People that do things will always suffer hecklers. People who can't do things struggle with the urge toward petty jealousy. Ugly little people.

Good luck with your bitcoin. You will be needing it.

I am unsettled by the impact of quantum computation on the integrity of all cryptos. It has become my largest concern regarding crypto-viability - even eclipsing banking and government based disruption

You lost your crayons. Go find them.

TDS. Taking things superficially in the middle of an information war is probably a good way to get nearly everything wrong. Making moves that are completely obvious and direct usually only is effective

Liberal politics would carry more information if they just dispensed with all outward affectations to real world features and just focused on a detailed psychological analysis of the person animating them.

Something about how you put that reminded me of an observation I had related to the capability slider thought experiment. It goes like this: -Begin with a population of super-AIs (slider set high) -Value

You are using the word evidence as if it were evident. It isn't. It is the crux of most problems reaching consensus. If you don't believe that, just try to give me a careful description of you would consider

I was including capacity to react to perturbations as part of the meaning of competition- with better competitors having more capacity to react. To you point: A highly turbulent market seems to require

Yep, I agree. It is infuriating. I would make a ballpark estimate that adverse engineering comprises 20%-30% of engineering time spent on most products.

Regarding Occam's razor, I don't find your dichotomy useful. That isn't to say the way you break it down doesn't have value or is wrong. Don't worry, my agreeing with it or not shouldn't affect the utility

I think you are asserting that technological advancement represent a force that continually erodes the bar of entry (tending to increase competition as a result). If that is an accurate paraphrase of your

Complexity IS difficult to do efficiently, that is true. I was simplifying. It is scaled by efficiency. Just because a competitor manages equivalent complexity with more efficiency doesn't mean the system

Nice topic - not talked about enough. Comments by you like: 'Obsolete? Yes. By design? No' show a problem with how you dichotomize the issue. Try beginning with planned obsolescence as a monetize-able

Reading a bunch of the comments, it appears like they are mostly opinions without much thought behind them. It is a very complex topic and people use down-votes differently than they use up-votes, so it

No. Since you linked to Mises, I'll explain a property of markets that you won't find from him. It comes from network and game theory. 'Free markets' are not the stable state of markets. They are a transitory

It sounds like they need to consider pathogen vectors & sanitation during their democratic process. The article is also poor reporting and most probably misconstrues or selectively omits information.

Reality is simple too. The strong subjugate the weak. So is genetics. Slaves have been hybridized to select suitable traits. You are free to begin your anarchy utopia immediately. Nothing to stop you.

That response suits you.

'Everyone comes here to make money...' People who interact as a means of playing a kind of popularity game for profit - Wow, they pretty much peg the meter for fun and interesting people, don't they? I'm