if you read the whole story then you know he has voltage regulators so exactly that problem you (rightfully) bring up doesn't happen.

a fantastic story from a neighbor of mine in Watsonville, CA. He fought PG&E over some years and finally won: http://www.solarwarrior.com/pgebattle.html

Time is money, right? I like the notion that i can barter with time. Here's a 1-Hour note, redeemable directly by me. What do you want me to do? Fix your network? Do some gardening? Clean your fridge? Or you can spend it to get something else, then i owe someone ELSE 1 hour. You dig my well, i'll fix her solar panels, she installs your carburetor. It seems to me that everyone's *time* should have equal value, whether you're babysitting or programming a nuclear reactor.

mod parent up

if you're going into app development or IT, probably not much math needed. i've been in app dev for a long time (and quite successful). Those times that i actually need math? I just look it up, program it, then forget it. I never have needed much math. However, if you're going into some CS field that requires math, well, obviously, it's worth your while to study it.

it's meant to just stimulate discussion, not meant as set-in-stone rules upon which to found a new society. i think if we would all just stop hurting each other we'd be a long way toward a better society, and codifying some rational form of "don't violate anyone's free will" moves in that direction. eg: a rule like "don't be a dick" means just about the same thing to most rational, clear-thinking, honest, nice people, but if you ARE being a dick, you can totally argue a million ways in which it's not very clear.

you're not allowed to override the free will of another, but you're required to override the free will of a third party who is overriding the free will of another.

yes, that's the hairy part. those who for selfish reasons override the free will of another give up their right to free will, enabling "the rest of us" to step in and prevent their harming others. yes, we're then overriding the free will of the harmer, but as a harmer you've given up the protection of YOUR free will.

there is a resolvable conflict here:

you're not allowed to override the free will of another, but you're required to override the free will of a third party who is overriding the free will of another.

yes, that's the hairy part. those who for selfish reasons override the free will of another give up their right to free will, enabling "the rest of us" to step in and prevent their harming others. yes, we're then overriding the free will of the harmer, but as a harmer you've given up the protection of YOUR free will.

monsanto: they want to patent all seeds? remove heirloom seeds from the public's use? sue you for not using their stuff? they're willfully doing evil, which violates the free will of "the people" to grow their own food. under law 1, they'd have to be disbanded

monopolies: laws 1 and 2 both come into play because they by their nature violate the free will of "the people" who want choice and not a dictatorship, and also if they have all that power for the sole purpose of making more money and gaining more power, they're also required to "help those less fortunate". laws 1 and 2 totally trump law 3

secret deals? that is a bald-faced violation of my free will, as i require transparency and honesty. i think i am not alone in that.

the intention is to put up a straw man for discussion, not invite a cursory dismissal without any thought.

there is a resolvable conflict here:

you can't override the free will of another, BUT, you are forced to override the free will of those who override the free will of others.

monsanto overrides the free will of everybody by attempting to patent seeds, take heirloom seeds out of the public's hands, and extort farmers everywhere. we would be forced to disband monsanto for doing such.

monopolies override the free will of the people, so they are simply not allowed by law 1, not to mention law 2 which would explicitly say you can't lord it over others for profit. law 3 is always trumped by law 1 and 2

no secrets? that violates my free will right there. can't do it by law 1.

Let me suggest the three laws, modified for human consumption: 1) thou shalt not override the free-will of another, or thru inaction, allow a third party to override the free will of another 2) thou shalt help those less fortunate than yourself, to the best of your ability and in a sustainable way, unless it conflicts with the 1st law 3) thou shalt have fun and do whatever you want, unless it conflicts with the first or second law It would be fun to discuss the ramifications of this. for examples of what shakes out: no wars, no "illegal" drugs, no banksters, no monsanto, no monopolies or or oligopolies, marriage equality, no slavery/trafficking, no secret backroom deals, etc etc. i fully expect some to vociferously disagree with this, and i think that's part of the fun. but i think we could go a long way toward a more civilized society by seriously considering these ideals.

I know google doesn't have much of a choice in this, but when they had real estate search it was the tip of the awesome iceberg. I wish they were allowed to "compete" in that space.