, my bias) so, something isn't fitting here.
I've heard Gorilla experts say, that the Gorilla was a "wild creature and dangerous, needing to be killed to save the kid" and "Gorilla was protecting the scared child in a Gorilla sort of way". Again, two opposite things. I am 100% sure that both opinions are of pure intention, but only one of them can be right, and both can be wrong.
I don't know gorillas, and I don't know the kid or the parents. The only conclusion I can come to, is that it was a tragedy. It could have ended in another kind of tragedy or in a way that everyone would be "happier" about. Any "opinion" I might have is actually irrelevant.
And you know what? My view would have pulled the story from the airwaves about 30 minutes after it hit. But that doesn't drive ratings! MUST DIVIDE AND CREATE CONTROVERSY!!!!
The capital is being sucked up by financial institutions, and accumulating there. It is also being held captive overseas. The problem isn't the supply, it is velocity. And until people realize that when the government is confiscating wealth (via taxes), the situation isn't going to change.
I have a solution that would greatly increase velocity, but conservatives wouldn't like it, and liberal/socialist would hate it, because it would require actual responsibility and not kicking the can down the road to the next President/Congress is elected.
So, instead of having depression (correction) every 25 years, we have a banking system bailout by the Federal Government every ... 25 ... years.
The only difference is, those responsible don't lose money now. And you seem to think this is better.
I have seen three such "corrections" in my 52 years on this planet. This last one, has lasted nearly 14 years (started after 9/11) by my reckoning. The economy is stagnate, and unresponsive.
The Fed is not the Federal Government. It is a private banking system. This is a common misunderstanding.
The Debt (Federal) is a function of spending and taxes. Increasing the debt is a function of the House of Representatives and the President, with the Senate in a consent role. These debts are covered by bonds issued to private people.
What is really happening (IMHO) is that The Fed loans money out at 0% (or near that) and those people buy up the Federal Debt Bonds at whatever the going rate is. It doesn't matter how much debt is issued, if you can borrow money to buy it, and you'll always be making a profit, even if it is very small. The Fed can't raise Interest, without exposing this problem, and so we're stuck in this cycle.
Yes, the debt has doubled under Obama and the Republicans, and is more than likely to double again in the next 8 years (Clinton/Sanders/Trump). It doesn't matter which of the two irresponsible parties are in office, which is why it isn't a real campaign issue. Remember, Obama call the Bush Debt, "unpatriotic", which IMHO was one of the few things he said that was correct. The debt more than doubled under his watch, and perhaps he meant it was unpatriotic that it was so low (who knows??)
The SSA is a different problem all together. The wealth that has been taken and put in a "lock box" is all a nice shell game. There is no lock box, its just a shoebox full of IOUs. The congress, has already spent that money elsewhere on other things. It is just an accounting gimmick. There is no surplus, it has been repurposed.
The reason all of this works, is because the American people are willingly ignorant, and trust our leaders to do the right thing. The American people have abdicated their role as leaders, and handed it over to our public servants, because we can't be bothered (as a whole) to pay attention. And the few of us that are paying attention are called "kooks" and "nutjobs" and "extremists" and .... precisely because it marginalizes us.
And people want to know why Trump, Sanders, and Hillary are our "Best" candidates? It is simply a reflection of how little our citizens care about what our country is doing.
Hey look, Kim Kardashian is naked .... again!
That is still a semantic argument. How long is too long?....
"You've held your stream too long, we're sending ED209 for corporate enforcement of our policies. Please stop what you're watching. You have 30 seconds to comply"
Whoever wins, we lose!
You sound like my boss, who refuses to patch anything in a timely manner, because patches might cause problems. This kind of logic ignores the fact that unpatched systems also cause problems.
People like you do not know how to perform risk assessments properly. So, while it is possible that a patch may (and can) cause problems, there is also the risk that not patching may also cause problems. In our case, we have a system, and he never green lighted updates to a component after we updated the main system, because "something might go wong" (always undefined worst case scenario that has a 99.99% chance of not actually materializing), meanwhile those systems without the updated component are not working right (or at all).
So, instead of proper risk assessment, and always assuming that change might cause worst case scenarios, we instead have systems in a non-functional state, which is actually worse than the undefined "worst case" that might happen (but probably won't).
However, that is the reason he is now the PHB we make fun of, because that level of caution is what his superiors (who know nothing about IT) like. And when it all comes crashing down, I'll be safe, because I have my recommendations all in writing, along with the bosses rejection of them. As always, make sure you document everything.
The #1 indicator of how well a kid does in school, is parental value placed on education. If you have parents who care about education, their kids do much better than kids whose parents don't give a rats ass about education.
All the standardized testing does, is find out what schools have parents that don't give a shit about their kids, but they can never actually say it that way. Political Correctness says that you can't shame parents for being lousy parents, and not caring about their kids, because that means spending more money trying to educate kids whose parents suck will never work. It would be MUCH cheaper to identify those parents early, so that we can break the cycle of bad parenting. But since we can't really say "you suck as a parent", we'll spend stupid amounts of money beating around the bush, in a vain.
Something about "broken clocks" ?? ;)
And that is only a "guess". My guess, is humans, at least the smarter ones, will survive by migrating to the more temperate zones. The rich with their Miami Beachfront homes will try everything to save their lifestyles. Meanwhile, all those liberals fleeing to Canada when Trump gets elected will suddenly have nice weather in winter. So, in a funky way, Liberals should be all for AWG! ;)
It won't be used until it is needed by the Government to suppress the will of the people, and then it will be used against the enemies of the state (aka us citizens).
That is how all these things work. And instead of preventing abuse by not allowing it in the first place, people (I'm guessing you're okay with this) like you allow such things to go through, under the illusion that they won't ever be abused. Naive at best, delusional at worst.
For Complete safety, one must move to North Korea, where the Government dictates everything. And since you are against Liberty, I suggest that is the perfect example of what a world without liberty looks like.
Obviously, you think North Korea is the prime example of good government. Somolia isn't a Libertarian Government, it is Anarchy. However, North Korea is a fine example of unlimited Statism, which is what you seem to support.
What, exactly, do you believe the (D) and (R) parties differ on, in areas like this? There are a few people on both sides that vehemently oppose laws like this, and are summarily pushed to the edge and called "kooks", and "extremists". And it works, because too many politicians are more concerned with getting reelected than doing what is right for our country.
The problem is, we keep trading in our liberties, for the illusion of security, creating a monster state that has limitless power to enslave us all. I mean, if you're not doing anything wrong, what could you possibly want to hide?
Fuck YOU Facebook.
So, to Opt out of being tracked by you, I have to go to yet another place (which is not obvious) and sign up to not be tracked. Fuck you world which allows this shit to be acceptable.
1) Use Tor
2) Use Incognito Mode
3) Time to block cookies, delete cookies, and so on.
http://www.howtogeek.com/63721...
Did I mention ... FUCK YOU FACEBOOK!
The trouble in this case is that it is frequently the armchair quarterbacks who are pushing the curriculum, and the teachers trying to pick up the pieces within that context.
IT guy working in Education here
First off IMHO we have people in far away places (DC, State Capital etc) who see "trends" in education, and have to implement them without really understanding the whys and more importantly, the why nots of current theories and trends. These are the people that have decided that testing three weeks a year to gather data that doesn't help a single child is a "good thing" and don't understand why it sucks for everyone except those people in far away places.
Meanwhile, you have people in college who don't know anything about history (See Mark Dice YouTube) . And if you know your history, people who Do Not Learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
So, while we are teaching our kids about "sociological issues" and filling their heads with information that is truly irrelevant, we are neglecting the basics of reading, writing, and math. No wonder the US is so far down the chain of education in first world countries, our schools are a cesspool of political correctness. Nobody is crying for our illiterate kids, but instead are warring over who can use a fucking bathroom. And thus, our nation's collapse is nearly complete.
Is that what you kids are calling it these days.
Call GetOffMyLawn()
I would think that in a modern world, that sound is one of the most predictable sets one can choose from. Our world is filled with white noise that is actually cyclic in nature, which produces random noise, but with very little variation, which makes the sample set much smaller than you would think. This is why sound engineers can filter ambient sounds from audio to isolate the actual sounds they want to hear.
My guess, is that the best way to generate truly random numbers is to combine several sources together, from a larger pool of available sources, in such a manner that it makes it almost impossible to guess. This is the approach being used here (from my understanding).
He used Government resources appropriately. Gawker lost the suit.
Libertarians aren't against government, contrary to popular leftwing statists views. The purpose of the government is to provide equal application of laws (something it has abrogated) and ensuring the rights (in the case Hulk Hogan) of individuals are upheld. The fact that the lawsuit was funded by him is irrelevant, except to statists who don't understand libertarianism.
The case here is one where an individual asked the state to protect his rights, and the state found Gawker in violation. The only reason why I think you could even protest this, is because you're a shill for Gawker and think leftwing organizations can do not wrong, because ends justify the means. Or you just kneejerking "anti-liberation" catch phrases because you can't actually think for yourself?
Leftists believe only Government power is right, and the power of the people to defend themselves is a crime, because people defending themselves subverts the very nature of socialism (statism actually)
No, winning lawsuits makes right.
Gawker lost to Hulk Hogan, and big time. Are you suggesting that Gawker should have won simply because it is a leftwing rag spewing shit, and Hulk Hogan should have just taken it?
As a libertarian, I see "Might makes right" a lot more coming from leftwing side of things, like when idiots block traffic to protest something nobody in traffic has any connection to, and thinking that is just fine and dandy. And for once, someone takes on a leftwing rag spewing crap and takes them for huge losses. Gawker deserves to die simply because they were wrong, and lost in court.
Unless you're saying courts are not functional and filled with biased judges who spew their own prejudices. But only when it isn't leftwing agenda items that is.
It is funny how people view things that when it is their side, it is fine and dandy, but when it is against them, how the system is rigged and corrupt. I'm trying to figure out which "might makes right" is the right might, that makes right.
When you post about your life, to Facebook, and Facebook wants to eavesdrop on your living-room, you have the choice, to not post anything. That is the choice. Stop pretending that someone is holding a gun to your head, making you post on Facebook.
My suggestion is, don't post to Facebook. Don't post online at all.
As an aside, you should watch the TV Show "Person of Interest" (syndication/netflix, last season on air), as it really exposes how things really are. Yes, it is a tad Sci-Fi, but the concepts are already in place.