A state might be able to imprison me and try to coerce me in to handing over my property but ultimately the responsibility to resist that and keep my money despite it once rested with me if my money was in a Swiss bank. Now it isn't secure at all, it is at the whim of random nations.
Thinks it's a hoot
$10B in loot
GM still a coot
For all its servers and software, Google does not have an Army or a Navy.
This wouldn't -- no counldn't have happenned in the days before computers.
Eventually, I think centralised computer control is going to go the way of semaphore. It's too easy for a centralised computer system to glitch, break, be shutdown, and then screw up the lives and functions of millions.
What we should see is decentralised systems run using independent computer systems.
No need. Orcs mostly speak the common tongue or else their own tribal dialect. The Black Speech -- as devised by the Dark Lord in elvish runes -- was a failed attempt to linguistically distinguish his followers from those of the Alliance. It didn't take among the Orcs, but strangely the East End London accent did.
The journals of course are businesses and quite reasonably want to stay in business and make a profit.
Sadly I don't have a good idea for a solution.
Nationalise the journals.
This isn't an anti-patent troll bill. It's an anti-small inventor bill.
If so, good then; the sooner the myth of patents being for the small inventor dies the sooner everyone will finally be rid of the impediment of patents forever.
It's another FU to small inventor, just like the last patent reform.
The small inventor, and the little guy in general, has been FU-ed out of the game for a long time now. Patents are now all about legal fights and trolling, not innovation or rewarding it. It's time for them to die.
Exactly. For content consumption, small and mobile devices are very convenient.
Who exactly spends all of their time simply "consuming" on these devices? It's virtually impossible to spend more than a day online without feeling the urge to add to the conversation, and all iDink devices and touchscreen interfaces do is get in the way of that (2-way) conversation with the outside world.
As to the consumption itself, as far as I can see, everything is clunkier on touch device. Everything. Designers are having to make buttons and icons cartoon sized in order to accomidate simple viewing on these "computers".
I simply cannot accept the proposition that people are -- willingly -- going to accept a future of either creation or consuption on these restricted devices. Even if the whole industry collectively decides to abandon PCs, in a decade or so the current infants playing with iDinks will manage to "rediscover tactile touch based text input devices once called 'keyboards' " as a faster, better method of interfacing with their computers.
Eventually, some of them will even rediscover the command line as well.
When you talk to managers, you need to talk business. Throw every reason you think important into the trashcan. Then build your case from the ground up as a business case. Show that it saves the company money or increases productivity. Basically, make the case that your proposal == more $$$.
Essentially, you must dance the corporate Dance of the Seven Veils, in order to entice managers in the only language they are able to speak.
No. I just haven't reached the same wrong conclusions that have fscked the global fiat economy.
"Deflation is a dividend paid to everyone holding any quantity of money --- which benefits no one but the ultra rich with money to sit on."
An assertion that is commonly touted by those who support the idea that inflation is needed to drive an economy and which I thoroughly debunked in my previous posts in this thread. You don't need inflation to force the rich to try to use their wealth to become more wealthy. The rich spend, and need to replace what they spend, additionally the rich are greedy like everyone else and want to increase their wealth. The rate of deflation/inflation just a set minimum bar for the returns your ventures must yield to be worthwhile. Deflation sets the bar higher, and since return on investment directly correlates to risk a higher bar means assuming more risk. That means ease of access to credit because higher risk credit yields greater ROI. Ease of access to credit means more startups and more ventures. Businesses in turn will need to expand in order to do better than they would do by simply sitting on their money.
Deflation provides interest without a bank. To everyone, every minute of every day. If you make 25 Bitmils/hour you will get a built in raise from week to week at the rate of deflation. That means your employer must expand operations or otherwise increase the value they offer to continue to pay your salary. The deflation doesn't magically come from air. It comes from increased goods and services.
Someone who legitimately just sits on their wealth and hoards it has little to no impact on the economy since their money isn't in circulation and the reduced supply of money will cause the value of each unit that is in circulation to increase to compensate. That doesn't cause a problem unless there aren't enough units of money. That is a problem on the gold standard. That is no problem in Bitcoin. Bitcoin has trillions of units and it is actually fairly simple to expand the number of digits used to track Bitcoin. So even though Bitcoin is deflationary, it can expand to a theoretically unlimited number of currency units. It could also cause a problem if there were a huge number of people in that position but like you said, we are talking about a very tiny number of wealthy people and their personal contribution to the production of goods and services is essentially nil and their consumption of goods and services is already far below their personal wealth.
Either way you look at it consumers and laborers are what drive the economy and investors leech from it. Inflation and Deflation don't change any of that. Deflation actually benefits those with less because it increases the buying power of their wages and forces investors to assume more risk in order to generate returns higher than deflation. Higher risk means more freely available credit and a greater chance of losing, which will cause more investment in new business and wealth to shift hands more quickly.
Inflation is a tax on everyone holding any quantity of money. It encourages producing more money. Deflation is a dividend paid to everyone holding any quantity of money. That dividend ultimately comes from higher risk credit and increased production/consumption of goods and services. So deflation encourages the production of more goods and services. That benefits everyone.
Some say investment is bullshit I say they are full of shit. Gentleman played early on in Bitcoin had thousands in a wallet which he'd forgotten about. Heard a bitcoin story and took a look and found out he has a few million worth now. Thanks to speculators making the market liquid he was able to sell coin and buy a flat for $250,000 (in Euro actually). Now you could claim that because he converted his BTC to Euro the Euro was worth a flat but I say it makes no difference. Had I bought the same flat from the US I'd have to convert my dollars to Euros but I'd still view it as a $250,000 purchase and my dollars as having bought it for me and $250,000 worth of Bitcoin still changed hands.