Re: acceptable coinage/ currency/ money
Also, Frank Chorodov: Why the State destroys Society, The Rise and Fall of Society. https://mises.org/library/rise-and-fall-society https://mises.org/profile/frank-chodorov On Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 12:27 AM Douglas Lucas wrote: > > Stuff you should read for more similar or similar-ish to the above: > > Peter Gelderloos: _Worshiping Power: An Anarchist View of Early State > Formation_ > > Heather Marsh: _Autonomy, Diversity, Society_ and _Binding Chaos_ and > https://getgee.xyz > > Ursula K Le Guin: "The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction", _The Dispossessed_ > >
Re: acceptable coinage/ currency/ money
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 04:26:38PM -0700, Douglas Lucas wrote:
> Soo much complete bullshit from Zenaan as usual. See below for those
> others interested in knowledge.
>
> On 10/10/19 11:11 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> >
> > Humans seem prima facie inclined to engage in transactions of
> > "currency" (e.g. fiats) or "money" (fiats, gold and silver coin,
> > digital coin, etc).
> >
> > As we recently learnted from Jordan Peterson, hierarchies are rather
> > fundamental to our biology, and indicate strongly the pyramidal
> > distribution of wealth, status and mating opportunities.
> >
> > AKA "skewed distribution of wealth".
...
> Trade is what outgroups do. I don't trust you, so I'm not gonna do X for
> you unless you do Y for me. And those most skilled at trading rise to
> the top of this, as lobster fanatic and benzo addict Jordan Peterson
> screams, but did you know for hundreds of thousands of years not all of
> life is based on trade?
Did somebody say "all of life is based on trade"? Perhaps you read
some other email than the one you thought you were replying to?
Pareto distributions however:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution
Originally applied to describing the distribution of wealth in a
society, fitting the trend that a large portion of wealth is held
by a small fraction of the population, the Pareto distribution has
colloquially become known and referred to as the Pareto principle,
or "80-20 rule", and is sometimes called the "Matthew principle".
This rule states that, for example, 80% of the wealth of a society
is held by 20% of its population. However, one should not conflate
the Pareto distribution for the Pareto Principle as the former only
produces this result for a particular power value, α {\displaystyle
\alpha } \alpha (α = log45 ≈ 1.16). While α {\displaystyle \alpha }
\alpha is variable, empirical observation has found the 80-20
distribution to fit a wide range of cases, including natural
phenomena and human activities.
pretty much all of biological life is characterised by pareto
distributions.
Those third sigma alpha lobsters are going to metaphorically bite
you (us), to the extent at least that we ignore this part of our
shared reality.
> Over time in ideal circumstances trade might
> lead to the traders becoming ingroup with each other, ending the trade,
> and starting up sharing / fluid custodianship of assets. But in today's
> world the deli never changes because of overwhelming social control
> exerted by corporations, states, etc. You have to trade for the reuben,
> even though the deli worker behind the counter has come to know you from
> your regular stops and y'all share good tidings with each other,
> friendly comments on the rainy weather, etc. The sharing prosocial world
> and the trade antisocial world exist side by side every time you stop at
> the deli counter, two vibes or spheres uncomfortably overlapping.
Sometimes, and sadly, yes.
However, many of us have a fine first hand example of at least the
beginnings of "a sharing culture" in the guise of FLOSS.
For some, significance, good feels, social status, and possibly even
actual altruism, is sufficient to create in the software realm and
give ones creations away.
> Trade means non-traders, such as very disabled individuals or infants or
> elderly, are forced to rely on shameful charity rather than being
> treated as integral parts of the ingroup. Today in the capitalist ideal,
> everyone is their own 'sole proprietor' of an outgroup of everyone else,
> 7.5 billion outgroups all competing, except for say families, or when
> people start forming ingroups, as they do in so many situations. You can
> tell trade is stupid for ingroups because it doesn't include
> automatically infants and elderly etc. Able-bodied white people with no
> kids please! Yeah, let's base all the rules on 30 year olds and just
> kick infants and elderly to the curb with shameful charity. Makes a lot
> of fucking sense as a lifelong, generations-long strategy /sarcasm.
> "Where there's justice, there's no need for charity." -- Wollstonecraft
Our present world leaves a lot of humanity by the wayside, and many
suffer for it - including able bodied childless individual
(i-divide-u-all) "consumers" - there are more and more examples these
days where this dynamic hits women in their early to mid 30s pretty
hard - they realise that their attractive fertile years have been
wasted on the cock carousel (muh individual freedom/ fun/ good life)
and that such a narcissistic lifestyle is not exactly fulfilling -
certainly not in later years - "freedom from" parents, grand
children, a true support network which family provides.
Some funny dating site ads pop up on daily stormer here and there,
e.g. the 18 year old "wanna be model" looking for a fit handsome
billionaire "who must be socialist", or the late-30s ex porn "star"
(initially advertised as "professionally successful woman seeking to
settle
Re: acceptable coinage/ currency/ money
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 04:26:38PM -0700, Douglas Lucas wrote: ... > We need a global commons for public data so we can organize effectively > to knowledgeably replace the social structures, not just cheering on > corporate Twitter etc when the current ones continue to collapse (and > then when our number's up screaming that we deserve more cryptocoin to > float our own particular outgroup boat), and so there can be a literate > population that can maintain individual autonomy (which means so much > more than trade but also cooking skill, traveling skill, etc etc) > through individual rights but also be informed in agreeing to social > contracts etc because we're simultaneously very social creatures. > > Stuff you should read for more similar or similar-ish to the above: > > Peter Gelderloos: _Worshiping Power: An Anarchist View of Early State > Formation_ > > Heather Marsh: _Autonomy, Diversity, Society_ and _Binding Chaos_ and > https://getgee.xyz > > Ursula K Le Guin: "The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction", _The Dispossessed_ BTW, thanks for the reading list. Appreciated - especially with your effective/implicit commentary to hint at the content. Have a good one and create our world heh,
Re: acceptable coinage/ currency/ money
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 04:26:38PM -0700, Douglas Lucas wrote:
> Soo much complete bullshit from Zenaan as usual. See below for those
> others interested in knowledge.
>
> On 10/10/19 11:11 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > Well that's the question isn't it...
> >
> > Humans seem prima facie inclined to engage in transactions of
> > "currency" (e.g. fiats) or "money" (fiats, gold and silver coin,
> > digital coin, etc).
> >
> > As we recently learnted from Jordan Peterson, hierarchies are rather
> > fundamental to our biology, and indicate strongly the pyramidal
> > distribution of wealth, status and mating opportunities.
> >
> > AKA "skewed distribution of wealth".
>
> Off the top of my head:
>
> People have been around for hundreds of thousands of years and have
> lived in all sorts of different civilizations and social structures. The
> world is of much bigger scope than Zenaan permits; humans have much more
> range than benzo addict Jordan Peterson yelling about lobsters and
> hoping to hoard even more commodities/bananas.
>
> Indus Valley Civilization lacked military/security forces, very little
> wealth disparity, very little hierarchy, no priests, very peaceful.
"very little hierarchy"
Certainly not none.
Choose any value, and you immediately, inherently create the
following hiearchies:
- the hiearchy of individuals capable of embodying and living that
value to a greater/ lesser degree that other individuals
- same for groups in relation to other groups
"Who's the greater Buddhist"
You can throw straw men around till the cows come home ("Zenaan does
not permit a bigger scope in the world that the specific sentence he
spoke...") and you can assert similar false limitations of thought
and conversation upon anyone else you choose (Jordan Peterson in your
above paragraph) but doing these things just demonstrates your
position in the hierarchy of those capable of making an ass of
themselves by using straw men arguments.
Knock yourself out...
Re: acceptable coinage/ currency/ money
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 02:17:24PM -0300, Punk wrote: > On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:18:53 +1100 > Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > As we recently learnted from Jordan Peterson, > > > > > > ok - so you still are a shill for that piece of right wing shit. > > > Ergo, you are the problem. > > > > Just because person X says something incorrect, does not mean that > > everything person X says must therefore be incorrect. > > I didn't claim that's the case. I do claim that person X making > some outrageous and blatantly false claims, and then ignoring > counterarguments is proof that person X is not a legitimate > intelectual actor. He is a fraud. And all I said is "as we recently learned from X" - how is that shilling? > > > > hierarchies are rather > > > > fundamental to our biology, > > > > > > yep, you are the very source of the problem. I'm getting tired of > > > your constant flip floping. Go suck peterson's cock, trump's cock > > > and putin's cock. > > > > Hierarchies are compelling science. > > yop don't know what 'science' means. That's one of those problematic, dichomatic absolutes - you might have a problem with pareto distributions, but they exist; ignoring that is not useful. > Your statement makes as much sense as saying "the sky is a pink cake". > > > > Actual science. Including math. > > Yes, MATH! A = A ergo 'hierarchies' > > Dig yourself deeper? Nah, don't waste my time and yours. Certainly. Pareto distributions. We cannot avoid them. Except perhaps with some fascist dictatorship which immediately institutes the problematic hiearchy we're "trying to get rid of". "Hierarchies in action" - we can't avoid them. > > > And I already pointed out that gold coins are a lot better than > > > any form of 'crypto currency'. > > > > Yes, gold and silver, acceptable coinage. Many would agree. I happen > > to agree. > > > > And gold and silver coin are perhaps the only reasonable foundation > > for any digital coin. > > I wouldn't put too much 'faith' in such a system. The moment you > exchange actual real physical coins for some digital IOU you have > a problem. Though admitedly the problem may be mitigated in a > libertarian culture. You know, the exact opposite culture of what > we have now. Ack.
Re: acceptable coinage/ currency/ money
Soo much complete bullshit from Zenaan as usual. See below for those others interested in knowledge. On 10/10/19 11:11 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > Well that's the question isn't it... > > Humans seem prima facie inclined to engage in transactions of > "currency" (e.g. fiats) or "money" (fiats, gold and silver coin, > digital coin, etc). > > As we recently learnted from Jordan Peterson, hierarchies are rather > fundamental to our biology, and indicate strongly the pyramidal > distribution of wealth, status and mating opportunities. > > AKA "skewed distribution of wealth". Off the top of my head: People have been around for hundreds of thousands of years and have lived in all sorts of different civilizations and social structures. The world is of much bigger scope than Zenaan permits; humans have much more range than benzo addict Jordan Peterson yelling about lobsters and hoping to hoard even more commodities/bananas. Indus Valley Civilization lacked military/security forces, very little wealth disparity, very little hierarchy, no priests, very peaceful. We have recently learned from benzo addict Jordan Peterson that he is an idiot. Here, think of this. Trade versus sharing. Obviously, especially older generations, will automatically hear "sharing" and think "Soviet Union" or "communism" but there are other real-life models for actual sharing. Imagine you are on a road trip with three friends. Four individuals in the vehicle. You all have a single bag of 100 kale chips. Communism is when one of these four becomes a dictator and says "each person gets exactly 25 kale chips because we're all [supposedly] equal, (though perhaps a few extra kale chips for me)" and anyone who disagrees is killed, etc. USian anarchists insisting on rebranding history to fuel their attempts at celebrity cstatus all this "State communism" because then they can agree with their constitutencies of rank-and-file idiots that "communism is a good thing", but most people know better about the failures of communism, etc. Trade (such as capitalism, yes not just crony capitalism, jim bell), is when you gesture to your ingroup friend in the car that you'd like to have some kale chips too and he says "$5 or GTFO." Suddenly you are an outgroup on this roadtrip. You don't belong anymore; you've been shunned. You have to provide dolla dolla bill up front to your former friends because you can no longer sit with them etc. Trade is when you go to the deli and say "Fuck you, I paid the five dollars, give me my goddamn reuben" and you get your sandwich without having to ponder, associate with, or help the dead factory farm animals, the workers cleaning the deli, the homeless person who hangs out in the deli, etc. It's just fuck you I paid give me my sandwich. Trade = outgrouping; sharing = ingrouping. Forget the communism crap, I had to clarify since "sharing" automatically triggers "communism" in people's impressionable brains, you know this world where we all go around murmuring "invisible hand" or "proletariat" because dead guys wrote those words down hundreds of years ago. So just normal sharing. Like little kids usually do. Sharing is what ingroups do. It's fluid custodianship of assets. In this roadtrip case, the assets are the 100 kale chips to be distributed/allocated during the course of the road trip. The road trippers share the kale chips according to respect, approval, logic, etc, because they are in-group folks. Maybe the driver needs a few extra because the driver is tired from focusing on the road. Maybe the one passenger with high blood pressure needs to not have so many salty chips, so the other 3 subtly and semi-automatically look out for this person, making sure this person doesn't have too many kale chips. This is all sort of natural and automatic and the situation is dynamically refreshed constantly. Maybe the car breaks down so everyone becomes more careful to save the kale chips. This sort of sharing is what ingroups do, not just road trips but also families, officeworkers in an office setting familiar to them, etc. We're all familiar with this. Imagine you are working in a computer firm office and suddenly one secretary demands the other secretary fork over $2 for the good pencil with the eraser left on it. No, obviously, these employees see each other as ingroup so they share the good pencil on an as-needed basis and refresh the situation according to life's contingencies. Maybe someone gets shunned or the dynamically refreshed situation changes, everyone decides to burn down their employer, leak all the documents, strike, or whatever. Trade is what outgroups do. I don't trust you, so I'm not gonna do X for you unless you do Y for me. And those most skilled at trading rise to the top of this, as lobster fanatic and benzo addict Jordan Peterson screams, but did you know for hundreds of thousands of years not all of life is based on trade? Over time in ideal circumstances trade might lead to the traders
Re: acceptable coinage/ currency/ money
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 02:01:21PM -0300, Punk wrote: > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 17:11:52 +1100 > Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > > Well that's the question isn't it... > > no the question was your retarded comments on that fisher > scumbag, doubting the self-evident fact that he is a thief to the > tune of BILLIONS of stolen 'dollars'. Admittedly it was a new question - what does JuanCoin look like. Looks like phys gold and silver ... > > As we recently learnted from Jordan Peterson, > > ok - so you still are a shill for that piece of right wing shit. > Ergo, you are the problem. Just because person X says something incorrect, does not mean that everything person X says must therefore be incorrect. > > hierarchies are rather > > fundamental to our biology, > > yep, you are the very source of the problem. I'm getting tired of > your constant flip floping. Go suck peterson's cock, trump's cock > and putin's cock. Hierarchies are compelling science. Actual science. Including math. You don't have to believe in hierarchies for hierarchies to exist. Yes that's a self evident trolling statement, but a fair troll on the face of it: Hierarchies -are- rather fundamental to our biology. You don't have to deal with it, nor accept it, nor dispute it, nor take or not take any position on that, for that fact to be true. > And I already pointed out that gold coins are a lot better than > any form of 'crypto currency'. Yes, gold and silver, acceptable coinage. Many would agree. I happen to agree. And gold and silver coin are perhaps the only reasonable foundation for any digital coin.
Re: acceptable coinage/ currency/ money
I very much doubt any money system can fix the economic and social environment within which its embedded. A more effective lever for change is to make unnecessary as many of the current economic underpinnings as possible. One likely approach is the development, to practicality and widespread application, of APM (Atomically Precise Manufacturing), i.e. nanotech. If APM can largely eliminate supply chains, especially non-local, and make communities (or even individuals) practically independent (i.e. off-ecconomic as well as off-grid) then the economic and social pyramid could greatly flatten and deny small numbers their privileged positions. On Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 7:12 AM Zenaan Harkness wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:35:20AM -0300, Punk wrote: > > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:15:11 +1100 > > Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can there be such a thing as an "ethical billionaire"? > > > > > > > > no - there's no way for a single person to earn 'billions' in a > > > > free market. It's completely impossible to be filthy rich without > > > > being incredibly criminal. > > > > > > > > > So which sort of "digital coins" systems, are ethical to roll out? > > > > > > > well, no system can fix the prvious/current criminal allocation > > of 'property rights'. Something like bitcoin can prevent further > > looting through inflation but it can't fix previous looting. And > > as seen, bitcoin has introduced its own skewed 'distribution of > > wealth'. Not to mention the fact that bitcoin has been > > successfully attacked by the american govt and its subsidiary > > 'coinbase'. > > > > So what sort of digital coin can fix all those problems? I > > obviously don't know =) > > > Well that's the question isn't it... > > Humans seem prima facie inclined to engage in transactions of > "currency" (e.g. fiats) or "money" (fiats, gold and silver coin, > digital coin, etc). > > As we recently learnted from Jordan Peterson, hierarchies are rather > fundamental to our biology, and indicate strongly the pyramidal > distribution of wealth, status and mating opportunities. > > AKA "skewed distribution of wealth". > > So, I want to know what JuanCoin looks like - and I (really or 'in > principle') don't care whether it has any of the following > properties, except that they satisfy Juan :) > > - inflation/ deflation/ stagflation > > - phys backed/ pure fiat/ combo > > - central-/ pure-decentral-/ combo- mintage > > - use X or Y electrons per unit of JuanCoin minted > > - and any other axis of interest > > > Until we lay out the parameters of acceptable, our pot shots at > "every attempt thus far" may appear a little thin in reasoning - > let's rectify that. > >
