federona

So very strange to invest so heavily in Bitcoin a highly volatile crypto at its peak. Not to mention an old generation crypto with dubious value on the face of 3rd generation crypto that does not damage the environment and does not have the same scaling issues. It's like considering some old tech as which has dubious value just because it was invented first. Like overvaluing a gas car when an electric exists and is the wave of the future. What do these companies know that we plebs don't.

Seems like an Android client and a distributed key value store with phone numbers tied to public keys is all you would need and probably an erlang app like that written for Whatsapp back in the day to build something useful from this.

Fractals show that order is simply a part of the chaos. Infinities create repeating discrete patterns in recursive order. We already do what Plato suggested, it's more or less called schooling and no one rebels because school teaches humans how they can productively live in community. You have many parents each of them called teachers. It's too bad we don't have closer bonds with all these various parents, would make life more meaningful.

I am sure the market will find other uses for it. For instance Soy Plastic. https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_Report.cfm?Lab=NCE...

There is no way personal choice affects industry enough to make a difference. Regulation effects it much much more. If you don't want people eating meat, reduce all the subsidies and make meat price sky rocket, problem reduced.

Say it with me, there is no such thing as the free market, there is no such thing as buying your way into fixing environmental problems, some exception though may be found in religion where certain things are banned so it's so socially unacceptable to eat those things that it may well be codified into law. When it comes to fixing these things, it's politics all the way down. Policy, regulation, and enforcement. Also private ownership of the land with terms of ownership saying you can't do anything to this land, through zoning laws. You want to be an environmental billionaire, buy all this land and do nothing with it because you can't and because it's privately owned the government can't decide to let people use it to create jobs, they could however rezone it.

The biggest problem we have is we keep making things that we have no idea of the consequences and then to get rid of them takes a while because industry says no we can't do this, there will be too much economic damage. Same with all environmental issues, the speed of damage is much faster than the ability to control the economics created as a result. As a result unless something is shown to be immediately fatal, it's hard to prove without a doubt it's fatal and often the damage done is cumulative and distributed across the whole industry. There is no easy solution to this.

My Bitcoin is on the government(s) and their security agencies. Satoshi is just a moniker they concocted in order to hide the fact that this is a government project through and through to be able to move fund around into and out of various economies and destabilize weaker ones. Also as a result of beng there in the beginning they have a huge amount of currency to do stuff with that will never be accounted for. Only reason it makes sense in our world as to why this stuff has not yet been banned and why Satoshi's identity is so well hidden.

At some point perhaps we will make laws that say if you have a certain amount of economic power, you can not convert that into social power through buying up the media. Economic power should not be translatable to political or social power, or else the entire system is controlled by money rather than by an ideology like humanism, science, and democracy. That is to say that companies in the media including social networks should be independent organizations funded by the government like BBC.

It's not nor has it ever been a free market. The free market mythology which is invoked whenever it's a powerless party or the public involved in order to justify them paying for acts of nature which invalidate contracts in contract law is not a sound policy. When someone signs up for wholesale rates they are not disclosed the downside properly and if they were there is no way it would stand up in court, and it's simple enough for the wholesaler to get insurance on this which again would fail in case of which extreme unforeseen events. If we can bail out banks, corporations, and billionaires, we can bail out individuals due to extreme unforseen events of natures, contract law allows for this, for the contract to be null and void due to unforseen acts of nature.