Everything in the future. And you know why? Because it's strange.
We do not like realistic depiction of the future and call it dystopia because it is different from our way of life. We will be gone and what we call dystopia will be just normal for contemporaries.
Stupid regulations. I am not a libertarian and I am all for government regulation. It's just the government regulation is an extremely complicated domain of technology. I wish that instead of fighting for votes of imbecile constituents bright minds from both parties were thinking together on how to regulate the unfathomable complexity of modern economy better.
And this particular one is an example of that.
Government regulation needs to be applied quickly in reaction to ever-going fight with the entropy of greed. You should not need to wait for the next election to raise or drop the taxes on a particular item by couple of percentage points. It should be done automatically by government computers.
I do not know what Sierra Leone government officials are smoking. Maybe they should stop smoking weed and start to worry about Chinese takeover of their country.
That's not why he was elected. He was elected despite of that.
Your stupid "centrist" DNC managed to dramatically piss off one of the solid bases - white working class males in three key wiggle states. They decided to cater instead to various economically insignificant, but politically growing minorities in already Democrat states.
The problem is not in feasibility. UBI essentially has been created in top socialist countries in nostalgic hey day of Cold War.
The problem is not in inequality, the problem is in equality.
Everybody knows how bad equality was in that Soviet block and how it eventually led to economic bankruptcy of USSR. It created atmosphere of laziness and absence of hope.
That's why you NEED inequality. A member of the strata should be afraid to fall to the lower level of it and he should hope to get to the higher level.
That's how averaged, socially significant human psychology works.
Now, what about very unequal Western societies like America? One would say that the the discrepancy beween the earnings of the bottom man and the top man is 1 fricking million times.
Thats true. Yet, that does not mean that there is no place for that bad equality in that system. You see, in economically normal society the strata have similar barriers (ratio of population between stratas) and stimulus (ratio of income between stratas). The weak point of such an ideal Lorenz curve is when suddenly there is a on overflow of population inone strata compared to these ratios. That indicates to the lack of social mobility, because thats how the normal strata structure emerges - by creating a fair enough system of mobility where people are promoted on merits and demoted on inadequacies.
Large linear portions of Lorenz curve are indicators of illnesses.
In this respect , American economy looks surprisingly healthy. I analized the 2014 data on AGI of American taxpayers and found that it lies on that ideal curve quite well. We do give a chance to people to climb to the top and we ruthlessly punish those who do not fit by demoting them to the economic misery. Some people experience that rollercoaster several times during their lives.
Then I watched the evening news broadcast of the event and what they said about the event bore little resemblance to what I had witnessed while standing next to the camera and the reporter who reported on the event
This has been known for ages.
"There must have been three thousand of [the dead]."
"It must have been all of the people who were at the station."
The woman measured him with a pitying look. "There haven't been any dead here." She said. "Since the time of your uncle, the colonel, nothing has happened in Macondo." In the three kitchens where José Arcadio Segundo stopped before reaching home they told him the same thing: "There weren't any dead."
the 'reputation age', in which information will have value only if it is already filtered, evaluated and commented upon by others
The only thing that changed is that in the past there were natural barriers and thresholds for idiots "online". Now there are none, so the problem is solved by artificial "reputation" measurements.
I have been online since I got my own snail mailbox.
"Constantly" meant once every business day (at some moment that started to include Saturdays) I got updates I wanted: bills and newspapers, and unwanted: spam mail.
Nothing changed since then, email, text or weather app, all behaves the same way,
Only the definition of constancy changed.
Another thing that changed was variety of what is it that we are updating ourselves to, variety of utilities, variety of services, variety of news sources.
It does not make sense to ask how many people online, it make sense to ask: online to what? Where does this "line" on which we are "on" is leading to?
Get over with it. Instead of sending everybody on the same route, send them probabilistically. I suspect Waze already does that, verified several times experimentally.
>Science has already identified the problem and provided a solution: stop doing it
No. Science identified the problem and provided a range of solutions that need and will be applied in parallel: reduction of CO2 production is only one of the solutions.
Slashdot Mirror
Dismissed as bullshit alarmist crap
Reduction if the speed to zero will completely eliminate the risk of death. I am tired of this stupid "slow down" argument.
If I slow down, so will 1000 cars behind me, you stupid libtards.
Idiotic 55 mph limit on highways was inttroduced in 70s to reduce gas consumption: remember OPEC and oil crisis?
Since then it still stays that way in many places, a monument to liberal idiocy.
Breaking and swerving simyltaneously sometimes lead to additional probability of sliding
Humans should be nowhere near the car traveling at 70 mph, and vice versa.
Apparently.
Everything in the future. And you know why? Because it's strange.
We do not like realistic depiction of the future and call it dystopia because it is different from our way of life. We will be gone and what we call dystopia will be just normal for contemporaries.
That's how it works.
whataboutism is a bullshit argument. Always has been, always will be.
Stupid regulations. I am not a libertarian and I am all for government regulation. It's just the government regulation is an extremely complicated domain of technology. I wish that instead of fighting for votes of imbecile constituents bright minds from both parties were thinking together on how to regulate the unfathomable complexity of modern economy better.
And this particular one is an example of that.
Government regulation needs to be applied quickly in reaction to ever-going fight with the entropy of greed. You should not need to wait for the next election to raise or drop the taxes on a particular item by couple of percentage points. It should be done automatically by government computers.
I do not know what Sierra Leone government officials are smoking. Maybe they should stop smoking weed and start to worry about Chinese takeover of their country.
> Cryptographic blockchains should be run for maximum possible efficiency, the distributed proof of transfer suffers nothing from being efficient
There are plenty of other uses of blockchain technology, including currencies that do not require that much of a verification.
Second blockchain platform is Ethereum which is used also for distributed computing.
Maybe they should do the opposite: disclose the salaries of those who are paid under certain amount
I did not know how far this would go.
That's not why he was elected. He was elected despite of that.
Your stupid "centrist" DNC managed to dramatically piss off one of the solid bases - white working class males in three key wiggle states. They decided to cater instead to various economically insignificant, but politically growing minorities in already Democrat states.
The problem is not in feasibility. UBI essentially has been created in top socialist countries in nostalgic hey day of Cold War.
The problem is not in inequality, the problem is in equality.
Everybody knows how bad equality was in that Soviet block and how it eventually led to economic bankruptcy of USSR. It created atmosphere of laziness and absence of hope.
That's why you NEED inequality. A member of the strata should be afraid to fall to the lower level of it and he should hope to get to the higher level.
That's how averaged, socially significant human psychology works.
Now, what about very unequal Western societies like America? One would say that the the discrepancy beween the earnings of the bottom man and the top man is 1 fricking million times.
Thats true. Yet, that does not mean that there is no place for that bad equality in that system. You see, in economically normal society the strata have similar barriers (ratio of population between stratas) and stimulus (ratio of income between stratas). The weak point of such an ideal Lorenz curve is when suddenly there is a on overflow of population inone strata compared to these ratios. That indicates to the lack of social mobility, because thats how the normal strata structure emerges - by creating a fair enough system of mobility where people are promoted on merits and demoted on inadequacies.
Large linear portions of Lorenz curve are indicators of illnesses.
In this respect , American economy looks surprisingly healthy. I analized the 2014 data on AGI of American taxpayers and found that it lies on that ideal curve quite well. We do give a chance to people to climb to the top and we ruthlessly punish those who do not fit by demoting them to the economic misery. Some people experience that rollercoaster several times during their lives.
one of the favorite subject of 15-year old libertarians: Ganja.
This has been known for ages.
This has always been this way:
The only thing that changed is that in the past there were natural barriers and thresholds for idiots "online". Now there are none, so the problem is solved by artificial "reputation" measurements.
Because it is disrespectful.
I have been online since I got my own snail mailbox.
"Constantly" meant once every business day (at some moment that started to include Saturdays) I got updates I wanted: bills and newspapers, and unwanted: spam mail.
Nothing changed since then, email, text or weather app, all behaves the same way,
Only the definition of constancy changed.
Another thing that changed was variety of what is it that we are updating ourselves to, variety of utilities, variety of services, variety of news sources.
It does not make sense to ask how many people online, it make sense to ask: online to what? Where does this "line" on which we are "on" is leading to?
"lost his bearings" and "greatest physicist of all time"
Don't do either of these, whoever writes about it.
Get over with it. Instead of sending everybody on the same route, send them probabilistically. I suspect Waze already does that, verified several times experimentally.
>Science has already identified the problem and provided a solution: stop doing it
No. Science identified the problem and provided a range of solutions that need and will be applied in parallel: reduction of CO2 production is only one of the solutions.
LOL: saw the subj phrase in here:
https://thebreakthrough.org/in...?
your objections are generic and superficial.