Prepaid spam
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 07:58:56PM -0500, John Morrow wrote: Subject: Re: Do Not Call -- The newest public interest miracle? At 07:41 PM 7/1/2003 -0400, Wei Dai wrote: I can... The Do Not Call form should take a bank account number and dollar amount. Any advertiser who pre-pays the amount I specify would be allowed to call me. This is precisely a thought that occurred to me as a way to prevent spam -- computers can reduce the marginal transaction cost, and liens could be put up against bandwidth providers to take care of any lag in the system. Would be spammers would sign contracts with their ISPs, and ISPs with the agencies who kept track of costs for individuals and authenticated email coming from contracted ISPs. A major problem is getting a critical mass of people to use it, so that people are not missing email from users of hold out ISPs. See my article Stamps vs Spam for a proposal to implement this idea that arguably doesn't have a critical mass problem with respect to number of users: http://fare.tunes.org/articles/stamps_vs_spam.html [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] Please leave the State in the toilets where you found it.
Re: socialism historical?
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 07:41:45PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Socialism developed in the early and mid-19th century as a rejection of classical liberalism, Wrong. You seem to confuse the concept of socialism with the word socialism. Just like classical liberalism can be traced back to chinese taoists or to greek stoicists, socialism can be traced back to chinese legists or greek platonists. Plato's much praised The Republic is your typical national-socialist utopia. So yes, the word socialism appeared and became popular in the early nineteenth century, some time after the word liberalism, to denote the opposite trend in ideology. But both concepts or traditions seem to be as old as society itself. What they all have in common, rather, is the subordination of the individual to some sort of higher collective, whether, as in the case of communism, the international working class, or, as in the case of national socialism, the nation (the people of a particular ethnicity), or, as in the case of liberal socialism, democracy or the People (a vague notion not necessarily incorporating a particular notion of ethnicity). In practice many of these types of socialism (of which I've listed only a few) overlapped, and we see, as I mentioned in an earlier email, when the German Marxists allied themselves with the monarchists to pass government-mandated pensions over the opposition of German liberals. While most forms of socialism have been statist, not all statism has been socialistic. The primary statist ideology prior to classical liberalism, classical conservatism, took as its justification not the subordination of the individual to some higher collective, but the divine right of kings to rule (one might say subordination of the individual to God through God's alleged representative on earth, the king). The post-modern left, for that matter, has to some degree moved beyond socialism anyway. The environmentalist movement in particular has shifted from conservation for the sake of future generations of humans to protecting the environment for its own sake. Even more than socialism, environmentalism harks back to medieval calls for subordination of the individual to a non-human higher good. David -- [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ]
Accountancy vs Entrepreneurship
Classical liberal authors such as Bastiat or Mises teach us that the costs that matter (or should matter) to people who take decisions are the opportunity costs of that decision -- i.e. the relative costs/benefits of the many options open to choice --, as opposed to accounting costs, that describe the transfers that actually happen. What is the right technical name for what I call accounting cost? What papers/books/works should be read/cited for the invention and clarification of this distinction between opportunity costs and accounting costs? If this isn't the right place to ask, where is the right place? Thanks for your attention. [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] Democracy is but government of the busy, by the bully, for the bossy. -- Arthur Seldon, The Dilemma of Democracy
Re: (book review)The Case against Government Science
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 05:16:11PM -0700, john hull wrote: The economic benefits of this separation [between Applied and Basic researchers] outweighs the cost of paying for basic research. How is this separation a benefit at all? Not separating them will mean that they can better cooperate with each other and cross-breed their work. In France, we have a very high rate of separation, and France has a reputation for great researchers - but what good are these french researchers, if they can't cooperate with each other and with the industry? France also has a very low reputation for actually useful science, for cooperation that leads to actual results, etc. Your whole argument is a dubious petitio principii. That's not to say that basic research is not valuable, but it evidently follows strange and unpredictable And how is that an argument for or against state funding of research? Obviously, the government didn't forecast the unpredictable path of discovery any more than the private sector. Non sequitur. As usual, the only contribution of government intervention is irresponsibility and rent-seeking. Mind you, in a free society, if you and 50% of the people want to fund gratuitous research, no one is going to stop you. Yours freely, [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] -- Question authority! -- Yeah, says who?
Re: Securities analysis
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 11:16:54AM +0530, Koushik S wrote: Those who believe that the jury is still out on efficient markets hypothesis Efficient as compared to what? To a utopia you dream of? Or to the kind of government intervention we can see happens? As a practising value investor, I see many many instances of ridiculous valuations of companies (over and under valuation) all the times which can be turned into avenues of profit. Great. Why aren't you a billionnaire yet? BTW, those who will turn their better information into profit ARE part of the market. That actually everybody knows as much about companies and no one has an information edge ? In a free market, the way prices vary depend on the information that is being used. If you refrain from using your information, there will be discrepancy between the price and what it would be. However, by using your information and turning it into an avenue of profit, you will also affect the price in such a way that the avenue of profit will be lost and your information will not be worth anything anymore. You will need to constantly feed the market with new accurate information so as to continue making a profit. All in all, the approximated fact that no one has an edge in information is a postcondition of a free market, not a precondition of it. Similarly for the approximated equation between price and amortized marginal cost (that, e.g. Marx took for granted), and many other such equations. Yours freely, [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] In its weak form, Utilitarianism sums up as a requirement of observational consistency and behavioral relevance for ethical rules. -- Faré
Re: Monopoly justice vs free market justice
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 03:49:15PM -0700, James Haney wrote: I like anarchocapitalism as much as the next guy, but this thread seems tendentious to me. If private individuals or organizations have a right to sue you for murdering one of their relatives or life insurance customers or whatever, that makes murder _de facto_ against the law. Hence, as usual, _de jure_ legislated laws are useless at best, harmful always. _de facto_ constraints will do better, within the respect of natural law principles. [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] The advantages ... [of not having patents] in the machine industry generally, lie less in the free use of developments themselves, than in the free scope for engineers in general. With great complicated machinery, individual, perhaps not very essential, parts can be patented, thus preventing a complete and perhaps much more valuable construction and forcing better engineers to an exacting study of all such little patents. -- Bureau der Kaufmannischen Gesellschaft Zurich, 1886.
Re: monopoly justice vs free market justice
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 11:11:27PM -, mitchinson wrote: i don't know very much about it but recall from school that saxon and viking societies used to have blood money payments for crimes. similarly i believe that a payment to the victims family can be sufficient within the islamic code providing that family agrees the sum. a self regulating solution? i believe there were also other penalties if terms could not be agreed. There is no penalty, but payment. If the criminal party refuses to pay willingly, then there is war, and it will have to pay by force. But this war is only justified up to taking proper revenge, and taking back too much might raise an endless vendetta war. Hence everyone's interest in finding a peaceful agreement. Both parties, as well as surrounding families, are interested in peace, and will thus seek a prompt agreement before court. The criminal, who is especially wary of possible revenge, and his whole family, who fears about an innocent being the victim of the revenge, will usually be the first one to seek refuge nearby a respected wise man and summon a court. Similarly, the offended party would seek a court agreement so to not to waste time and effort seeking a vengeance that could lead to a wasteful war. A party that would refuse to summon a court, or refuse to comply with court decisions would be a rogue, in whom no one would trust anymore, that would not find any protection by anyone anymore, not any work, etc. Such rogues would be at war with the whole society, and would not survive long. Si vis pacem para bellum. -- If you want peace, prepare war. That's exactly how free societies fight roguery. Not surprisingly, the same kind of things happened in lots of free society throughout the world and throughout times, a surviving example being Somaliland. [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] The more one knows, the more one knows that one knows not. Science extends the field of our (meta)ignorance even more than the field of our knowledge. -- Faré
Re: books
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 11:59:59AM -0800, Jason DeBacker wrote: Would any of you like to share your favorite books- particularly related to economics and/or libertarian philosophy? F. Bastiat - Economic Harmonies H. Hazlitt - The Foundations of Morality F.A. Hayek - Law, Legislation and Liberty [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] With Information Protectionism, people make money by slowing down the flow of information. With Free Information, people make money by accelerating it.
Re: Exuberance Is Rational
On Tue, Feb 13, 2001 at 10:32:48PM -0700, Chris Rasch wrote: [Quoting an article] Since the Reagan era, a mantra for office seekers is that people know what is best for themselves. Generally, yes; but what if not always, and what if they err in predictable ways? The implicit argument here is based on the truism that government can take advantage of information not available or used by the people so as to enhance people's lives. But so can private companies, as was precisely the case in present experience. And apparently, from the very same experience, in ways that allow to dynamically discover news policies in a non-disruptive, non-violent ways that do not put the whole country's economy at risk when they fail. rant So the question is whether government intervention brings a positive differential effect. And the answer is clearly no. If people can vote with their irresponsible voice for someone who will relieve them from such problems, they can even better vote with their responsible dollars for such a person. Government is but force. Use of force is never justified or efficient but for self-defense. Government is not self. Government is never justified, nor efficient. More deeply, these arguments of "predictability" of human behavior are underlying the whole leftist school of sociology (led in France by the infamous Pierre Bourdieu), who pretend that people cannot free, since these sociologists' statistics prove how socially (but, oh, of course, not genetically) determined they are, and hence that government can never be accused of violating any non-existent freedom, and that on the contrary it should optimize the common welfare by tweaking all the knobs provided by these scientists. Now, this alleged determinism is but crass conceit about what these people's a posteriori statistics provide. Since they are a posteriori, they don't say anything about the future. Since they are statistics, they don't say anything about anyone. So they don't change zilch about individual freedom, really. Besides, if there is no freedom, where does the freedom of the government to choose better than individuals come from? And which of these fighting scientist should the government listen? Or shall government just do what it will, and listen a posteriori to whichever scientists "spontaneously" exists (funded by government money) that approves and theorizes its action? /rant Ok, sorry for the line noise on [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just had to say that somewhere, and this article triggered it. [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] Bastiat.org: debunking economic sophisms since 1845.
Article: Patents Are An Economic Absurdity
Dear all, I just completed an article that I wish to submit to the European Commission during its consultation on the opportunity to extend european patent law to cover software: "Patents Are An Economic Absurdity" http://fare.tunes.org/articles/patents.html This article contains a detailed analysis of economical, technological, and social effects of patents, in terms (I hope) understandable by anyone. I'd appreciate your comments and suggestions so as to amend and better it, before I submit it. After it has been proof-read and corrected, I would also like to publish it the most widely in newspapers, journals, etc, or wherever it can reach the widest readership. I request your advice and opinion as to how this can be done. Yours freely, [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] What a lot of trouble to prove in political economy that two and two make four; and if you succeed in doing so, people cry, 'It is so clear that it is boring.' Then they vote as if you had never proved anything at all. -- Frederic Bastiat, "What Is Seen and What is Not Seen", 1850
Underpaid workers
Isn't one of the reasons why some highly qualified people feel underpaid the fact that in many structures, they feel they have a value that is unacknowledged or unexploited by their hierarchy? This may be particularly true when the hierarchy doesn't grasp the technicalities of the work and/or the far reaching effects that make the work add value, as compared to other works with more immediate effects (sale, finance). Of course, competition among employers will work toward reducing this effect; however, protectionist laws, economic inertia, small market size, information lag in emerging or quickly evolving market, and the general cultural gap between the profession of employers and that of employees work toward increasing it. You'll tell me: in a really free society, such information gaps are an _opportunity_ for someone to come and fill the gap for a fee. Experience seems to show that we (at least in France) are not in a really free society, with that respect. In summary, people are paid according to the value their employer expects them to bring; but their own expectation about that value differs, and they will feel underpaid (and complain) or overpaid (and be happy). [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] "No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session." -- Judge Gideon J. Tucker, 1866.
Re: Efficient secrets
On Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 07:50:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/7/00 15:34:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: but people using and republishing the information without having committed any such deed may do so freely. I stand by what I said. I was considering natural rights. I never consider but natural rights. When governmental edicts are opposite to natural rights, they must be abolished. USCS TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1) "intellectual property" is only information protectionism in disguise; it's opposite to natural rights, and one of the biggest sources of injustice in the industrial world. It's state-supported racket for the benefit of looters and moochers. 2) The US, that defends information protectionism, is thereby not a free country (not that there exists any). 3) I don't live in the US, and don't care about your stupid laws. That said, the country in which I live also has stupid laws (albeit different ones). [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] A good answer is one that solves the asker's problem, not one that (necessarily) fits his expectations. Actually, if the asker has been seriously looking for a solution, and did not find any, then there's a good deal of chance that a good answer won't fit his expectations! (At least, not all of them.)
Re: NPR, Self-Interest, and Rationalizations
Dear Armchair Economists, below is an e-mail announce I just sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and which I think might interest some of you. I'm sorry if it's considered off-topic on this list; if so please tell me and I won't do it again. Cheers, [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win. -- Gandhi --8--8--8--8--8--8--8--8--8-- Dear friends, I am pleased to announce to you that you can already register for the Bastiat 2001 conference that will take place in the first week of july 2001. The conference will be organized by the Cercle Frederic Bastiat, in collaboration with the ISIL and with Libertarian International. All the details are available at http://bastiat.net/en/events/ Send questions, suggestions, etc, to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I hope I'll meet you there next year. Yours freely, [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | ReflectionCybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] [ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ] Reason isn't about lack of a priori's, but presence of a posteriori's.
