If you think the USA doesn't like free-for-all of money laundering you should read up on HSBC and Bank of America. Sure, money laundering is a "crime" and stuff but prosecuting it? The problem with Bitcoin is that no one is bribing congress.
As I already said in the post you just replied to: The error you are making is that you limit yourself to one dimension, one variable that you call "freedom". A model with one variable can only describe trivial systems. Economic systems in the real world are more complex. The examples you give are just a demonstration of confirmation bias. It's as easy to see for them that different, orthogonal variables are needed to describe the system as it was for the List of countries you gave above.
Unfortunately your only reaction to me mentioning some of these dimensions were some random insults about how stupid and ignorant I am and that of course I must be a liberal, clearly one of the others, a communists progressive nazi nigerian. That's why I have no interest in continuing this conversation. Have a nice day, sir.
I assume that your politics are democratic or liberal (in the modern American sense, as in more government) or 'progressive', whatever that is, am I right?
We're getting somewhere:). The mythical free market with all its magic properties doesn't exist. That's basically one point I was trying to make.
The freer ONE country is compared to another, the more wealth will flow to THAT country.
The problem here is that you limit yourself to a one-dimensional model for very complex situations. And that's where and why your model fails. You can check that yourself by figuring out if Singapore has a freer market than Switzerland.
USA had free market (mostly, as free as it got) in 19th century.
The "free" market before the civil war, where all the work was done by slaves? That sounds like a perfect example of a free market. Or are you talking strictly about 1870 - 1899? The big success of the free market is that the economy grew (very fast) after the civil war? Impressive.
Today the freest markets are found in Southeast Asia, in Switzerland to a degree. Look at Singapore [...]
Singapore is an interesting example. To quote the wiki: "The National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), the sole trade union federation which has a symbiotic relationship with the ruling party, comprises almost 99% of total organized labour. Government policy and pro-activity rather than labour legislation controls general labour and trade union matters. The Employment Act offers little protection to white-collar workers due to an income threshold. The Industrial Arbitration Court handles labour-management disputes that cannot be resolved informally through the Ministry of Manpower. The Singapore Government has stressed the importance of cooperation between unions, management and government (tripartism), as well as the early resolution of disputes."
Actually ancient Rome had a relatively free trade market before it turned into an empire. The free trade market gave it the power that allowed Rome
You seem to be a big fan of slavery.
The reason why the other people I asked didn't give me these examples is because they were not as intellectual dishonest as you are.
So when you say: there is or there was no free market, you are not understanding what it is
Stop lying. I asked for an example. I didn't claim there are none. I do not understand what it is. You are right about that. Is a market without contract laws freer than one that has contract laws? Does criminalization of theft make a market less free? Where is the line? What laws are part of a free market? Which aren't? It all seems pretty arbitrary to me.
I hear the term "free market" a lot when talking to Americans. What i have never heard is one instance of a "free market" that actually existed, in what context whatsoever. Do you have an example for me? And maybe even some data?
The problem with this approach is that some scientists will rather use social engineering to increase their reputability score than improve their research methods. If a sufficiently large portion of the scientists do that, your metric will become irrelvant or even misleading. This is basically the same situation we are in right now.
Parent's implict argument was: Hold the victims of computer crime accountable because they didn't aply common sense to protect their computers like they would do (for example) to protect their car. He made this argument by describing how common sense meassures protect your car and the things in it from beeing stolen. I justed wanted to point out that this argument is wrong.
If you think the car door lock or ignition lock stops a motivated thief you are as clueless when it comes to car security as the PC owners are about computer security.
So intellectual property is no more or less foolish than any other kind of property.
The thing that is owned in "intellectual property" is not well defined. That's a pretty big difference to real property. The concept of intellectual property is not even wrong. Calling each other foolish won't change that.
It's always about the oil (or living space) some "other" group. Like Muslims. Having the external enemy is vital beacuse the retards that fall for the republicans vs. democrats rhetorics will only get you so far.
The lefties that voted Omama in
Yeah well, see above.
would be O.K. with it , rather than cause war.
You say that like if war was a bad thing. What are you? Some kind of terrorist? A sustainable war is the ultimate goal.
Evolution is not about the chickens, it's about differential survival of competing genes. Factory farming is what makes the chicken's genes so successfull and the chicken's life miserable.
The "sound advice" is what we call culture. No one is arguing against culture. Religion is the mind blowingly stupid bullshit that gets added on to that. It is in a way the collection of the most stupid things that humans do.
Millions of people have made it across the ocean on ships similar to the Titanic (though smaller); only a few thousand had perished.
You might want to check your numbers: "It is suspected that of 11 million slaves transported, this represented a third of the slaves from the start. so approximately 22 million slaves died on the slaves ships in the Indies and Americas alone."
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Slightly off topic but the war on drugs is a war against the people and kills more Americans than any other war the government is currently waging. So, yeah, treason it is.
Slashdot Mirror
If you think the USA doesn't like free-for-all of money laundering you should read up on HSBC and Bank of America. Sure, money laundering is a "crime" and stuff but prosecuting it? The problem with Bitcoin is that no one is bribing congress.
It seems to be trading at about $92 USD, which is approximately where it was before bitfloor's announcement.
6 months ago a bitcoin was $5, 6 months before that it was $35. The fluctuation is massive.
Right. That's why Disney dollars are outlawed.
Isn't av-test almost exclusively sponsored by the antivirus vendors? Their "test results" are nothing more than fact less marketing.
we know that some markets are freer than others
As I already said in the post you just replied to: The error you are making is that you limit yourself to one dimension, one variable that you call "freedom". A model with one variable can only describe trivial systems. Economic systems in the real world are more complex. The examples you give are just a demonstration of confirmation bias. It's as easy to see for them that different, orthogonal variables are needed to describe the system as it was for the List of countries you gave above.
Unfortunately your only reaction to me mentioning some of these dimensions were some random insults about how stupid and ignorant I am and that of course I must be a liberal, clearly one of the others, a communists progressive nazi nigerian. That's why I have no interest in continuing this conversation. Have a nice day, sir.
I assume that your politics are democratic or liberal (in the modern American sense, as in more government) or 'progressive', whatever that is, am I right?
No.
Freedom is relative
We're getting somewhere :). The mythical free market with all its magic properties doesn't exist. That's basically one point I was trying to make.
The freer ONE country is compared to another, the more wealth will flow to THAT country.
The problem here is that you limit yourself to a one-dimensional model for very complex situations. And that's where and why your model fails. You can check that yourself by figuring out if Singapore has a freer market than Switzerland.
USA had free market (mostly, as free as it got) in 19th century.
The "free" market before the civil war, where all the work was done by slaves? That sounds like a perfect example of a free market. Or are you talking strictly about 1870 - 1899? The big success of the free market is that the economy grew (very fast) after the civil war? Impressive.
Today the freest markets are found in Southeast Asia, in Switzerland to a degree. Look at Singapore [...]
Singapore is an interesting example. To quote the wiki: "The National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), the sole trade union federation which has a symbiotic relationship with the ruling party, comprises almost 99% of total organized labour. Government policy and pro-activity rather than labour legislation controls general labour and trade union matters. The Employment Act offers little protection to white-collar workers due to an income threshold. The Industrial Arbitration Court handles labour-management disputes that cannot be resolved informally through the Ministry of Manpower. The Singapore Government has stressed the importance of cooperation between unions, management and government (tripartism), as well as the early resolution of disputes."
Actually ancient Rome had a relatively free trade market before it turned into an empire. The free trade market gave it the power that allowed Rome
You seem to be a big fan of slavery.
The reason why the other people I asked didn't give me these examples is because they were not as intellectual dishonest as you are.
So when you say: there is or there was no free market, you are not understanding what it is
Stop lying. I asked for an example. I didn't claim there are none. I do not understand what it is. You are right about that. Is a market without contract laws freer than one that has contract laws? Does criminalization of theft make a market less free? Where is the line? What laws are part of a free market? Which aren't? It all seems pretty arbitrary to me.
Precision almost always increases with sample size, accuracy often (usually?) doesn't.
I hear the term "free market" a lot when talking to Americans. What i have never heard is one instance of a "free market" that actually existed, in what context whatsoever. Do you have an example for me? And maybe even some data?
The problem with this approach is that some scientists will rather use social engineering to increase their reputability score than improve their research methods. If a sufficiently large portion of the scientists do that, your metric will become irrelvant or even misleading. This is basically the same situation we are in right now.
Animals don't tend to do pointless things without a good reason.
Really?
Has one of those intelligent individuals that have been researching AI for years managed to define the word "intelligence" yet?
Simplified isn't subjective.
What is the objective defintion of "simplified"?
Parent's implict argument was: Hold the victims of computer crime accountable because they didn't aply common sense to protect their computers like they would do (for example) to protect their car. He made this argument by describing how common sense meassures protect your car and the things in it from beeing stolen. I justed wanted to point out that this argument is wrong.
If you think the car door lock or ignition lock stops a motivated thief you are as clueless when it comes to car security as the PC owners are about computer security.
So intellectual property is no more or less foolish than any other kind of property.
The thing that is owned in "intellectual property" is not well defined. That's a pretty big difference to real property. The concept of intellectual property is not even wrong. Calling each other foolish won't change that.
but most people can't code. They can't be taught to code, save for in a very limited manner.
[Citation needed]
Here.
It's always about the oil (or living space) some "other" group. Like Muslims. Having the external enemy is vital beacuse the retards that fall for the republicans vs. democrats rhetorics will only get you so far.
The lefties that voted Omama in
Yeah well, see above.
would be O.K. with it , rather than cause war.
You say that like if war was a bad thing. What are you? Some kind of terrorist? A sustainable war is the ultimate goal.
I don't see us pushing the weak aside for living space
The "living space" of fascist america is oil.
Outside the U.S., the Constitution doesn't apply, and the government is free (legally) to kill people left and right (morally is another question).
Wrong. Internationally treaties make it a war crime. It's murder, morally and legally.
Evolution is not about the chickens, it's about differential survival of competing genes. Factory farming is what makes the chicken's genes so successfull and the chicken's life miserable.
The "sound advice" is what we call culture. No one is arguing against culture. Religion is the mind blowingly stupid bullshit that gets added on to that. It is in a way the collection of the most stupid things that humans do.
Millions of people have made it across the ocean on ships similar to the Titanic (though smaller); only a few thousand had perished.
You might want to check your numbers: "It is suspected that of 11 million slaves transported, this represented a third of the slaves from the start. so approximately 22 million slaves died on the slaves ships in the Indies and Americas alone."
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Slightly off topic but the war on drugs is a war against the people and kills more Americans than any other war the government is currently waging. So, yeah, treason it is.