For a long time Bitcoin transaction fees were high and unpredictable, as Bitcoin runs into its scaling limit of seven transactions per second. This has caused grave damage to the lightning network and to daos.
During this time more and more people have moved to layer two solutions, such as Liquid, Lightning, and Liquid Lightning, with the result that the number of transactions has finally fallen back to below the scaling limit. From time to time, not often, but often enough, the mempool empties, something that has not been happening in a very long time.
If you are not in a hurry, most days one sat per vbyte is sufficient. This is fifteen cents for the simplest and most common Bitcoin transaction. Which is still higher than it should be, but it is quite tolerable. As a result the lightning network is now finally starting to recover.
Liquid provides substantially more privacy than level one bitcoin, unless you know what you are doing and are very careful with level one Bitcoin, in which case level one Bitcoin can provide considerably better privacy than Liquid, but lightning is better than either.
Three minutes before I wrote this, mempool.space showed a coinjoin transaction worth millions of dollars which had hundreds of outputs. The government has been successfully suppressing most coinjoins, but they are coming back.
I don’t know what the current state of coinjoin is. It has been changing fast and I would welcome information in the comments. For a while it seemed that it had gone away, partly because of repression, and partly because of unacceptably high transaction fees, but it is back.
The great majority of lightning nodes are darknet nodes, which provide substantial privacy, or combined clearnet and darknet nodes, which can provide substantial privacy.
Lightning software is still unbearably difficult to use unless you are transacting through a centralised, and usually custodial, wallet, but presumably all those darknet nodes are using a self custody wallet.
And you can lose your money if you mess up the rather difficult task of administering a full self custody lightning wallet.
Lightning protocol still has a horrible and easily fixable privacy hole, which strangely remains unfixed. (And fixing it would make the creation and destruction of lightning channels cheaper and more convenient.)
Lightning provides substantially more privacy than layer one bitcoin, because channel creation and destruction inherently mixes level one bitcoin.
Existing scaling solutions are now finally working, but, as the shills correctly point out, will not work forever, will not scale to the size we will need to replace SWIFT, the US$, and the Chinese renminbi as an international medium of exchange. Efforts to replace SWIFT are now primarily focused on Liquid and Liquid Lightning, but Liquid will find it hard to scale to SWIFT size. Maybe Liquid Lighting can scale to SWIFT size,
I await the Grail Bridge becoming a bridge to a level two that can scale forever.
If I had 8 or 9 or 10 figures (USD) of bitcoins I too would probably jerk myself off over its technical details. Since I have none I’ll settle for fully and finally killing off the crypto scam with something that grandma will use.
Hey look it’s the talking toasters guy sans frenulum!
So tell us, does your perfectly conscious and perfectly intelligent washing machine agree more with Confucius or more with Laozi?
Are you mocking me for (allegedly) having been mutilated shortly after birth in one of the most severe and permanently physically and psychologically damaging possible deliberately inflicted traumas at the surrogate hands of the Devil himself, the scum-sucking nurses and doctors of the U.S. medical apparatus?
Yes.
Then die.
Lol triggered.
I console myself with the fact that I wasn’t born an Ashk.
Well, you should just ask the perfectly conscious and intelligent chat GPT how to stop your penis from being so Jewish; no doubt it will tell you all about it, and then you can just follow through with the instructions and finally have a non-Jewish penis. It might take several decades, but patience is a virtue.
Come on man, don’t be so sensitive.
You need to grow thicker skin.
Thank G-d that in 3 years the ASI (Artificial SuperIntelligence) will be able to tap into the quantum subfield and turn the cosmic energy of the aether around my penis into fully enervated tissue.
>I console myself with the fact that I wasn’t born an Ashk.
>G-d
Lol what, you a sephardic Jew?
I’m sure he listens to Ofer Levi while writing these posts.
Then again, my own son is uncircumcised (by my own decision) in a country where 99% of the boys are circumcised, so you can’t really accuse me of being a “bad person.”
Check-mate, goyim.
The dilemma was between depriving him of sexual pleasure by snipping that skin vs. depriving him of sexual pleasure by rendering him an incel due to having ant-eater penis in snipdick country. I chose the latter option.
Is my sense of humor dark? Or is reality itself sometimes less than totally bright, and I actually make the best of the cards I’ve been dealt?
[*your positions are arguable, reasonable, and worthy of reply, but deleted anyway for failure to conform to the moderation policy.
[*deleted*]
No thought crimes detected.
>And you can lose your money if you mess up the rather difficult task of administering a full self custody lightning wallet.
That’s an important point. If you want one of these digital currencies to become widely used – something worth having because normal everyday people will accept it as payment for goods and services, it’s got to be idiot-proof.
Because one does at times need to do honest business with idiots. Maybe a lot of the time.
Not really. There have been times when it was usual to use different currencies for different types of transactions, e.g. Western currency for serious purchases and local currency for every thing else in most of Eastern Europe before the wall came down. In unoccupiend France during WWII people used gold when they bought valuable stuff and paper currency for everyday shopping.
Just use fiat currency to pay idiots and bitcoin for serious business.
It is ok if BTC isn’t idiot proof anyway, it just further incentivises smarter behavior.
You need to be able to buy from idiots and sell to idiots. And it does not take an idiot to lose a self custody lightning wallet. Normies are going to balls it up.
Should there be idiot proofing against lost Bitcoin? There’s an argument to be had that the passive permanently decreasing of the money supply is a good deflationary hedge against deflation, but at some point doesn’t that pose a risk of liquidity crisis?
What if it were possible to mine stagnant Bitcoin wallets?
Absolutely there is idiot proofing against lost bitcoin.
For a long time, Bitcoin wallets have used a recovery system based on a master phrase, so you can always recover your bitcoin from master phrase.
But that is level one Bitcoin, and liquid level two bitcoin.
Recovery of Lightning is far more fraught. It does not need to be, but it is. The protocols to fix the problem almost exist.
Removing foot-guns and making the entire experience as safe, seamless, and intuitive as possible is just good engineering. Everyone makes a mistake on long enough timescales.
I am not sold on prioritizing UX over functionality, I am not sold on BTC being what you use to buy groceries or it goes bust. Looks to me like we get soverign banks, and lots and lots of different little currencies. This process was happening naturally as corporations felt their oats on the fronteir, before the government squashed them. Well, now these ‘tokens’ are much harder to stifle. We’ll have lots of them, most of them scams, until things mature, then a lot of scams and some with real utility.
So people with lots of wealth learn to use cryptographic wallets, and learn techniques to manage valuable secrets. The middle people learn some basics. The lower get highly curated apps and whatever they can pick up from the middle.
The upper stores significant wealth, does lots of deals. The middle less so, uses it to manage certain finances, navigate around failing bureaucracy. The lower uses the system to gamble and play online games.
Expecting middle and lower people to manage all their assets trustlessly, keep very valuable secrets around, always, this I don’t expect to work out. They’re going to be sold a service, and this is fine. The risk of the service going bust is likely lower than the risk of the average person losing their secret.
Speaking of doing business with idiots, a few years back there was a real flourishing of merchants and vendors willing to transact with Lightning, and there were even a few online directories up; but as of about a month ago (last time I checked), it’s now mostly a pile of dead links, scams, domain squatters, and stores/merchants that are technically still around but show no evidence of accepting crypto payments or ever having done so, like the Beef Initiative.
Maybe this isn’t the right place to discuss it, and if so, that’s fine – feel free to delete the post. But I’m curious if there’s much of an “economy” still up and running with Lightning, or Liquid for that matter. To be clear, I’m not talking about shady black-market/dark-web stuff, which actually isn’t that difficult to find; I’m talking about normal above-board merchants taking crypto payments for real rather than digital goods.
With some effort, it’s possible to get a lot done using either regular layer 1 bitcoin or litecoin, but lightning and liquid seem to have gotten into a Monero type situation in which the transactions are obviously still happening, but not for any mainstream commerce, only between private parties transacting exclusively in crypto.
It’s strange because I’m not aware of any explicit crackdown on the layer 2 protocols. Seems they just went underground all on their own, maybe anticipating a future crackdown.
I see two reasons for lack of demamd currently for transacting in BTC as the main means of exchange. 1st, you have to pay capital gains tax if you want to stay out of trouble. Why pay extra tax for using BTC if you have the cash? 2nd, with BTC not hitting its full valuation potential spending BTC over USD makes no sense. Why spend the asset that will be going up in value long term when you have excess devaluing cash lying around?
Why sell stock that’s been doing well, when the company still has good long-term fundamentals, when you still have cash lying around in bank accounts? Asset allocation – you often want to avoid any excessive concentration of capital in one particular class, and an individual who’s been hodling BTC for ten years might find himself highly over-indexed in that class.
Exchanging for fiat can be somewhat less smooth and drastically less private than spending it directly. There are P2P exchanges, but selling on them can be hit or miss when prices are high.
Speaking purely hypothetically and in broad strokes, I doubt that most people transacting in cryptocurrencies (and off the centrally-owned exchanges) are gung-ho about paying capital gains taxes on an asset that wasn’t even regulated at the time they acquired it. While it’s not quite as insulting as the concept of taxing “unrealized capital gains” we keep hearing about, it’s still tantamount to naked theft. Therefore, a U.S. resident with Bitcoin is like a California resident with an AR-15 who lost it in a tragic boating accident: hard drive died, with no backups, and the little slip of paper with the seed phrase was tragically thrown out by the cleaning lady who thought it was trash.
There was a big push to get lightning into person to person transactions, and these efforts have failed everywhere, even under the most favorable of regimes. But for people who do long distance transactions where one or both of the parties has a wobbly banking regime, or the two banking regimes do not talk to each other very well, or the currency suffers severe inflation, getting good penetration among normies. There are plenty of hosting providers who take bitcoin, plenty of suppliers of grey market pharmaceuticals who take bitcoin, and plenty of normies who do not have a full time business, and are therefore not prepared to jump through all the hoops required to get permission to accept credit cards, and who lack the leverage that makes it possible to safely accept credit cards, who take bitcoin. But the pattern among normies is that having bypassed the failing banking system, they then cash out or cash in at an exchange.
While getting merchants to take Bitcoin for a cup of coffee was dismal failure, Bitcoin is experiencing natural and substantial growth in international transactions by small time and part time businessmen. Whose disinclination to put up websites under a government registered name saying they take Bitcoin may have something to do with taxes, or, as in China, Bitcoin being simply illegal but widely used.
Making payments inside Russia is extremely easy. Anyone with a bank account can send money to anyone else and the fee is always zero. You give me your phone number and I enter it into my banking app and see accounts at various banks with the name “James Robert D.” I choose one, type in how many rubles, and click Send. Cash is also accepted everywhere. Minibus rides cost 30-50 rubles and most pay cash, but for cashless passengers the driver hands you a slip of paper with his phone number and the name of his bank, or writes it on the inside of the bus.
Outside of Russia, moderately more difficult, but not difficult enough within one country to provide a strong use case for Bitcoin. Internationally, difficult, dangerous, and frequently impossible. Right now I could not buy something, because I could not pay the vendor, despite my connections with no end of fiat international networks.
Presumably international payments are even worse in Russia, because of sanctions, but they are bad everywhere, and much worse in countries that are not quite part of the globoempire. For a private individual to pay a small business, or a small business to pay a private individual, it is mighty rough. There is a clear use case for Bitcoin, and I am seeing substantial Bitcoin adoption by normies for this use case.
Bitcoin was illegal in Russia, and they are still attempting to regulate the stuffing out of it, but when sanctions hit, no end of highly respectable well politically connected Russians simply had no alternative to Bitcoin, so they just did it and the regulators rolled over.
On a related topic, I’m looking for a Linux-based e-mail and web-hosting service with SSH access. I found a list on-line, but can’t connect to any of them from a Russian IP address. This server, whose content is completely apolitical, needs to have access to the global internet, so siting it in Russia is not an option. What do you recommend?
https://x.com/RadarHits/status/1927815150024732788
Guaranteed that Vance is announcing the coming worst regime against cryptocurrency privacy ever.
Mark it and send it.
JD Vance proposes to remove the many and severe sanctions against stablecoins and to “vastly expand the use of stablecoins”
“Stablecoins” are the one real stablecoin, Tether, just as “Crypto currencies” are the one real crypto currency, Bitcoin. All the enemies of “cryptocurrencies” denounce Tether for its role in facilitating black market transactions and exchanges of fiat and Bitcoin. So, removing the many and severe sanctions against Tether would, the enemies of crypto currency believe, be good for the price and use of Bitcoin. Probably they are correct, though I find the enemies of Bitcoin to not be a reliable source of information. Probably removing sanctions against Tether would result in even more information about Tether transactions becoming available to the US government. But just as Bitcoin tends to be exchanged as Liquid by the bigger operators, and lightning by the smaller. Tether transactions tend to have Bitcoin at one end of the transaction. If you convert Tether and lightning, you normally do so through a KYC exchange, but Bitcoin lightning remains difficult to trace.
It seems to me that once you admit that Bitcoin is “the one real cryptocurrency” you’ve admitted that Bitcoin’s purchase value has little or nothing to do with Bitcoin’s technical value. Right?
The issue is network effects are sticky. If bitcoin slowly adopts new technology, avoids state capture, and new technology adopts bitcoin, it will stay the one. No matter how fast other networks move on the tech front, if they cannot match bitcoin on liquidity and number of users, eventually they get swallowed. There is probably a better protocol out there than IPv4, and yet most things end up using IPv4 addresses.
Not if I get there first.
Anyone can copy Satoshi’s idea, so every copycat shitcoin and memecoin scam has as much technical value as Bitcoin, and several currencies (Litecoin, Monero, and Zcash) have important innovations that make them technically vastly superior.
Bitcoin is the One True Crypto Currency because of Metcalfe’s law. To remain the One True Crypto Currency mindshare, it has to be faithful to the vision of Satoshi, so it outsources technological innovation to level two Bitcoins.
The ultimate solution would be that a cryptocurrency actually implements ZCash promises.
USD has an intrinsic value of zero, true, but an implicit value inasmuch as it’s rooted in some combination of petroleum, military might, intelligence fuckery, wages, mortgages, bonds, derivatives, financial fuckery, etc. Bitcoin, like USD, has an intrinsic value of zero, minus all the other baggage, so it can go to infinity precisely because it’s literally nothing.
Everything has an intrinsic value of zero. If no one wants to buy it, it’s functionally worthless.
People who blather on about the “intrinsic value” of some asset are usually fishing for an excuse to steal it.
You are more spiritually Jewish than Mossadnik.
And just so you understand the same thing can’t be both a currency and an asset.
Nuts
Bitcoin is a currency and and asset, and its value is entirely because people think that eventually it is going to replace fiat. If it is purely an asset, its long term value is going to be zero.
That is the argument the shills are making, and they are right.
Gold has some intrinsic value — pretty, malleable, and corrosion resistant. Trump likes gold plated toilets — gold has intrinsic value because you can make nice toilets with it. But its price far above this value. Bitcoin has zero intrinsic value. But it is a better gold than gold, because it can safely move.
Are you sure it’s spiritually Jewish, and not technically Jewish, intrinsically Jewish, or implicitly Jewish?
Let me know if you’re ever running short on polysyllabic adverbs you can use to make any old bullshit sound plausible if you squint at it from just the right angle. We “spiritually Jewish” folk have tons of ’em.
How fascinating. So all those centuries where gold and silver were used as currency… never actually happened?
Please, tell us more of your 100% Really Truly Factually True Facts, I am but a parched man wandering the desert and you carry the only flask.
Jim: “Bitcoin is a currency and and asset, and its value is entirely because people think that eventually it is going to replace fiat. If it is purely an asset, its long term value is going to be zero.”
This translates to “Bitcoin is a thing with some currency-like characteristics that is currently an asset because people think that its currency-like characteristics will let it eventually become the dominant currency.” Or alternatively “Bitcoin is currently an asset because there’s a small possibility that one day it becomes currency.” Which doesn’t conflict with what I said really.
Jim: “But it is a better gold than gold, because it can safely move.”
Does that really make the world a better place? Why shouldn’t banks be robbable, actually?
Scaredbucks: “How fascinating. So all those centuries where gold and silver were used as currency… never actually happened?”
If you use the most expansive definition of “asset” you can make that work. Using the colloquial modern definition “asset” means something cashflowing. So during “all those centuries” the income-yielding assets would be estates and the estates’ peasants and the gold and silver coin (possessed and used almost entirely by estate-owning nobles and the merchants who served them) were just extremely stable stores of value. Here’s another way to think about it: you can buy an asset with leverage because it has a “return” and the “return” implies a valuation multiple; you can’t buy a store of value with leverage because there’s no “return” and anyone you propose that to will look at you like you’re a retard (because you are).
Of course you won’t respond intelligently to this because you think you’re considerably smarter than you are. It’s all so tiresome.
Nuts. Assets are what standard book keeping calls assets. If you can legitimately put it in the asset column, it is an asset.
You are using your own idiosyncratic private language and getting into pointless arguments because of odd language that means thing you do not intend and do not understand
This does not appear to be true, and if it is true it should not be true because it is an attack on our ability to speak and communicate by communists who intend to implement a brutal totalitarian terror state and to murder everyone like me.
“Something cashflowing” is capital — “capital” Capital originally meant “head of cattle”, so capital is something that produces more of itself, as cattle produce more of themselves.
Redefining capital away is part of a Marxist attack on speech in order to destroy capitalism and impose socialism. Because communists want the only factor of production to be labor, making capitalists parasites by definition and entrepeneurs parasites and scammers by changing the meaning of words.
Please do not corrupt the language. When you encounter terminological disagreement, check out what meanings the better people employ instead of confidently declaring your idiosyncratic and bizarre usage to be colloquial and modern.
And if it truly is colloquial and modern, then it cuts us off from past knowledge, so we should resist changes where they matter for war, politics, faith, and organisation of the enterprise. Leftists are always changing words, because they want to do over again what led to catastrophe last time.
The problem, from the point of view of those intend to impose a brutal totalitarian terror state, is that using the word “capital” to mean productive assets, and the type specimen of a productive asset is a cow, implies capitalism is productive, and they want to rule over starving peasants scratching the dirt with digging sticks.
Communists have been fighting redefine “capital” ever since Marx to remove its positive associations with productivity and the creation of value, with making it and being successful. As far as I can tell, not getting very far. So I very much doubt your usage is colloquial and modern, but rather very old and never widely accepted.
And if you persist in using language not widely accepted on this forum, that is shilling and manipulative, not debate and reasoned argument.
Please do not translate standard usage of widely used terms to your own unique and incomprehensible Humpty Dumpty speak.
Standard usage of words by intelligent well informed people forms a web of meaning in which everything fits together. Which is necessary for intelligent well informed people to be able to communicate.
Check your stuff with Deepseek, It hallucinates a fair bit, but it is rather good at recognising standard usage. It is a thesaurus in which you can look up words for a well formed sentence whose meaning other people can recognise. Use it as thesaurus for words you are struggling with, but don’t copy and paste its output, as it is not an adequate substitute for human output.
A financial asset is anything with a valuation, regardless of whether said valuation is denominated in the official national currency, cryptocurrency, shiny pebbles or cows and chickens. It’s anything you own that might possibly be traded.
And currency is a store of value/medium of exchange that everyone agrees on, usually (but not always) because the state or local authority forces them to, i.e. “legal tender”.
The definition of currency is not only not exclusive with that of an asset, it’s a proper subset. All currencies are assets, because all currencies have self-denominating valuations, and also float against other currencies.
It’s funny that I’m labeled “Jewish” for aligning on the simple, parsimonious definitions of these words that everyone intuitively understands instead of some twat’s incomprehensible squid-ink definition designed to be contorted into infinite legalisms.
An accountant might try to tell me that my car is an asset, sure, notwithstanding that it loses value every single year. I won’t listen to him, of course, because I’m not a retard. Only things that keep their value (at an absolute minimum) or appreciate (more reasonably) are assets in any reasonable everyday meaning of the word. Technically cash-flowing and appreciating are different and I’ll admit to imprecision to that extent.
Not everything that cash-flows (or appreciates) is inherently productive for anyone other than its owner. Great assets to own can be parasitic net-negatives for everyone else.
Remind me to respond more later. (Just kidding. Maybe I will.)
Obviously a car is an asset. Ask Deepseek if a car is an asset. Deepseek was trained on billions of pages of English, so it uses English the way average normal people use it. It gets facts wrong, but it never gets English usage wrong.
You are speaking in your own weird idiosyncratic Humpty Dumpty language that no one else is going to understand. Words mean what they are used to mean, not whatever you want them mean.
This leads to you getting into stupid pointless fights, because people understand you to be saying something absurdly wrong. Because you are saying something absurdly wrong, even if inside your own head you meant something reasonable, but due to stubborn ignorance of the meaning of words, that is not what came out of your mouth.
Also your idiosyncratic speak has strong Marxist influence — you are not a Marxist, because I can understand Marxists — they use words in a non standard way, but it is a known variant of English. You are Humpty Dumpty after Humpty Dumpty was lectured by Marxists but did not pay much attention.
A car is an asset, retard. The exact phrase is “depreciating asset”. Another example of a depreciating asset is the roof on your house. This phrase exists precisely because “asset” on its own says nothing at all about either the quantity of the valuation or its direction.
You’re trying to impute some emotional meaning to the term “asset” that simply isn’t there. There’s no special word for “an asset that always appreciates in value” because it’s not a real or useful category; any asset might appreciate or decline in value depending on circumstances. Some 20-year-old pickup trucks suddenly started appreciating in value during the Rona madness when trucks became impossible to buy new or rent or repair. The fundamental defining property of an asset isn’t price, it’s ownership. If you own that car, it’s an asset; if you lease it, it’s a liability.
We have the word “capital” but capital is only production in potentia. Cattle in the hands of an incompetent rancher aren’t guaranteed to reproduce, and dollars in the hands of an incompetent investor aren’t guaranteed to yield positive ROI. The difference between potential and actual is crucial, because capitalism is fundamentally about maximizing the allocation of capital to the most prolific producers, such that the capital is… well, capitalized.
If capital is the term you are fumbling for, then currency is also considered capital because currency in the right hands can always be used to either generate more currency or to lower the cost of a good or service, which is functionally the same outcome. Just like other forms of capital, currency isn’t guaranteed to improve anyone’s quality of life merely by existing, but always has that potential. So here again, the terms “currency”, “asset” and “capital” are not mutually exclusive, and in fact there is considerable overlap.
“Cash-flowing”, if it has any meaning at all, is irrelevant to any of these definitions. It sounds like another newspeak artifact of KFM which likes to imply, via confusing terms and deceptive metrics, that it doesn’t matter how much real production is happening in an economy as long as money is “flowing”, which is obviously nonsense, and obviously a flimsy justification for continuing financialization and unconstrained growth of the parasitic FIRE economy.
“In the long run we’re all dead.” -> “In the long run our depreciating assets are no assets at all.”
Some of you code monkeys are worse than lawyers, I swear.
“Not everything that cash-flows (or appreciates) is inherently productive for anyone other than its owner. “
This is obviously wrong, it follow that everything that have cash flow / appreciates is inherently productive for someone other than the owner. You can’t have cash flow without someone paying up the cash , and so this someone think it is productive and valuable for him to pay the money.
And So everything that is cash flow and appreciate (because it has the cash flow) must be productive for someone beside the owner , in fact everyone , even those who have no relationship with either the owner or the customers , win because the add value that expand productivity.
“Great assets to own can be parasitic net-negatives for everyone else.”
This is true in the narrowest sense , lands hoarding. Even here it is by product of not proper development of land.
I don’t know if you actually believe sincerely or being malicious . But your view is inherently communist, you think that landlords are parasite and farmers are thieves , because the first take rents and the second sell milk. And can’t comprehend the effort and dedication it need to upkeep property for human livings and backbreaking works in farming.
Anon: “But your view is inherently communist, you think that landlords are parasites and farmers are thieves, because the first take rents and the second sell milk. And can’t comprehend the effort and dedication it takes to upkeep property for human livings and backbreaking works in farming.”
You’re making stuff up in your own mind. I haven’t yet said anything about landlords or farmers (or communism).
Some landlords may produce positive externalities, especially small landlords, precisely because small landlords have less pricing power than big landlords. Adam Smith had some things to say about landlords.
Regarding farming your mental picture is hilariously out of date. Most farming done by farmers today (if the farmer even owns his own land) employs A/C-equipped GPS-controlled gigantic machinery industrially farming corn and wheat heavily subsidized by the federal government.
I’m not ideological about this. But I don’t actually think that every square inch of farmland in America should be owned by Bill Gates (or insert other convenient villainous character), and anyone possessed by an ideology implicitly or explicitly supporting such an outcome should probably feel socially and physically insecure, yes.
We already live in a totalitarian nightmare-state. We may as well use eminent domain to reappropriate land to the benefit of more-worthy men. Imagine an FAA of farming established to distribute cushy lifetime land sinecures to 20 y/o men based on SAT-P (Scholastic Aptitude Test (Philosophy)) and GENE score.
In fact you have said plenty about communism — you are giving us the ideological rationale for communism.
The Kulak, according to you, is a minion of wall street. Wall Street is evil, it produces no benefits for us: Which implies the conclusion: Strike a blow at Wall Street! Kill the cows of the kulak with two cows, for those cows were assigned to him by Wall Street!
The most monopolistic of monopolies still produces massive external benefits, it just keeps more of those benefits for itself than many smaller operators doing the same thing.
But often many smaller operators cannot do the same thing. Standard Oil revolutionized oil refining, radically reducing the price of fuel. Microsoft revolutionized computing. These are enormous positive externalities. Every Linux desktop is still trying to catch up with what the Windows desktop was before Gates retired and the faggot in chief shat all over it.
And Musk cannot give us space, unless he effectively owns it.
I rely on X2Go. Wayland breaks X2Go. Windows in the days of its greatness (before the faggots and accountants took over) did not have this sort of problem because Bill Gates was in charge, while no one is in charge of linux desktops. Of course the solution in a distributed ecology of desktops is simply to use desktops that are compatible with X2Go. But that hits gaming performance, and prevents some games from playing altogether. The target market of Wayland does not have to deal with dozens of computers located in odd places, so X2Go services are off their radar, while video gamers are very much on their radar, and Wayland is very much on the radar of people writing video games. If we had a King of the Desktop, as we have a King of the Kernel, we would not have this sort of problem.
The modern economy was built by “monopolies” like Standard Oil and Microsoft, because to get stuff done, you need great men controlling great power and wealth. If you had your way we would be scratching in the dirt with digging sticks.
Considering how Wayland has been in development for over 15 years, that is a bit sad, even though Linux’ capabilities have become very impressive. Perhaps one day we could have a sovereign who, as fount of all honors, sponsors such projects to fill in the gaps.
Jim: “The Kulak, according to you, is a minion of Wall Street. Wall Street is evil, it produces no benefits for us: Which implies the conclusion: Strike a blow at Wall Street! Kill the cows of the kulak with two cows, for those cows were assigned to him by Wall Street!”
I looked up “kulak”, which appears to be a foreign word imported from Russia. The Wikipedia entry says that to qualify as a kulak you had to own 8 acres or more of arable land. Having 8 acres or more of arable land would be a gigantic step up for a huge number of 20 y/o men. I do in fact support gifting land to sensitive young men. If we can do that and simultaneously claw back some ill-gotten gains from criminally usurious olds, sure.
Meaning you support stealing it from the kulaks and gifting it to faggots. Much as the Bolsheviks promised “land to the tiller” Which turned out to mean enslaving the tiller to work on the land the Bolsheviks had stolen.
Any program whereby benevolent do gooders propose to steal land from Bob and give it to Dave tends to result in the do gooders torturing and murdering Bob, keeping the land, and enslaving Dave.
Alf: “Considering how Wayland has been in development for over 15 years…”
Linux will never have a Year Of The Linux Desktop because the software “people” who volunteer their time on free software do it for Nerd Cred. Linus Pauling, however extremely smart he legitimately is, got a pity $1 million from Red Hat and was happy to have it.
Neither Negros, Poors, anyone who is not your own kin and kind, or King’s Sons deserve gifts of lands. Only those who have demonstrated work, and can and will work the land. Even the neighbor’s son of kind is more eligible than they. A few token alms are all the no-work Marxist grifters and so on get, and that not without at least acknowledgement of the hand.
Yet here we are at a point in time where Linux can do everything Windows can. Sure, sometimes with embarassingly hacky workarounds, but workarounds nonetheless. And quite often, Linux works much much better, while its competitors are going backwards. Pewdiepie switched to linux and recommends you switch too.
Nerd Cred seems like a pretty powerful force.
You are mixing up your Linuses.
I support real estate gifts for Trump supporters from the lands of confiscated leftists (all leftists need to be killed with forfeiture of property leftist includes anyone who voted for Biden or Kamala). Not saying its a good idea normally but too many economic downturns in the past decades caused by leftists the people who didn’t cause the problem need to be made whole by robbing and killing the people who caused the problem. Kill all leftists confiscate all leftists property.
Dispossess the Biden voters, but instead of killing them, send them to work off the national debt in a Chinese arsenic mine.
The fake communist economy has run so long, a lot of Bobs have their land because they were the biggest pride parade supporter. I don’t know who Dave is, but if I’m fighting a war against Bob and the people who gave Bob all his printed money, I want his land when this is over.
This is true enough, but it is not what Mayo is talking about, and the tell is the phrase “criminally usurious”.
Jim knows what usurious means in the Christian sense, you and I know what it means – it means a non-collateralized and/or non-dischargeable loan, i.e. a loan in which the lender reaps the benefit but does not share equally in the risk. But that is not what Mayo means when he says “usurious”, because he has told us what he means, and what he means is “how dare these people be allowed to earn an income off an asset just because they ‘own’ it.”
Ask him how he feels about Florida’s anti-squatter laws. He doesn’t want to dispossess the parasites, the squatters, the BlackRock cutouts, the niggers occupying prime real estate in the form of “affordable housing”, the politicians earning $200k annually who mysteriously managed to become billionaires within a decade; he wants to dispossess you, and every other homeowner, especially the people who manage to scrape together enough to buy one or two investment properties and rent them out for a lousy 5% ROI, and give them to himself and his nigger peeps and anyone else he deems worthy in his own world of confused and abused definitions of victim and oppressor.
It’s the same game that Anonymous Fake plays – identify a valid problem, a scenario where a lot of suckers were scammed out of their money or forced out of a particular marketplace, and then propose to solve it, not by punishing the scammers and the politicians and bureaucrats and priests who supported them, but by stealing even more wealth from the productive class to ostensibly make the victims whole again. Victims who will dutifully and immediately yield that money back to the scammers, e.g. through student loan/mortgage repayments, assuming they ever get the money at all.
Don’t fall for it.
And quite a bit more, in many cases. No one worth mentioning runs Windows on a home server, only various Linux builds. Plex alone reportedly has some 25 million users, and Plex isn’t the only game in town even for its little niche. Anyone who’s ever bought a NAS just to make some backups is running Linux. Anyone who owns an Apple or Android device is running an OS that, while not quite Linux, incorporates huge parts of the Linux kernel.
“Nerd cred” is another nigger sneer at the productive class, at the wypipo who know how to do stuff. Most open source development isn’t motivated by any desire for recognition at all, it’s motivated first and foremost by someone deciding to solve a problem for themselves, either because no other acceptable solution exists, or because they were just curious to see if they could do it differently/better. And then they decide to share their solution, sometimes in the hope of bringing other devs on board to take it to the next level, and sometimes just because they think it’s cool.
It’s ironic that the communist-in-residence sneers at them, because they are the closest thing to the New Soviet Man in practice, doing work that becomes valuable to millions of people while seeking no particular reward at all. The commie shrieks over everything being commercialized and monetized, complains about the obsession with money and profit creating a race to the bottom; and then looks at open source developers and sees “losers doing pointless work for nerd cred”.
Behold the towering intellect of the commie nigger.
Fact of the matter is, there is a lot of everything in the hands of my enemies, and if I am called upon to fight them, to risk my blood, anyone who supported them has their property forfeit.
I don’t care that they had stuff. I care that they are my enemies, that my enemies got their stuff by supporting and being supported by a network of wicked people. It’s not the kulak with two cows I care about. It’s the kulak with two cows that supported the insane priest saying we should equalize the bovine ownership, he loses his property. If that produces some economic hardship in the transition, so be it.
Messages get lost in telephone games, and so memes must be succinct. I propose the meme ‘after the war, take the loot, and distribute it fairly amongst the troops’. All the nuance of who is the enemy to be looted doesn’t really matter, because we all know who the enemies are, and what their loot is. We’re well past subtlety when they scream for child rape and human sacrifice any chance they get.
What does this sentence even mean – what is the difference between “purchase value” and “technical value”?
A price is a price is a price. Only commies believe in hidden Platonic ideal values of assets divorced from the price that buyers are willing to pay.
“Only commies believe that a flea market is not man’s most sacred place.”
Sucking a dick would be less gay.
You would know.
Somehow, not the most unhinged shit he has said.
> Only commies believe in hidden Platonic ideal values of assets divorced from the price that buyers are willing to pay.
If value is a measure of how effective something is at achieving a purpose, and if everything has a objective purpose independent of human belief (which is what I’ve been told repeatedly on this blog), then assets do indeed have an objective value.
Choose one and only one.
Value of an asset considered as an asset is what you can legitimately put in the asset column of the books of an enterprise.
Which generally should be what you paid to purchase or create it. Presumably you purchased it because you think it more valuable than the price, but if so, adjusting the value in the assets column requires a subsequent journal entry referencing events that justify the re-appraisal.
So you would enter the asset at cost, and then add a subsequent journal entry titled “appreciation” or “depreciation”, or something like that.
Of course one can then go postmodern and say that value is subjective and socially constructed, so we can make up any value we like. In Sox accounting one is allowed to enter Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and stuff like that as assets. So Disney is creating immensely valuable assets by producing diverse, equitable, and inclusive intellectual properties like Ironheart, which unfortunately no one wants to watch. According to Sox accounting they are doing great, but according the bond market, they are going broke.
Now if the Biden regime was still in power, they would tell the bond market “Hey, you cannot rate Disney debt as junk when their books prove they are doing wonderfully well”, and force the bond market to lend them even more money, but there is a new Sheriff in town. New accounting rules are about to take force, if they have not already. You might say the new rules are socially constructed, and the old rules were socially constructed, but I think there is something objective about the fact that no one wants to watch Ironheart that the Bond market has objective grounds to worry about. That Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion are not assets but expenses, and expenditures on diversity, equity, and inclusion, should appear in an expenses column, not the assets column.
The trouble with Disney’s books is that they show stuff like Ironheart as high value IP. And they did not want to actually run the show, because then they would have to depreciate the asset, and the actual returns on the asset would be vastly less than depreciation, so book value would converge to real value. So there actually is such a thing as real value. And if you follow the old seventeenth century accounting rules, the book value will approximate the real value, and over time converge to the real value.
And what the market will pay is not necessarily an accurate reflection of real value, but it is the best guess we have.
> You might say the new rules are socially constructed, and the old rules were socially constructed, but I think there is something objective about the fact that no one wants to watch Ironheart that the Bond market has objective grounds to worry about.
To say that “nobody wants to watch Ironheart” is an objectively true statement about society’s subjective desires. Consumers are still the ones that ultimately provide the valuation via their subjective preferences.
> the actual returns on the asset would be vastly less than depreciation, so book value would converge to real value. So there actually is such a thing as real value.
If leftist propaganda was more effective, then Ironheart would be a huge success, and its “real value” would change accordingly with people’s preferences. The people that push such propaganda are fully aware of this- their strategy is to simply change what people want and thus change the “real value” via mass psychological manipulation, the same way Edward Bernays was doing 100 years ago.
Of course, ultimately this “real value” is not as important as Gnon’s valuation. There may come a point where society’s desires conflict with Gnon’s desires to such a degree that the rules of our reality kick in and Darwin wreaks havoc upon said society.
That is to say, it’s unlikely that a show like Ironheart would by Gnon-approved… but we can’t really KNOW for sure. Perhaps Gnon supports degeneracy because he feels it makes our story more interesting. Or perhaps he doesn’t know what he wants from our world, and is just letting us play it out. Personally, I wouldn’t want my child to become a degenerate, but neither would I want them to be a carbon copy of myself.
No matter how often you tell people that shit is chocolate, it really is not chocolate, and they are not going to eat it. You cannot change shit into chocolate by the magic of propaganda. You can package shit as choloate, you can make people think it is chocolate, but when they chow down, not going to work.
I am sure that 90% of the people in the test audience theoretically believed in the progressive values the movie was preaching at them. Their guts knew better. Somehow, for some mysterious inexplicable reason, after eating all that lovely chocolate, they threw up.
Why is that a white man in armor and weapons is cool, and black woman just is not? Surely a belief system that would cause one to be pissed off by this is just unthinkably reactionary and no one believes that in the current year except a tiny toxic minority. The beliefs that should have made the Ironheart movie go down smoothly have been inculcated in everyone. Everyone believes that shit is chocolate, and yet for some mysterious reason they are still unable to eat it.
Since degeneracy is always positively correlated with the collapse of society (the more it is tolerated, the faster society falls apart; conversely, the less it is tolerated, the more robust society is), evidently Gnon does not support degeneracy, but opposes it. Gnon wants humanity to grow — to develop in a healthy way, where Reality determines what is and is not healthy, selecting for the objectively healthy and against the objectively unhealthy according to the criteria Gnon evidently determined; we see the selection process, which is Darwinian, with our own eyes — rather than to get sick and die, which is positively correlated with degeneracy. Degenerates fail to reproduce as individuals, and degenerate societies fail to reproduce collectively. Thus we know for a fact that Gnon (who imbued Reality with His selection processes) opposes degeneracy.
Also:
Only in the sense that evil makes the story more “interesting”; the point exactly is overcoming the evil (rather than succumbing to it), and likewise, overcoming the objectively sick things, such as degeneracy, rather than succumbing to them.
We can see His teleology in action in the Darwinian selection processes inherent in Nature/Reality – for instance, heterosexual sex allows sexually reproducing species to reproduce, hence the heterosexual impulse is objectively in line with Gnon’s teleology, whereas homosexual sex does not allow sexually reproducing species to reproduce, hence the homosexual impulse is objectively opposed to Gnon’s teleology. The selection processes work as intended, which is evidenced by observing which individuals/societies successfully continue into the future, and which manifestly do not.
Progress is always with the Tao, never against the Tao. Gnon evidently wants us to grow healthier, according to His manifest teleology, rather than sicker, which is what happens when any living creatures attempt to rebel against His manifest teleology due to sedition by diseased satanists.
Sin, or failure mode, is intended to be overcome, so that by overcoming it, we grow healthier and advance in accordance with the selection processes Gnon manifestly instilled into Reality. Succumbing to the sin, or failure mode, always invariably makes the individual/society that does the succumbing sicker, until they perish, as currently Satanized societies are evidently perishing. By overcoming the sin (or, again understood in secular terms, failure mode), or avoiding it altogether in the first place by observing reality, wherein God’s Will manifests, we learn how to progress in the direction which Gnon intends us to progress in, which is the only direction of progress actually possible, its opposite being regression, which always invariably leads to decline and death, as societies that listened to gay satanist sedition are, before our very eyes, declining and dying. Thus Gnon’s selection processes work as intended.
Cultures wherein old-type patriarchy was abolished fail to reproduce and are dying, “For the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23), while cultures maintaining old-type patriarchy are the only ones that will continue into the future, hence we learn that patriarchy is in line with Gnon’s biological/civilizational teleology, and abolition of patriarchy is a mortal sin (or catastrophic societal failure/dysfunction) which Gnon’s Reality, by way of Darwinian selection processes, inevitably and inexorably punishes. It’s patriarchy or death.
Everything that is broken is always broken in the same way. Africa was shit before colonialism, reverting back to shit after colonialism. Boring. Everything that works shares the same fundamentals that make it work, but whenever something works, allows for growth, and the direction of growth is always unique. Are we going to colonize Mars? Mine the Oort cloud? Very interesting.
It is incumbent on the civilized races to replace the hostile elites (running hostile regimes with satanic antinatal state religions) with virtuous friendly elites — or else patriarchy won’t be reestablished and they will continue degenerating and degenerating until they vanish completely, inherited and eaten by third world cannibals — thus the civilized races must brace for holy war, holy armies, and Kings (blessed by Bishops) to lead those holy armies against the hostile elites which preclude the reestablishment of the healthy social technologies and the eradication of the anti-social technologies. Society will not get back on track and reinstitute healthy social tech as long as the hostile elites, hostile regimes, and hostile faiths are in power, and to remove these from power, need counter-elites and (most crucially) a counter-faith, and in war need a war leader, hence the return of Kings; as Kings need legitimacy, need Bishops too – the war is fundamentally a holy war. If the autocoup in America succeeds, will naturally proceed to liberate the nips and the gooks from the grip of Anglo-Satanism currently asphyxiating them, and most importantly, should proceed to defeat the hostile elites of Europe and replace them with virtuous elites. America will need to declare holy war against the satanic elites running Europe in order to save the Europeans; allying with Russia will certainly help, so should seek to make stable peace with Russia. Once the hostile elites are defeated, the hostile regimes are toppled, and the satanic faiths are out of power, then the civilized races can reestablish healthy pronatal social technologies such as patriarchy, poofs off roofs, and so on, and abolish the anti-social technologies, such as Prussian School. Thermidor won’t do all that, and will first have to give way to the Dark Enlightenment.
There’s another type of subversion going on here that’s been dragging other people in; time to remedy this.
GNON is “Nature OR Nature’s God”. It is not a sheepish synonym for “God”; it has a specific meaning. In proper use, any proposition applied to GNON can only be valid if either term can be substituted and still make sense. That is, for a proposition to be collectively valid for (A OR B), it has to be individually valid for both A and B.
The “nature” part of GNON exerts pressure and can be described as having a will, but not a conscience. It has rules, but not an internal moral code. It makes use of clear mechanisms of reward (survival) and punishment (oblivion) but nature does not have conscious thoughts or feelings or desires. And nature is an “it”, not a “he”. Nature literally IS the world we live in, not its creator or master.
Anus is using “Gnon” as a stand-in for “God” in order to make strictly spiritual, theological arguments sound like materialistic ones, and thereby reopen debates that were settled thousands of years ago as if new information has surfaced. The question being asked here is as ancient as it is banal: “If God is all-powerful, then why does He allow evil to exist?” Well, if you want an answer to that question then read Aquinas, or any of the other ancient theologians who wrote entire volumes on the subject.
But the question is incoherent for GNON. “Nature supports degeneracy because he feels it makes our story more interesting.” Huh? Does not compute. Nature obviously doesn’t support degeneracy, because the degenerates fail to reproduce, and nature doesn’t “feel” anything at all. This is very obviously a (false and heretical) statement about God, not a reasonable speculation about GNON.
Neoreaction/Dark Enlightenment acknowledges and admires the frequent, near-universal agreement of the spiritual and material, especially on longer timelines. That is what GNON is all about – the “Gods of the Copybook Headings”. These attempts by Anus to muddy the waters are another illegal move; “The Problem of Evil” has long been settled to the satisfaction of most Christians, and for the atheist-materialism side of DE, does not need to be settled.
I sometimes wonder if the many synonyms for God in the old testament were meant to delineate precisely this kind of nuance, which nuance eventually got lost through subversion and holiness spiraling by degenerates like Anus. In any case, we shouldn’t allow it here.
This really is astounding, like listening to a virus in human form, which rapidly and relentlessly mutates, trying to find any possible configuration that will breach immune defenses. Consider all the implied premises here:
1. That a confessed faggot could, or should be allowed to have children. (No doubt he is thinking about adopting some CPS abductee-victim.)
2. That a confessed faggot is not, himself, a complete and utter degenerate.
3. That it’s inappropriate for a father to want his sons to follow in his own footsteps, which amounts to wanting a “carbon copy” of himself.
It takes five times more words than the original text just to explain everything that’s wrong with the original text. “Concentrated evil” is the best way to describe it.
@Mossadnik
How do you explain homosexuality in the animal kingdom among species that have occupied the same ecological niche for millions of years? Gnon apparently does not act the way you think he “objectively” should. We’ve been over this.
@Scarebucks
The concept of Gnon is, in part, a personification of nature that may or may not correlate with a real divine being.
per·son·i·fi·ca·tion pər-ˌsä-nə-fə-ˈkā-shən
a divinity or imaginary being representing a thing or abstraction
The term “God” also has Abrahamic connotations which are not relevant to my arguments in this case.
> Nature obviously doesn’t support degeneracy, because the degenerates fail to reproduce, and nature doesn’t “feel” anything at all. This is very obviously a (false and heretical) statement about God, not a reasonable speculation about GNON.
Everything is just so *obvious* and *objective* to you and Mossadnik, isn’t it? The world is so very easy to understand, the way you imagine it to be. And you call *me* the gnostic!
Tell me, which idea is more heretical:
– The idea that Gnon works in ways we can’t comprehend, and maybe there’s a reason that we can’t fully grasp for why faggotry has been around since time immemorial.
– The idea that Gnon’s thoughts and intentions are perfectly clear to us, and whenever reality doesn’t match these intentions, it’s because Gnon needs our help to make his world exactly how he always wanted it to be by throwing people off roofs.
> “Concentrated evil” is the best way to describe it.
“Concentrated evil” is how you imagine it, because you like imagining things in black and white, because you are clearly uncomfortable with uncertainty. Maybe you should consider being less eager to jump to conclusions, though, because none of the shit in your last section is true, and you would have known it wasn’t true if your mental image of me was informed by my actual posts instead of your own hysterical boogeyman.
This is the problem of evil. God’s answer to Job was not entirely satisfactory, but it suffices for most Christians.
Me, I think that a universe without evil would be quite boring, a game without a point. You have to be able to lose, and the stakes have to be high.
I have been a video game designer and a video game writer, and if I was responsible for this universe, it would resemble “Doom” a whole lot more than it does.
The original “Doom” was, and remains, hugely popular. Would you have God make a “My little pony” universe?
The problem of evil is “If I was designing this universe, I would do it differently.” Yes, I would do it differently also, but more like “Doom” than “My Little Pony”. On the other hand, evil that cannot be solved just by blowing it up presents a more intellectual challenge, which you need for the team play element. Tolkein’s “Wormtongue” The orcs of the original version of “World of Warcraft” forced the player characters to act socially by themselves acting socially.
It is the will of Gnon that we fill the stars and subdue them. One of the biggest challenges in this enterprise is to permanently avoid a full scale solar war while we are still restricted to one solar system, and a full scale galactic war when we reach beyond it, because a high tech civilisation is very fragile, and has very powerful weapons. And we have to avoid full scale war over the vast timescales needed in this enterprise. No full scale civilisation wide war over vast time scales may not be the Kingdom of God on Earth, but it is a whole lot closer to it than what we have now.
When we colonise the asteroids and the comets, the equivalent of a truck driver or a small trucking business will have the equivalent of nukes and rods from God.
So, one of the missions of our telos that we must accomplish gets us a whole lot closer to the Kingdom of God on Earth.
That one accomplished, we shall learn of the next mission of our telos.
There are diseases in nature as there are diseases among humans, who are part of nature. The vital point is that, since no human society that tolerates your disease thrives, and since every human society that tolerates your disease rapidly perishes, it is the manifest will of Gnon that human society shall not tolerate your disease; carriers of your disease fail to reproduce individually, and societies that tolerate your disease fail to reproduce collectively. The will of Gnon is thus indeed perfectly obvious as regards your diseases, the Darwinian selection process makes the divine teleology undeniable to anyone who is intellectually honest – the disease should be biologically eliminated, and eventually it will be, and everyone not diseased will cheer that on. That a disease exists among animals doesn’t make it any less of a disease, and the purpose of human civilization is to increase Order, which means, among other things, overcoming evil and eliminating diseases. Faggotry is entropic, and contrary to the civilizational telos commaned by Gnon, which is why evidently every society that abolishes hetero-normativity (as a result of gay subversion) fails to reproduce, and is harshly selected against, in contrast to societies that maintain hetero-normativity, which keep reproducing and thriving. The Darwinian selection process evident to all who have eyes to see clearly reveals the Divine Will. Poofs off roofs.
We see (every single day, everywhere we look, at all times, invariably) the teleology Gnon imbued into Reality both in making humans a sexually reproducing species, which in itself entails heterosexuality being fundamentally healthy and its opposite being necessarily unhealthy, and in the perfectly objective and very easily observable fact that societies that tolerate faggotry fail to reproduce, hence are selected against by Gnon (similarly to individuals afflicted with your disease), whereas societies that roof the poofs, or otherwise do not tolerate any poofs, are the only ones that successfully reproduce, hence they are selected for, and thereby once again the Will of Gnon is manifestly revealed, which Will is that humans, a sexually reproducing species which employs social technology for successful reproduction, do not allow any inherently diseased non-heterosexual or anti-heterosexual influence to disrupt society’s healthy social technology. Allowing faggots to disrupt humans’ social technology by injecting the collective memeplex with anti-heterosexual memes invariably leads to social decline and death, which is fundamentally against the Will of Gnon, whose manifest will is that humans maintain healthy social technology and eliminate unhealthy thought-forms and the fundamentally diseased individuals who spread them. By a Darwinian selection process, societies that fail to suppress faggotry also invariably fail to reproduce, and are replaced by societies that successfully maintain healthy social technologies and therefore successfully reproduce.
And here he is again, just straight up lying, nakedly asserting false facts as if repetition or rewording can make them true. GNON is an acronym. It literally stands for “Nature Or Nature’s God”. It is not a “personification of nature”. It refers to either nature itself, or the creator-god responsible for it.
What a crock. The reasons for not saying “God” are (a) to confuse and misdirect, (b) to disguise old discredited argument and (c) fear of the cleansing holy fire. Regardless, and despite the word-lawyering and definition abuse, these are not naturalistic or materialistic arguments about Gnon, they are old stale atheist arguments against God with a new coat of paint.
Isn’t anyone else tired of this bullshit, and the fact that every thread Anus sticks his diseased dick into winds up being an endless off-topic one-sided argument about disgusting perverts and the disgusting perverted things they do? Everything he talks about is either homo homo homo or a convenient segue to homo homo homo.
Yeah, it’s absolutely boring and endlessly repetitive. Also, it’s disgusting.
I too am tired of this bullshit. But it is important to engage with our enemies.
However, it is not important to listen when they repeat themselves forever.
[*unresponsive and repetitious*]
Deleted for going on forever. We have heard it all already, and replied to it all already, and if I allow it through, I will see again the replies I already read.
I am being slandered by people who have demonstrably ignored many of my previous posts and who are accusing me of the things they themselves are guilty of- yet I’m the one being censored while attempting to clarify and defend myself?
None of you wannabe tyrants deserve to be anywhere near a seat of power. Have fun LARPing.
Gross projection.
You were unresponsive — your posts made the same points over and over again, despite people shooting them down and you simply ignored everything anyone said except for calling them names for saying it.
Much stuff that you said was ignored by your interlocutors, because, like your endless repetition of the sorites paradox as if it was some killer argument for something, no one could figure out what it was a killer argument for, or what made it a killer argument for whatever it was supposed to be proving.
Possibly if someone already agreed with your philosophical system it would be a killer argument for something, but since they did not agree, its relevance was not apparent.
Other stuff was ignored because gay triumphalism, or projection. No matter what anyone said, you would force fit what they said into the philosophical system that they had just devastatingly rebutted, which rebuttal you “refuted” by proving it was incoherent given their supposed acceptance of what they had just denied. Which method of argument gets us nowhere. You are not engaging your intelocutors.
Over and over again you made the argument that gay is around, therefore the will of Gnon. This is a stupid argument, shot down innumerable times, and you just repeated it and repeated it and repeated it and repeated it. This gets us nowhere.
When God sets up a booby trap, as he did for Adam, when he leads us into temptation, it does not follow it is his will that we fall into the booby trap. Pretty sure that is not that hard to grasp.
[*deleted for endless repetition. You said that before, many times.*]
Also, I’m not letting this slide:
> Isn’t anyone else tired of this bullshit, and the fact that every thread Anus sticks his diseased dick into winds up being an endless off-topic one-sided argument about disgusting perverts and the disgusting perverted things they do? Everything he talks about is either homo homo homo or a convenient segue to homo homo homo.
Ever since my very first posts on this blog, Mossadnik has been the one bringing up gay sex most of the time, and posting repetitive walls of text, and talking about poop and anuses and posting Anal Cunt lyrics and being disgusting in general, but somehow it’s all my fault, and never his.
He’s not even jewing his way out of responsibility, you’re just being a blind idiot.
You are not being silenced for talking about homosexuality all the time. You are being silenced for endless repetition and not responding to counter arguments.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
By far my favorite one is not even about poop and anuses, but about a slightly different topic.
Just for you, O gaping orifice:
Presumably, that song is about you, O fissured cavity, since you are a gay ‘tard. But, strictly speaking, it’s not about your horrible disease. Per se.
I also like the one about entering the time machine and going back in time to vote for Hitler.
Jim, all you had to say was “I disagree with Premise 1” or “I disagree with Premise 2” or “I disagree that the premises imply the conclusion”.
If that’s too much effort then I suppose there’s no point in debating further.
This discussion is well over two millenia old. All I have to say is “Aristotle, moderate realism, stoicism”
Existence exists, reality is real.
Your premises are incoherent, elastic, mutually contradictory, and slippery, as Ayn Rand ranted at length quite some time ago, and no meaningful discussion of them is possible. When discussed, they slither around like worms. Any attempt to discuss your premises is unfruitful, and has been infamously unfruitful for two millennia. The internet is full of rants about this.
And you refuse to discuss our premises. Possibly you imagine that by repeating the sorites paradox over and over again, and the problem of evil over and over again, you have shot them down.
Quote two things I have said that contradict each other. I am genuinely curious.
Your unstated, and largely unstatable, premises contradict each other, which is why over the past two millennia, they are seldom coherently stated.
This is a very very old debate that has gotten nowhere in two thousand years.
The belief system you theoretically hold is inconsistent with sitting down on a chair and expecting it to hold you up.
So the debate goes: “Do you believe X”, where X is something commonsensical that everyone in fact believes.
“well of course”
“OK, and yet you also believe Y, and Y is inconsistent with X”
“No it is not inconsistent” Much squid ink ensues, where your priors will slide all over the place like writhing worms. Well known fallacies, like Motte and Bailey, ensue. Which Motte and Bailey is well summarised as “We cannot know everything, therefore we cannot know anything.” and “Because we have eyes, we cannot see.” We see a lot of that argumentation over the past two millenia. Men considerably greater than us have been around this merry go round far too many times.
Genesis 19:11:
“And they smote the men [of Sodom] that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.”
> This is a very very old debate that has gotten nowhere in two thousand years.
> The belief system you theoretically hold is inconsistent with sitting down on a chair and expecting it to hold you up.
I have no idea what 2000-year-old debate and what belief system you’re referring to here. [*deleted*]
Then you should not be attempting to debate natural law with those that do know.
If the terms moderate realism, sorites paradox, platonic realism, and nominalism do not ring a bell, you should do your homework before attempting to discuss such topics.
Nominalism: Nothing is real and we cannot know anything nor see anything – or at least that is Bailey of it. What the Motte is, is slippery.
Moderate realism: Things exist, reality is real, natural kinds exist in particulars, exist in each particular that belongs to that natural kind. Red exists in each cherry. Slogan: Reality is real, existence exists.
Platonic realism: Things exist, but their true forms, their natural kinds, exist in some higher plane of existence. Our reality is a shadow of a higher reality.
Bravo, Anus, I can almost hear you exclaiming “check mate, bitches!” in that faggy lispy voice.
Except you just cheated like you always do, rearranging half the pieces on the board while you thought we weren’t looking.
Who said value is “a measure of how effective something is at achieving a purpose”? All that’s doing is kicking the can down the road, substituting one unknown for another unknown. How do you measure effectiveness? Take something as simple as a light bulb: is its “effectiveness” and therefore “value” based on lumens, wattage, efficiency, longevity, or some combination of each? What about features like dimmability, or specialized socket types?
If it were so easy to define “value”, we wouldn’t have or need product reviews and recommendations; everybody could just punch the specs into a calculator and have it spit out the one perfect price. Reality doesn’t work that way. “Effectiveness” is almost never a one-dimensional metric, and often isn’t quantifiable at all. Would you trust a manufacturer’s “estimate” of how long that bulb will last? Likely only insofar as you trust the manufacturer itself, which means you’re actually valuing the brand, not measurable efficacy.
You’re taking the beautiful word telos and trying to reduce it to an ugly measurement on a scale because if you can reduce it to a measurement, you can find a way to subvert and game the system. No dice. Everybody knows what the telos of a light bulb is, and everybody can tell when one is not working properly, but that doesn’t mean everyone agrees on the price of an individual specimen. Telos does not have to be an absolutely quantifiable or measurable trait – nor does a lack of absolute quantifiability or measurability imply that we can’t assess overall success or failure, or compare the relative performance of two different specimens without knowing absolutes.
Price is not a measure of efficacy. Price is a measure of supply and demand, or more simply, an agreement between two parties, for which efficacy on any number of different metrics may be part of the consideration. Or not, in the case of commodity pricing, where efficacy is literally irrelevant because it’s assumed to be uniform and invariant.
Once again, your proud gotcha moment is nothing more than an extremely clumsy attempt at rhetorical sleight of hand.
[*Deleted for endless repetition*]
This is the umpteenth time you have invoked the sorites paradox under the mistaken impression that it proves something. What you think it proves no one knows.
No further invocations of the sorites paradox will be allowed, at least not without an intelligible explanation of what you think it proves and why you think it proves it.
Okay, then I’ll use a different example.
Scarebucks said that “Everybody knows what the telos of a light bulb is”
Everyone knew what the telos of a tire was, until someone hung one from a tree and turned it into a swing.
Everyone knew what the telos of a toothpick was, until someone used one to pick up appetizers.
Etc, etc.
An object’s purpose affects its usage, which affects demand, which affects price. It’s pretty straightforward.
The tire hanging from a tree is a failed tire. It stopped holding air, stopped supporting the car, and someone threw it away. Ninety nine out of a hundred of such tires are dumpeded in landfills or chopped up for recycling, one hangs from a tree. And you are a failed human.
> The tire hanging from a tree is a failed tire.
A tire that makes wonderful childhood memories is a “failed tire” because it’s not holding up some car somewhere? Nuts.
Truly I say to you, the tire which the drivers rejected has become the tire swing, and it is marvelous in my eyes.
The survival rate among faggots is higher than the survival rate among failed tires, but most faggots die as a result of disease, suicide, or gay on gay violence.
The survival rate of societies that tolerate faggots is so far zero, though some of them have taken a long time dying. But then we have a lot more tires than we have had faggot tolerating societies, so its hard to compare the mortality rate.
The tire hanging from a rope is no longer a tire, it is a swing. It was a failed tire, became a, less than ideal, swing. Pretending it is still a tire and that a tire is also a swing is just incoherence.
Similarly, the faggot is no longer a human. It lacks essential human functionality. The faggot is a failed human, and when this is all over, will become a less than perfect but still usable fuel in the form of biodiesel. Pretending the biodiesel is still a faggot is just incoherence.
“Everyone knew what the telos of a tire was, until someone hung one from a tree and turned it into a swing.”
A tire is a better tire than it is a swing- somebody turning a brand new Michelin Cup Sport into a swing is acting pathologically and denying the tire its highest and best use. The highest and best use of an old tire that cannot hold air anymore may be as a swing. This is obvious to the basic teleological sense of almost all men, a teleological sense purposed to keep us alive and in ascent.
Teloi are manifold and hierarchical. One telos of the genitals is sexual pleasure. One telos of a hammer is “banging in nails”. Somebody who bangs nails, over and over, into scrap plywood, when he should be building a house, is sick.
I really need to codify a purely teleological philosophy that addresses most reasonable objections
And just as importantly, a swing is a much better swing than an old tire. No one in their right mind would spend the money on a brand-new tire to use as a swing when they could spend the same amount of money or less on an actual swing.
For these alternate uses to emerge, usually requires failures on multiple fronts.
Market liberals really don’t want to contemplate the possibility that there are things that money can’t buy and markets can’t price and merchants can’t make, like cathedrals and nuclear bombs and high-quality women and space war.
“Everyone knew what the telos of a tire was”
For some reason, I expected this post would be about necklacing.
To be more precise, the reason why ‘the value of something is what someone will pay for it’ can be meaningful is precisely because those judgements of value are arising from or touching upon the structures of potency as such. Which a being can be more or less capable of apprehending.
The reason why ‘price fixing’ is always worse than useless is, even before getting into matters of moral hazard, the simple fact that Information is Costly. ‘You’ don’t know shit about jack; and to the extent you can know shit about jack, you won’t know about it in a timely manner. The man working with the jack knows best, and everyone working with every jack everywhere knows best of all. And that’s the magic of the Market.
Price fixing gives some priest a job and an income. For the priest, who would otherwise be starving, price fixing works. That’s why priests are all for it, especially if there is an oversupply of priests.
If Blackrock decides to buy up all key miners and starts censoring transactions in accordance to OFAC would you be supportive?
This is, in fact, a very real threat, unlike most of the bullshit you shills repetitively spam. Bitcoin has extremely dangerous miner concentration. In this event, Bitcoin will fork or die.
Monero has an effective system against miner concentration. But it merely reduces it, not eliminates it. We need something better. However, if the miners start OFAC censorship, Bitcoin will fork to the Monero mining system, or a coin with the Monero system will replace Bitcoin. But Monero is not able to replace Bitcoin for lack of contracts, so probably ZCash. Last time I looked, ZCash software lacked many important promised capabilities, rather too much vapourware, but its theoretical capabilities against censorship and blockchain analysis are the best.
Zcash is, or was last time I looked, rather like Musk’s Mars colony. Could happen, probably will happen, and an exciting prospect, but his last ship just crashed. For Zcash to get places, has to connect to the one true crypto currency, Bitcoin, by the Grail bridge and launch a level two Bitcoin.
In the event of OFAC censorship, the ideal outcome would be everyone uses level two Bitcoin on the Zcash blockchain. (And Musk’s rockets become reliable enough and cheap enough to move to Mars.)
No.
Then they’re going to just exchange into ZEC and use ZEC on ZEC and cut out the thereby and by definition useless BTC.
Metcalfe’s law means there can only be one. Bitcoin is the one true crypto currency.
You cannot move to better technology by replacing Bitcoin, only by higher technology level two Bitcoins.
The way to make money from a better blockchain is to put daos and coinmixers on it, not through seigniorage, and milk the conversions and the fees.
There are a lot of fees to be had.
What about a self-custodial Lightning wallet that’s also its own $1000 portable computer, with all the right software pre-installed, built-in backup/soft-shutdown battery, fault-tolerant SSHD, etc?
It could have blinky-lights tho indicate certain… states and processes that someone needs to know about, etc.
Is that imaginable? Or rather, have I ignorantly missed the point entirely?
(For example, if this were something I bought from someone else, I’d worry that it was somehow key-logging everything in cahoots with Russian hackers somewhere.)
They have these. Umbrel, mynode, raspiblitz, etc. All of them have pre-packaged lightning nodes, most are under $1k.
They are, of course, computers, so they’re not appropriate for zero-trust environments where you don’t even trust the hardware vendor, but I’d put them in roughly the same trust category as a Ledger device.
The advantage of the Raspberry Pi based stuff in particular is that you really can build it all yourself, even most of the hardware. Well, who knows, maybe the CPU has its own back door, but eventually everyone has to make up his own mind on when a solution is good/secure/private “enough”.
CPUs all had backdoors, required and installed as part of the GWOT. (E.g., “intel management engine”, basically a special hidden CPU on your chip.) Then after some years Google grew tired of this security hole and made the case for the manufacturers getting rid of it, which I believe they did. (Trust us we did, goyim!)
There may still be holes of course. For instance, your USB stick may have an embedded ARM processor of no clear purpose.
China has been going over this stuff with a fine tooth comb, to insert their own security holes, to take over Global American Empire created security holes, and to refuse the import of backdoored hardware and software whose backdoors they cannot control.
I conjecture that the reason globohomo security holes are being removed is that the Chinese are successful in taking them over.
The Chinese keep trying to push backdoored software into the linux distributions, but, on the other hand, if a linux distribution is allowed in China, probably not backdoored. They seem to want to use linux to spy on people who speak Chinese a lot more than they want to use linux to spy on everyone. The Chinese empire has always been inward looking.
Microsoft exports a special non spyware version of Windows to China, because the Chinese threatened to ban Windows, and replace it with their own (very bad) version of Linux. However, the vast majority of Chinese cheerfully use Chinese phone apps, which report absolutely everything to the Chinese government, and you really cannot do anything in China, cannot buy or sell, without these totally intrusive phone apps. Because these give the Chinese government a wonderful window into the activities of everyone in China (and anyone who turns his phone off gets face recognition tracked by omnipresent security cameras) the Chinese government no longer cares much about installing spyware on regular computers, and continues to do so only through bureaucratic inertia. If someone spyproofs their computer in China, the Chinese government does not care. Which is why so many Chinese businesses cheerfully take Bitcoin for international transactions.
But, fortunately for us, the Chinese government still cares very much about the Globohomo empire inserting its spyware on Chinese computers.
There were spy cameras watching spy cameras when I last visited the UK. As far as I know they were all manual though. Did I dream that some had speakers so the staff could tell off the drunken revellers in the street?
Interestingly, San Francisco banned facial recognition a few years ago. I wonder if it got too embarrassing.
I’ve seriously thought about setting up cameras with facial recognition at least on the outside of the house. Too many poorly identified cars and swarthy people with no clear purpose turning up and I live in a europoor somewhat-high value area. Unfortunately, I think doing so might be against the law.
Older systems collect far too much footage for a human to go through at one minute per minute. The better ones are motion triggered, as by branches waving in the wind.
Newer systems, just now becoming available, can recognise people and cars. So have it collect footage of non family people and non family cars. Bleeding edge, so usefulness not guaranteed.
No one dares program them to collect on the basis of race, unfortunately.
I’d enjoy growing a local database of kebab and wogs. I want gait recognition too.
I think Clearview AI does, or was accused of doing so anyway. Maybe it is just really good at recognizing potential perps and the potential perps happen to all or mostly be of specific races.
Either way it gave the Left a collective aneurysm from day one and they’ve spared no expense trying to destroy the company, the software and all the employees, which is how you know it’s precisely the software that every homeowner and neighborhood watch/militia should be running for its private surveillance, if only it were actually available to private citizens.
This is an example of a business that would be a perfect fit for a sovcorp. Entirely digital in nature, just sell subscriptions.
It has been done — not happy with the result.
Could be done right.
Continuing the previous discussion on classical liberalism on two key points.
By today’s standard, the Classical Liberalism of the Founding Fathers is extreme racist thoughtcrime. I have a hard time any of the former Woke could even entertain such thoughts, not even thermidor.
From Jared Taylor’s ‘What did the Founding Fathers think about race?’:
From a quick google search, Jefferson also said:
Such a sentiment is echoed by Lincoln:
I remember there were a plethora of ‘spicy’ quotes, even lengthy essays, by the Founding Fathers on race, but search engines have made it terribly difficult to find when I went looking just now. A few years back there were no end of race realist infographics quoting the founders on /pol/, but those have seem to disappeared into the ether as well.
No, I’ve brought this up before, ‘equal’ in 1776 had a meaning much closer to ‘similar’ in today’s lingo. Similar in the way a pit-bull is to a golden retriever in that they are categorically and obviously both dogs, but obviously one is a family dog and the other is more often than not a biological menace.
There is no disagreement from me however, that Classical Liberalism bore terrible fruits for which it should be judged for, but ‘death to whitey’ is not a logical extension of the ideology, though it is a logical conclusion to the experiment. The reason being that Classical Liberalism removed Chesterton’s Fence on a great many of defenses against demonisms, and the ideology therefore quickly disappeared, outflanked by what Moldbug would call America’s ‘Race Communism’.
America’s actions in Haiti, and for that matter the wider Caribbean, had less to do with Classical Liberalism and more to do with Machiavellian geopolitical objective of kicking out competing European interests in the Americas, justified under an ideological venear, and in that why they were unprincipled exceptions to Classical Liberalism and not a logical extension, but that really just further the point that it had little to no defenses against demons so to speak.
“Death to whitey” is the ideology of classic liberalism. It is just that in 1776, everyone had a mental reservation, an unprincipled exception. Being an unprincipled exception, when whites were being genocided in Haiti, they neglected to apply it.
If all men are created equal, whites have got to go. When you have a falsifiable faith, reality must be corrected to conform to theory.
But they did have an ideological veneer, one conspicuously lacking with for the founding fathers race realism. The founder’s race realism was an unprincipled exception to Classic Liberalism. Their policy in Haiti was classic liberalism.
Had they not been classic liberals, would have intervened in Haiti, and maintained a social system run by Haitian whites, except answerable to Washington rather than France, which which blacks were not slaves, but were under a different legal regime to whites, similar to that previously enjoyed by freed slaves in Haiti. This would have been far more successful than the policy that they and France followed, which removed France, and removed Frenchmen, but left America with a festering sore that continues to fester to this day.
The least drastic and most effective way of controlling Haiti would be to get the local elite on your side “OK, we are going to take away your slaves, because you cannot control them yourselves, but, unlike France, we will keep you alive, and in control as our satraps.”
>If all men are created equal, whites have got to go. When you have a falsifiable faith, reality must be corrected to conform to theory.
Why would it need to be whites who “had to go”, rather than blacks? When it comes to technological and cultural achievements, Sub-Saharan Africans are far more of an outlier than are Europeans.
I suspect it was really more that other white people were seen as the competition.
All technological and scientific innovation is the result of hard work performed by brave, stunning, beautiful, Sub-Saharan African lesbian wymyn, which WYPIPO then stole so they can oppress the poor dyke-nigras, and all men and women and cocksucking gay-faggot trannies being created equal, the pale-skinned patriarchy (which won’t let wymyn practice their precious hypergamy and only sleep with billionaire vampire pirate demon kings) has to be abolished and the oppressive evil sinister wicked white race ewwww genocided completely so the theft and oppression will finally stop and we can all be equal and equally live in mud huts and have a life expectancy of 25.
Any question?
This is closer to the mark, since liberalism was undoubtedly devised as an instrument of class warfare and power struggle for aspiring/upstart elites to wage on the royalty, aristocracy and landed gentry.
But that was just its function. When the instrument is a meme, or memeplex, then it matters what the meme actually says, not just why it was said. If all men are created equal, then it is a logical contradiction if some men perform worse than others. To resolve the contradiction, one must declare either that performance is actually equal, according to some revised definition of performance that everyone must accept, or that the apparent inequality is being caused by something other than creation, i.e. it is environmental and artificial rather than biological and natural.
And in actual practice, both those memetic failures happened simultaneously, and rather quickly. Negros having high impulsivity and women being generally irrational are just “Ugly Stereotypes”, and to whatever extent they cannot be written off as mere stereotypes, such as academic or job performance, it is the result of current and historical “Oppression”. This is not brand-spankin’ new woke jargon, it’s centuries-old.
Injecting race realism is just another unprincipled exception, another distraction. All white men are clearly not created equal, either. Elon Musk obviously comes from better stock than the light-skinned loser who goes around selling weed and stealing packages off neighbor’s porches. AMACE is evil gibberish constructed to sound noble and high-minded, and countless subsequent atrocities are the direct result of attempts to force reality to conform to the ideal.
Elite competition may be the subtext, but the memeplex is the text itself, and no ruling power can ignore its own doctrine forever. If your memeplex is AMACE then you eventually get Haiti and Rhodesia and South Africa, it’s only a question of how soon.
>it matters what the meme actually says, not just why it was said
If an instrument is successful, other beings will try picking up the instrument as well; and ideally, replace the original users themselves as the revolutionary vanguard, by being more instrumental than thou.
We can make it more general; if you get your way by misrepresenting what you’re about, other devils will come in to call the bluff.
Just so; and once your competitors, or in many instances, your very own descendants, become “more ____ than thou”, the ratchet clicks. There is no reverse gear; no returning from the new normal to the old normal.
You can only return to an old normal when the old normal was overthrown, because the case can be made that the overthrow was illegitimate. The mere removal of unprincipled exceptions is completely legitimate, and attempting to bring back the unprincipled exceptions by force is de facto illegitimate, which is why Thermidor as a faction will not be able to maintain legitimacy unless it yields the memeplex and social technology to DE.
Even if you start off planning that blacks have got to go, and for a long time that was plan of a whole lot of classical liberals, as for example Liberia, the rhetoric of injustice implies that whites are the bad guys, and blacks are the victms, so when you start implementing firmer measures, those firmer measures are always going to come down on whites.
Liberia was a fine idea, and the obvious solution was round up all blacks and ship them over there, there was plenty of room, the place was near empty, but far from doing that, they were horrified and pulled back when it became obvious that due to white biological admixture and white culture, the people they were shipping to Liberia were not equal to the locals, that what was going on was old fashioned colonialism with a darker shade of colonists.
When blacks who went to Liberia were in America, they identified as black, but when they went to Liberia, they reacted to the racial and cultural difference by identifying with white culture and identifying as of mixed race. (Which they always were, but in Liberia it became obvious.)
FrankNorman: “I suspect it was really more that other white people were seen as the competition.”
This is the true throughline. 1980s South Africa, white population 5 million (many or most with minor African admixture), had a competent nuclear program making functional warheads!
US Court of International Trade has struck down Trump’s tariffs. We are ruled by the liberal elites who [*usual inversion of reality deleted yet again*]
Trump’s still trying to face Harvard without tanks.[*usual inversion of reality deleted yet again*]
The time for tanks approaches. We shall see if he fishes in the Rubicon this time. Last time, he nearly died of fishing in the Rubicon.
https://x.com/CBSNews/status/1927902716468064747
Still at the fishing in the Rubicon stage. But maybe the news is lying to me like usual.
I’ll be honest, trump selling the trump and melania coin made feel as if he was unserious about the whole thing. Add that whole Kash Patel money dump organization and I feel like I am looking at a bunch of merchants who are thinking of cash and prizes rather than being astutely aware that this doesn’t really matter if you have power.
What is the point of being fixated on getting money if you are in control of the money printer? Surely the serial killer outside saying how you have to ‘go’ is a more pressing concern than making a quick buck? Is getting that fiat converted to crypto a way of making covert death squads or crypto-assassins? Surely it can’t be as simple as the ol rug-pull maneuver right?
Note also, that Kash says that Epstein suicided and will repeatedly tell you this with no ambiguity what so ever. He reminds me of Pence, a guy who stands on your side like a battle brother, but when push comes to shove, will immediately topple with barely any force applied. He has no strong faith or malice against his enemies, a signifier of Thermidor.
It is the usual rug pull maneuver.
The great majority in Trump’s circle are Thermidor. Kash Patel looks us straight in the eye and says Epstein killed himself, and the Epstein files will be released real soon now.
Thermidor is not serious. They just want their unprincipled exceptions back. The left is serious. The Trump team is not going to get far without some serious people.
Last time, Trump had a team of enemies. Now he has a team of allies, but mostly unserious allies.
Off topic, but Scott Alexander is chittering with rage against DOGE shutting down USAID (Tyler Cowen is the proximate object). He has tried and failed to formulate his attack for at least a couple of posts, but it all just looks confused and self-contradictory by now. Somewhat amusing to watch if you’re into that sort of thing.
Everything that gnostic kike believes in is fake and gay, and it looks like the mentally ill psychiatrist is about to experience an emotional breakdown — the cognitive dissonance he cocooned himself in won’t hold for much longer — as it becomes increasingly evident to everyone who isn’t an utter nutter that leftism (in which he has been so emotionally invested throughout his life) is not merely “misguided” but outright evil and satanic.
He is lurking here, and the gospel of “reality is real” has now nestled itself inside his brain — against his will — where it gradually and persistently bullies his ego to see the destructive, anti-civilizational consequences of his ideology. The final wake up, or (dark) enlightenment, or snap, won’t be pretty; I suspect it’s inevitable at this point, though.
Scott, consider drowning your brain in ketamine; you won’t truly grok any world religion until you actually experience ego-death (as opposed to just writing about that sort of stuff); it’s only the actual experience of ego-death that will allow you to both accept with equanimity that you’ve been a satanist this whole time and that you should practice and preach Divine Law instead. Scott, it’s time to kill your ego once and for all, and if you can’t do it with your Buddhist practices, then you will need copious amount of the K to achieve it.
He cannot say what is pissing him off, and perhaps cannot altogether think it, because it is a thought crime — that the left was substantially funded and coordinated from the inner sanctum of USAID which Musk raided.
You can say Hitler was right all day, and it is not a thought crime. In America, though not in Europe, you can say that Hitler did not genocide the Jews, but he should have.
But that the left was largely run out of a small group of offices in a single office building in Washington DC, that you cannot say, or even think.
The day that Musk hit that office building, the left was thrown into chaos world wide, a whole lot of shilling shut down, and a whole lot more shut down not long afterwards.
And since then they have been struggling, not very successfully, to re-organise.
As the permanent government became ever more dominant over the merely elected government, power slipped into more and more hands. But state power cannot be exercised in a decentralised fashion, so it had to be furtively re-centralised. And Trump sent Musk to shut down those centers, triggering massive chaos on the left.
Trump wonders why those trade deals were so bad for the US. He is only pretending to wonder. They were bad for the US because the permanent government got paid off, making Washington DC a concentration of staggering wealth, and funding the left.
The reason the greenies are so comfortable with exporting carbon emissions to India and China is that India and China are funding civil service employees and judges who are funding the greenies.
The reason Bernie Sanders wound up going along with the nomination being stolen from him is the reason he is a strangely wealthy socialist.
The Judiciary is still acting as a central opposition because its controlled by the Jesuit order which controls law and medicine especially where law and medicine connects with government and academia. The popular left is totally braindead without USAid the more elite left unfortunately is run out of Rome…
The Judiciary is acting with alarming cohesion. They have to go. Start by investigating the strange wealth of Judges, and complete the job by shipping them to re-education camp in Alaska under Lincoln style martial law.
Kash Patel, however, would not touch the curious wealth of civil servants and judges with a ten foot pole. Need someone like Pete Hegseth to run the FBI.
Jeets are typically worthless and Patel is no Dr. Shiva or D’Souza. The one thing they can ussually be counted on is making anyone under them’s life a living hell and maybe thats what Trump is counting on but apparently not in this case.
“The Judiciary is acting with alarming cohesion.”
On this note, Here is this
JUDGES CONSIDER MANAGING THEIR OWN SECURITY FORCE DUE TO RISING THREATS
Meaning soon the judiciary will have an army.
I didn’t see this coming Judiciary’s republic , can actually they pull this off, I know that priest can’t rule. But if they appoint men with arms who obey , then they can rule. I remember Boston busing under judge Garrity , when he assumed power over the school district from 74 to 88. And ruled with bayonets literally.
Trump need to actually arrest these people, or before his term end, he will be arrested and executed.
So first, here is a working link: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/judges-consider-own-security-force-threats-1235347919/
Second, If the judges actually move even 1 more step towards implementing this plan, Trump needs to arrest (and kill) all of them for insurrection. Failure to do so will result in the judges becoming the only real branch of government left.
Yes, Trump must stop judges from having their own enforcement corps that report directly to the judges. Furthermore, for those concerned with Constitutional legalities at this late stage, his Constitutional justification for this is airtight: Enforcement is by definition the province of the Executive branch, not the Judicial branch. Only the Executive branch can have enforcement mechanisms.
Disputes over sovereign authority inherently escalate until decisively resolved.
Because of the decline of elite virtue, we have to have a system where one man is the supreme lawgiver and the supreme judge, the famous and extraordinarily long lasting British Justice of Henry the Lion of Justice, and the scope of central government is reduced to what one man can control — tax collection and the military. Federal offences should be reduced to whatever challenges central authority.
If the sovereign attempts to manage more power than one man can exercise, power slips through his fingers into the hands of his dangerously powerful servants. This is very bad for the people, who find themselves with a thousand kings three miles away instead of one King three thousand miles away, and it is dangerous for the sovereign. King Louis the sixteenth died of it, Kennedy died of it, and Trump very nearly died of it.
“and the scope of central government is reduced to what one man can control — tax collection and the military.”
What a one man can control today is very different than what king Henry can control in the first millennium.
Today a man can control entire port with robots and machine, hell soon no man will be needed.
The entire justice system can be replaced with centralized AI and officers like judge dredd with the same power.
The scope of what a single man can do vastly changed than what even a hundred year was or let alone a millennium ago.
Elite virtue will still be needed because all of this systems has a bottleneck of organization and IQ , to deploy and maintain.
Privacy and anonymity are nice, and I’m glad there are smart people working on that, but to me the big win for Bitcoin is that it isn’t tied to a fiat that governments can inflate at will. When the Bitcoin becomes a more stable currency than the dollar, things will get interesting.
To the disappointment of many Maxis, who were hoping for the next blowout roman candle top, Bitcoin is stabilising, as designed by Satoshi in the beginning.
It was US$1700 at the start of 2023, and has been rising fairly steadily, with no dramatic falls, ever since. It is likely to continue to do so, though the rate of rise has to slow down.
If we ignore the dramatic peaks of bitcoin hysteria and pumping, we get a fairly straight line on a log graph from when it was US$90, and the growth since 2022 is right on the line of stable long term growth. The peaks of hysteria and ensuing slumps of despair have been steadily getting smaller. Bitcoin has been rising steadily at about seventy percent a year, and continues to do so. That cannot continue forever, but it can continue for quite a while.
What do you think the stable price is ?
1 million for 1 bitcoin , billion for bitcoin.
At some point there are ceiling for the price.
Moldbug, a very long time ago, predicted that if Bitcoin “becomes money”, which I interpret as having parity with the US Dollar in the functions of money, it would be worth something like $250,000-$300,000. Seems like that prediction is on track to being accurate, though with inflation, a stable market value would be somewhere around 750k.
The current market capitalization of gold is around 22 trillion, and BTC around 2 trillion. BTC mcap reaching current gold levels would have it around 1-1.1 million USD a coin. Thats a reasonable target were you to expect BTC to become a relied upon reserve asset.
So sick of hearing big XMR fanbois constantly bleating their completely intentional twisting of the term “trusted setup”, and that some poobah ZEC dev tweeted a pro-tracing govt smooch that simply cannot happen in protocol real life.
Those two twisted takes are what XMR keeps bleating for 10 years because they’ve got nothing on ZCash.
Whereas today’s ZK protocols in general are far more powerful than XMR’s silly legacy blockchain and statistical non-mix. We even have private version of kaspa-dag, private zano evm, etc. Many interesting developments in the entire privacy-scale space.
https://www.scifi.money/Zcash-A-Zero-to-Hero-s-Guide-1ea9a7e7054a80f3ba68f2129b9d0a16
https://bhargav.wtf/blog/zcash-part-1/
https://github.com/0xWOLAND
https://dark.fi/
Of course, actual privacy and scale were banned topics at this years biggie bitcoin conference, as usual. Unless you were a govt/corp given a pass to shill false versions of them for prison/profit.
The problem with ZCash is that, like Musk, they tend to overpromise.
Monero has nothing on what ZCash promises to deliver real soon now. But they keep being a bit late.
I am not up to date on the latest status. When last I looked, ZCash had some really wonderfully great stuff in development. Maybe it is now working, but I am in no hurry to check.
For ZCash to succeed, has to provide a level two Bitcoin through the Grail Bridge. And, as a transition path away from fiat, stablecoins, level two Tether, to provide a path between the regulated financial world and the privacy enabled blockchain world.
Have you reached a place where you BELIEVE that a good-enough Level 2 Bitcoin is mathematically possible? Like even if it’ll be hard, do you now have a strong sense that yes, there really is a “there” there?
Yes, sure. The basic idea was figured out in 2018, but actually implementing it has been trickier than expected.
The technology explained in 2018 gives us a blockchain that scales as O(log(N)). Which means that if it works OK at moderate scales, it will work OK at gigantic scales. The “work OK at moderate scales” part has proven rather difficult.
Kind of like Wernher von Braun knew that in principle liquid fueled rockets can reach Mars, but actually building them was trickier.
We have known since 2018 how to build a limitlessly scalable, completely private, blockchain in principle. Building it in practice has been a bit more difficult.
We now have several different technological solutions that could give effect to this, my favorite being folding with Poseidon hashes and snarks, but without recursive snarks.
The pieces are coming together.
We right now have an actual running solution, (which no true Bitcoiners like), an actual working limitlessly scalable blockchain based on FRI and recursive snarks, but FRI and recursive snarks has rather high bandwidth costs which in practice lead to all full peers being in a few gigantic data centers, and everyone else having a client wallet and zero privacy, which is no good. Kind of like trying to settle Mars using the NASA space shuttle. It works, but it just does not work well enough. I think FRI is a dead end, that is always going to lead to peers being mega corporations in the cloud.
Fortunately we have more alternatives to FRI than I can shake a stick at.
Zcash is trying to make recursive snarks work on your desktop, rather than megacorp data centers on the cloud. I wish them luck, but my money is on folding and ordinary snarks.
Their recursive snarks really work, as promised, but it is not clear to me that they work efficiently enough for an enormous blockchain running on the desktops of ordinary users with hundred of millions of peers and thousands of transactions per second, while it looks to me that folding can accomplish this. The Zcash blockchain can scale to astronomical size in some degrees of freedom, but not clear to me that it can usefully do so in all the degrees of freedom required.
We are at a point analogous to Musk sending rockets up, and after they go up, we encounter problems.
Was recently just viewing some body cam videos based on recommendations from Youtube/Facebook of American police, mainly related to traffic stops and also some videos of them handling shoplifters and drunk airline passengers. Note that, I hadn’t really watched these videos before, so these were new to me.
One thing I clearly understand now. Why Jim calls blacks “Plains Apes”. There is no exaggeration from what I saw in these videos.
Most of these offenders were either stone drunk women of various races, blacks or black women also mostly stoned. The male offenders were usually hispanic, black or sometimes white. Most of the offenders were usually under the influence of drugs, alcohol or both.
And black women were the absolute worst of the lot. Their sense of entitlement and victimhood was at another level altogether. Usually shoplifters at least try to hide their stolen goods, but black women simply took out cartloads of stuff without paying and were actually outraged when confronted by the police.
The way they say “I dindu nuffin” then “I know my rights” and “Don’t touch me” and then resisting arrest and actually saying “I can’t breathe”, all while kicking, biting, screaming and cursing in the foulest possible language when restrained matched the stereotype perfectly and really reaffirms that they cannot live in a civilized society at all. The way they actually think that breaking laws and stealing goods is their right is amazing.
Again on women: most of these women, regardless of race, actually actively courted arrest by almost challenging the police officers directly to suppress them physically. Exactly like how Jim says women shit tests in order to be slapped and then giving a good fucking. And yes, when finally restrained they become teary eyed and start howling and pleading.
Their behaviour in these videos matches what Aidan wrote about on his blog.
Red pill is real.
Another observation: American police also tend to escalate too quickly at times. Not always but quite often. Maybe they have good reason to, but police in other countries seem to be more relaxed and “in control” of the situation while American police regardless of which state they belong to, seem to be on edge most of the time.
P.S. the few men who were caught in these body cam videos were far less dramatic and far more cooperative in general, especially the white men, though there were some exceptions. Even black men know the score when caught seem to cooperate a lot better with the police than black women.
I can just remember leftists and activists being excited for the introduction of bodycams, on the expectation it would keep innocent indigent blacks from being railroaded, and capture all the police brutality that just must be going on.
But that flipped very quickly once people saw the footage. Bodycam footage on the internet turned out to be a major rightward pull on normies; reality is reactionary and racist.
Another observation: American police also tend to escalate too quickly at times.
Guilty, absolutely.
One reason is they have the job of policing blacks, some of whom will pull out a gun given any chance, and the training and job experience it takes to survive that gets carried over to all interactions. Explicitly allowing disparate treatment in policing by race would greatly improve things overall. But some admirable foreign policing practice only works for mono-racial societies.
men who were caught in these body cam videos were far less dramatic and far more cooperative in general, especially the white men
It’s not widely known that, per interaction, American police escalate to deadly force the most with white males, even more than black males. I blame the religion of woke making police walk on eggshells to avoid being Derek Chauvin’ed, while if they execute a white male they get a free pass the way Philip Brailsford did.
This is an explanation not an excuse; I favor trial for the worst abuses.
This is more a general observation on police, rather than any specific country’s police.
The problem with modern police the world over is that they are always a prole organization reporting to a an official priesthood structure in most countries. There are very few warriors among the police, and the way modern police acts is through procedure “by-the-book” and legal consensus which is rather a priestly thing, rather than being a traditional military-like command.
Proles, especially the lower level proles, love to dress up in uniforms and act like warriors for the kick it gives them; just as proles love to dress up in lab-coats and act like priests. When these proles in uniform get frustrated by their official reality disturbed by actual reality on the street, they have a tendency to get violent and aggressive against those who cannot hit back.
That is what a police organization gives them an opportunity to do. There is neither warrior spirit nor leadership structure among police. Even the topmost ranked policeman reports to the official priesthood leadership rather than a military leader.
ZK?
I’m interested in links to any estimates of the parameter and resource sizes and speeds needed to service a billion private PQC P2P tx-settled account-balanced users.
Sucks that so much allocation is flowing into a crypto that can’t actually be used to handle the load that such idle capital is going to demand of legacy L1’s.
I feel a massive global transactional settlement capacity disappointment is coming for bitcoin, not least from the hopium and corporate lies told and sold about layers and products, but from their excessively high fees, including on the legacy L1. And from the absolute KYC and TAX and regulatory nightmare logjam.
Mass will hit, then everyone is going to try to spend, and find out the hard way that they can’t… the hodler-set, a hundred million prospective users, soon trying to mass-spend, will all begin screaming failure in unison.
Thankfully these token and representative lockup legacy layers are being recognized as parasitic to L1’s, and more capable L1 architectures are being worked on. The demand and funds for such are palpable and growing, and big voices and media are being forced to break former heretical bounds.
To me, all of these Zero-Knowledge “in-and-as” the base protocol of the L1… these seem very promising as a sort of arbitrarily flexible yet rigorously defined top layer that you’re going to be able to use to record a lot of things with.
And if the only thing you choose to account for in that L1 is the balances of billions of users accounts, it seems there might be plenty of capacity to do that.
I also see about fast protocols like Kaspa, but
1) Kaspa history is said to be corrupt something about lots of old data missing
2) Kaspa don’t seem to be doing native privacy (though clones are, and there’s always coinjoin).
3) I don’t like “store all tx forever” protocols… roll those settled tx into a balance field and discard them, or use ZK to treat a “tx” really as a state change.
I also think we need some kind of publicly broadcast, optionally encrypted, fixed length message/data between accounts. So that the public, if cleartext, or keyholders if encrypted, can read and use the msgdata field however they want.
Holding a large per-account field forever doesn’t scale without
hard-expiry (say 5 years, perhaps with optional pay-to-bump), since
128KiB * 1B accounts using the optional field = 256 TiB
and many people think the number of accounts has to be unlimited, but could be collapsed under privacy, or pay-to-keep-open.
A separately referenced fifo buffer could be target sized to expire a mass of smaller fixed length msgdata flows after say 1-5 years.
Using data agnostic fixed length fields allows for longterm capacity planned designs.
For people to interact about non custodial funds, communicating arbitrary data, they need to be able to interact using a pseudonymous identity without revealing their IP, interact blockchain style as Bitmessage already does.
Working on it.
For this to scale, need a time limit on the persistence of such data in the public broadcast channel, and infinite divisibility of public broadcast channels, which Bitmessage theoreticaly does.
To permanently store an unlimited number of unspent transaction outputs, again need an infinitely divisible public broadcast channel, which does not allow arbitrary human readable data, but only unspent transaction outputs, and commits of those outputs to transactions, with the commits and spent transaction outputs eventually becoming inaccessible, but the unspent transaction outputs forever remaining accessible.
Channel subdivision necessarily requires that not everyone verifies every transaction, so each public broadcast sub channel must produce a succinct proof of the validity of all new transaction outputs appearing in the channel, and the parent channel a succinct proof of all the subchannel proofs.
The technology to do this has been known in principle since 2022. This is the final solution to the scaling problem, and the final solution to the scaling problem also enables the final solution to the privacy problem, since it implies not keeping all information around forever and showing it to everyone.
Saylor favors ossification because he fears Bitcoin being deemed a security. ( He also believes in Lightning; and buys the “Bitcoin has already won” and “immaculate conception” ideas — both false. I hope I don’t need to explain those easy ones, though. ) Consider Saylor’s critique of Ethereum. If anyone “works” on the BTC code, then (Saylor thinks) it is also an unfinished project. Bitcoin then hinges on “the actions of others”, ie Howey. Like Eth. Saylor is not a cypherpunk and does not own MSTR’s BTC. He does not run a node and probably did not roll his own keys. It’s all with BitGo. So his view is inherently a compliant legalist statist one, etc. Saylor is also anti-privacy — for example, he does not like the zCash sidechain idea at all. A few people have brought it up to him, including me, and his reaction is very negative. The “legalist BTC” route, is one of the few routes *worse* than the “unlimited L1 blocksize” route. (In the endgame, it loses to CBDCs / WeChat). Thus, Saylor is in a different dimension. Whereas the status quo worked against early hard fork strategy, it works in favor of Saylor’s demagoguery strategy. This is why Saylor is more likely to bring the BTC price to $0, than he is to increase it to $20 M. Thanks to him, it is now (slightly) more likely that some other coin/fork will take the prize.
Neither can MSTR spend or invest stockholders assets without permission that it does not have and can’t make compelling case for.
Nor is MSTR an efficient store, and it’s 2x over NAV… such services will be drained and bankrupted by multi-party m-of-n self-custody frameworks.
Nor can MSTR truly and effectively loan BTC unless and until BTC becomes the denominator with all other L1 contenders moot.
BTC already is the denominator with all other L1 contenders moot.
There can only be one. Metcalfe’s law. Tech advance has to be done at level two. ZCash has some very interesting and important technological advances, but nothing will happen unless those tech advances come to Bitcoin through the Grail Bridge.
A hotter tech is folding, which as yet does not exist as a blockchain. Which might hint that it cannot exist as blockchain. We shall see.