|
How many strange coins does a loaf of bread cost and how do I pay for it and how many strange coins would I earn per month and would I still have to pay rent or what?
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
Ok I re-read part of the OP for some unfathomable reason and it seems like the stupid rules of this system could be implemented entirely with electronic currency and by banning physical currency like coins. Then presumably the government could closely track all StrangeCoin transactions for the purposes of turning the world into a carefully engineered quote:Support is a one-sided transaction over some duration t. If X supports Y over t, then X contributes additional S to Y's income from X's balance, expressed as a proportion s of Y's income over t. X's support effectively amplifies Y's income. To initiate this transaction, X specifies Y, t, and the proportion s of Y's income that X will contribute as support. Since support is a one-sided transaction, Y does not need to approve of the support to receive the additional income. How is this different from giving someone money or paying them for nothing? Is it supposed to be? Why? quote:Inhibition is a two-sided transaction over some duration t. If X inhibits Y over t, then X reduces the income or expenses of Y over t by some proportion i. By inhibiting Y, X effectively reduces the impact that Y has on the Strangecoin network by i over t by forfeiting that proportion of income and expense. To initiate the transaction, X specifies Y, t, and i, which must be approved by Y. Why would I ever want someone to have the ability to reduce my income? What the gently caress? quote:Endorsement is a one-sided transaction over some duration t. If X endorses Y over t, then X contributes additional S to Y's outgoing expenses, expressed as a proportion e of Y's expenses over t. X's endorsement effectively amplifies the payouts of Y's expenses. To initiate the transaction, X specifies Y, t, and the proportion e of Y's expenses that X will contribute as endorsements. Since support is a one-sided transaction, Y does not need to approve of the endorsement or the additional expense, which is drawn entirely from X's account. Could you give some examples of transactions of this sort that could not possibly be represented by just giving someone money and how an average person would learn to utilize these transactions? Also why, that point is important. Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 16:15 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
I recommend implementing StrangeCoin on the forums first. Imagine if you had a system whereby you could endorse and inhibit the posts of others, and the net number of posts never changed. Perhaps the net number of posts in a given thread would change non-linearly at first as people mine new posts, but then would be limited by a cap, after which inhibited posts would disappear in favour of endorsed posts, only to re-appear in a poorly-endorsed thread elsewhere on the forums.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
Hey RealityApologist are you ever going to answer any of the very obvious and simple questions that have been posed here or are you just going to keep up the intellectual masturbation? Can you explain in maybe 2-3 sentences each what the purpose of your five different transaction types is? Also how I would use them to buy bread, and how their use in buying bread would improve my life, or the government's understanding of economics, or anything at all. Why is payment two-sided, but support one-sided? Why does inhibition exist at all? Why aren't you more inhibited from posting?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Also maybe you can write a 2-3 paragraph abstract in the form of a TED talk to a general audience, explaining how your nonlinear cryptocurrency is going to revolutionize the universe. Something like this: Money is great. We all enjoy exchanging money for goods and services. You are paid money in exchange for your labour, and you use that money to pay for rent, utilities and buy groceries. But have you ever stopped to think about all of the problems with money? For example, if you go down to the bakery to buy a loaf of bread, how can the government tell that you're buying bread, or that the bread you are buying is especially popular with single white males age 25-40? Or perhaps you have trouble with accumulating too much money and not knowing what to spend it on? Perhaps your friends are frustrated that they can't mutually agree to make less money without spending the money they already have? That's where StrangeCoin comes in. StrangeCoin is a brand new non-linear cryptocurrency that solves all of these problems. Having trouble buying bread at the bakery? StrangeCoin gives you four different ways to change the structure of your income! All you have to do is decide on a fraction of your income to exchange with the bakery over a designated time period. Too much money and not enough to spend it on? StrangeCoin limits your savings and forces you to spend more of your income so you don't lose it to the aether! Not enough money? The aether will pay for your bread! And best of all, this strange new currency will allow your government to track your spending habits with unprecedented precision! But wait, there's more!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:Part of the point of a system like strangecoin is that you wouldn't need corporations as distinct legal entities, since their function would be entirely redundant. Individual agents themselves are capable of forming spontaneous corporate structures simply by engaging in the transactions. RealityApologist posted:Part of the point of a system like strangecoin is that you wouldn't need corporations as distinct legal entities, since their function would be entirely redundant. Individual agents themselves are capable of forming spontaneous corporate structures simply by engaging in the transactions. RealityApologist posted:Individual agents themselves are capable of forming spontaneous corporate structures simply by engaging in the transactions. RealityApologist posted:
Hi, my factory in Taiwan needs 10,000 tons of steel by Monday. Can you spontaneously collect a network of friends to spontaneously facilitate this transaction post-haste?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Do you really need that steel though??? Challenge your preconceptions. Actually now that I think about it, this is a brilliant idea to revolutionize the labour market. Imagine if every corporation needed to hire networks of people just to acquire enough cash flow (income) to cover their daily outlays. McDonalds would have to pay its workers dividends to order pallets of gross fake bread and vats of ground beef slurry. Systematic unemployment would end, and workers would finally own the means of production. Or maybe the economy would collapse. I don't know, there's only one way to find out!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:So wait... every business is now a pyramid scam? Like I buy a candy bar from the corner store, and because I was the first customer everyone else pays me dividends? RealityApologist posted:Right, and Strangecoin provides that kind of shield. Individuals don't assume full responsibility for their transactions; that responsibility is distributed across the network in quantifiable ways. More like, if you buy a candy bar from the corner store, you go to jail for 3 days because the Nestle Corp. network dumped some waste illegally in China, and pay a 50 strangecoin fine because an old lady slipped on a wet floor in the corner store and broke her hip. Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 22:50 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:edit: the corporations thing wasn't "spur of the moment", it's a note I've repeated multiple times. Maybe you should have repeated it in the OP, and possibly translated all of this gobbledygook: quote:And I can enter into less serious relationships of varying degrees with other parties. The effect is a way of managing not just financial transactions, but also reputation, investment, and other dynamics social constraints on the economy via the currency itself. Money is memory (http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/sr/sr218.pdf), but our existing currencies only represent some aspects of our economic activity, and therefore put limits on the memory stored in the economy. A nonlinear coin like Strangecoin can embed that social knowledge in the currency itself, providing a more robust memory framework on which we can conduct our economic transactions. ... into English. Here, let me help: quote:A nonlinear coin like Strangecoin can embed that social knowledge in the currency itself, providing a more robust memory framework on which we can conduct our economic transactions. Provide just one workable example. quote:I only hint at this in the proposal, but I suspect a system like this is required to resolve the twisted legal artifice the corporate veil, because it quantifies explicitly the role individuals have in collective economic activity, and thereby gives a method for explicitly holding persons proportionally responsible (in both credit and blame) for their contributions to that activity. Mhhmmm, yes, quite, so give me an example of how one applies this completely non-specific method to explicitly hold persons proportionally responsible. By the way, did you notice that the paper you linked provides a number of simple descriptions of the memory theory? Also did you notice that you haven't sufficiently answered a single question starting with 'Why' in this entire thread? Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Wait does this mean that if I buy some socks at Victoria's Secret with strangecoins I can find out what brand of panties my neighbour buys and from which store and how often and which colour?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
Parallel Paraplegic posted:I have a question RealityApologist, once you have all the world's uncompressed social economic network technodata that you can assemble into a cool graph like that guy did with StackOverflow or whatever, what happens then? We have cool graphs that show social interaction and economic effects and all that right now and nobody (well, no average person) really pays any attention to them. I don't really see how this would make any of this data or greater economic trends/effects more apparent to the average person unless they spent a bunch of time specifically going out to look for it, and they can do that right now with existing systems and the help of some good statisticians or economists. I mean I have a degree in Computational Mathematics with a minor in Philosophy and I don't really get why applying network theory to economics is desirable or will really do anything besides completely break the world economy during the transition period. You said something like it would be a tool used to bypass or change the world in ways we can't do in our current political climate, but how would the information make itself apparent in a way that would lead to change? I just see this as being useful to slick bastards who can exploit it, confusing to Joe Everyman, and otherwise just academically neato. He already answered this: RealityApologist posted:So here's a model very much like the Strangecoin model, that describes the incentive structures around certain constraints, and the changes in behavior of the agents on the basis of those constraints. It's not necessary to ask of the model "but what do people do with the badges", because the model simply describes their incentive structures within those constraints. Strangecoin has a different set of constraints and so will behave differently, but I'm describing the same sort of model. He has described a model. It's not necessary to answer 'what do people do with the currency', or 'what the gently caress is the point of this', because it is a special class of minimally informative esoteric model of maximally nonlinearly complex behaviour and it is impossible to create even the simplest working example of it. RealityApologist posted:The comments in this thread are aimed at stripping me of my legitimacy to speak. It is a way of preventing a discussion from happening at all. That's not an excuse, it's a fact of the social dynamics on this forum. It doesn't matter how prepared and competent I am, if my basic sanity is in question then there's no way I'll be able to communicate with anyone. There's no way you'll be able to communicate if you never answer the simplest loving question posed of you like 'what is the point of your model' or 'can you provide a working example' which have been asked repeatedly for the last 8 pages without a single answer.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
A man walks into a bar and buys a beer with a StrangeCoin. The bartender receives a nonlinear sum of StrangeCoins in return. Why? Then he drives home drunk and kills a pregnant lady and anyone who ever drank at that bar or purchased a product that was served there goes to jail.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:Let me stop you right there---where is this in your writeup? Are you just making this up now? No, he made it up in a blog post 3 months ago where he referenced some published research, vomited out a series of words about social media network graph theory topological defects, and concluded that StrangeCoin naturally solves this problem in an even more elegant way than described in the actual publication.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:So for example, let's say X wants to pay Y some quantity q of Strangecoin. Although X pays out q from their balance (so receives a net loss of q Strangecoin), Y could receive more than q depending on the other transactions X has. Say, for instance, X has 3 endorsers E1, E2, and E3, in proportions <e1, e2, e3> respectively. The Y as the result of the payment, Y will receive q coins from X, and e1*q from E1, e2*q from E2, and e1*q from E3. This is not a linear transaction. Okay, so I go to the bakery and want to buy a load of bread for one StrangeCoin. I pay one StrangeCoin, but two people are endorsing me for 50% of my expenses, so they also pay the baker an additional ha'coin each, and the baker nets two StrangeCoins. Why???
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
Justin Bieber dropped by my bar last night and had a shot of whiskey and then I bought a new car with the strangecoins from his 5 million twitter endorsers and now there are millions of angry parents wondering what the gently caress.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I've said multiple times that the issue of transitioning to a world of strangecoin is completely irrelevant. Now that's something we can agree on! RealityApologist posted:This is a project in modeling the dynamics of a complex economic system. How? Why? Do go on. You brought up this example of endorsing without explaining what purpose it could possibly serve. RealityApologist posted:I've used the nepotism example several times as a example of how it could be useful as a theoretical model quite independently of getting people to use it to buy bread or whatever. RealityApologist posted:For instance, it's quite common for nepotism to influence the jobs and roles of economic agents. Money obscures how common the practice is, and Strangecoin bakes the practice directly into the currency. That information might be available elsewhere, but the compression technique here makes it clear that's what you're seeing every time you make a transaction. Your currency is clearly not linearly independent of baking bread.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
Sorry I overlooked a post here:RealityApologist posted:About the reification of social problems: I've not claimed that this structure would make the problems go away, but would only make their impact salient. I gave the example of nepotism. Strangecoin would straightforwardly apply to familial relations, and so would make salient the degree of nepotism informing our economic networks. That doesn't fix the problem; I'm really not even sure it is a problem. But if it is, then Strangecoin gives us some tools for dealing with it precisely because it reifies those structures and makes them salient. A threshold of allowable support might result in fewer nepotistic ties in the economy by providing a disincentive to pool collective support among a small population of people, and in incentive to broaden one's network of support. If we think nepotism is a problem, then this tool provides a means for addressing that problem. Here's the thing. StrangeCoin is just a model. It's not supposed to be workable, or to solve any problems. But it could be used to solve the problem of nepotism. I'm not really sure if nepotism is actually a problem. But StrangeCoin could solve nepotism by finding nepotism in the socioeconomic network. Then you solve it by disincentivizing small networks and incentivizing broad ones. I'm sure you can work this out yourself. Ha ha I joke but this is almost progress! You identified a problem that may or may not exist, and almost demonstrated how StrangeCoin might be used to solve this problem! Your proposed solution was exceptionally vague and might possibly have incredibly damaging unforeseen consequences, but we're getting there! By the way, why do you need StrangeCoin to do any of this? A complete (electronic) log of transactions in any regular currency would be enough to identify whatever the gently caress you want, including nepotism. You could apply whatever kind of half-baked solution you wanted with a regular currency too. What does StrangeCoin have to do with any of this?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
Wait, isn't most of the point of cryptocurrencies to make transactions secure and virtually untraceable? The entire Strange system requires each transaction to be made public to every endorser and supporter at the minimum, possibly to the government's social engineering department, and possibly the entire network depending on how much recursion all of these transaction types are permitted (which as far as I can tell could be infinite). So this is really a decryptocurrency, since it's actively broadcasting your transactions to more than just the person your handing it over to. So okay, one unique feature of Strangecoin is that it's designed to be insecure and meant to be used for social engineering. Great. You could do that with any other currency. Same with a guaranteed minimum income and balance caps. The only unique thing that I haven't heard of before (and I'm not an economist) are these bizarre transaction types. Maybe as a homework exercise, some StrangeCoin fan could come up with a use for any of these transactions and publish it in a readable format. Or maybe they do already exist in a similar form somewhere, in which case again, nothing useful or original is left in this proposal.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
Oh, I get it. This was all an April Fool's joke.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
I had trouble sleeping last night thinking about the possible infinite recursion in strangecoin transactions. I hope someone figured that out. Next, if we somehow get a clear explanation for why any of these fancy transaction types need to exist, that would be super. Maybe even just a short publication-quality letter on a single transaction type as applied to an existing currency. E: could strange coin be used to identify possible life partners for lonely graduate students? Just curious.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:Realtalk: The two issues with infinite recursion are convergence and decay times. If you have some totally interconnected set of nodes, each receives dividends from all the other nodes and awards dividends to them as well. If you separate out those two actions and go through it in a stepwise manner, then can come up with the relation for handing out dividends (and dividends based on those dividends and so on). Okay that's cool, but instead of deriving how broken it is, can you come up with a simple and elegant solution? Preferably by next week, because this paper needs to be submitted soon. If you do a really good job, RealityApologist might credit you in a Google+ post.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:The reach of my coupling relations effectively assigns me a social caste with whom my economic fates are tied, in a way that is clearly expressed by a single parameter Ex. In a very real way, what this does is reify the class structure of the economy, in a manner that is directly palpable in every single transaction we engage in. Regular currency: Anyone can buy a burger at the same price and the burgermeister has no incentive to pick and choose who he sells the burger to because he gets the same price for it in the end. StrangeCoin: Anyone can buy a burger, but people with more rich friends have their friends pay extra for it, so the burgermeister now has an incentive not to sell his burgers to poor friendless people. Those poors now palpably feel the reification of their real class structure in that they can't buy food anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:Let's say the system couldn't be gamed and works more or less like I suggest. Why do you think it would magnify inequality? In other words, why do you think direct feedback on the caste structure of the system would result in more inequality in the system? RealityApologist posted:So what this means is that Y not only sets a price but also a range of clientele for which they are willing to trade at that price. From Y's perspective it doesn't just matter that you want a burger and have some strangecoin, but also who you are. You just explained this yourself an hour ago! Do you not read the drivel you write?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:How does that exacerbate the problem? The implication is that it's better for our class relations to remain nebulous and indeterminate when engaging in individual transactions. I'm not sure why we should think this is true. I'd like to see the reasoning. eXXon posted:Regular currency: Anyone can buy a burger at the same price and the burgermeister has no incentive to pick and choose who he sells the burger to because he gets the same price for it in the end. Now to that I have to add that your retarded currency apparently is designed to make it exceedingly difficult to buy a single item with a one-time payment and instead incentives extended periods of payment for some unfathomable reason. RealityApologist posted:So instead of paying q coins for the burger, I might instead couple with the burgermonger for 30 minutes while he prepares and I eat my meal, forming a temporary network to our mutual advantage if we're already both members of a stable network. By coupling, both parties increase their relative influence on the overall network, so it's a win-win situation. Now random dude in the burgershop needs to couple to the burgermeister, which in your OP claims that both income and expenses become linked. So if you want a hamburger, you need to tie your expenses to the burger shop's expenses, because reasons.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
All this talk about coupling transactions just makes me think of the end of Diamond Age. Am I in a high enough caste to buy a skullgun, or would that link me to Lockheed-Martin's social network?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:- A universal account provides all users a basic Strangecoin income, effectively unlimited wealth, and direct feedback on the overall prosperity of the network. Did anyone ask and get an answer about how this universal account generates unlimited wealth, and if that's supposed to read crippling hyperinflation instead? Also, y'know, since later posts claimed there would be a fixed unchanging number of StrangeCoins like other cryptocurrencies, where's this infinite wealth coming from? Is it because every time I couple with someone, we both go off to spend as much as we can of the other person's income before the coupling runs out? Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Apr 1, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:A lot of people think I'm doing something very different, and are criticizing me on those grounds, but it really doesn't touch what I'm doing. No you didn't shoot me!! You can't kill me! Hey come back here I'm not done playing you guys! Have you considered learning how to accept criticism at some point or are you seriously considering submitting this pile of trash to a reputable journal? While we're on the topic of doing your homework for you, which is a recurring theme in this thread, does anyone have a good reference on critical thinking?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Best Friends posted:Seriously how did this man get any sort of degree and get into a position of "teaching" students. I don't mean specifically, as in him personally. I mean systematically, how did the system let a man who cannot write, do basic math, or express willingness to read get into such a position. I can't speak about philosophy specifically, but you can get into graduate school without demonstrating critical thinking skills or being able to write well. Once you're there, you're usually required to be a teaching assistant for a few semesters, which can include leading tutorials or even teaching classes if the professor is away frequently or just plain lazy. Some programs also come with guaranteed funding if you maintain good academic standing, and what that means exactly can vary wildly. It could be as little as not failing a course or two, if your advisor sticks up for you and makes excuses for poor performance. Generally grad students make so little compared to postdocs and professors that they can linger for years without contributing anything of note.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Adventure Pigeon posted:I'm beginning to think that as soon as he's vaguely offended by whatever anyone says, he puts them on ignore. There's a reason he hasn't responded to Obdicut or anyone else who's been criticizing him in more than a few posts. Yeah, the reason is that he doesn't think any of the criticisms are valid or relevant. Don't ask me what kind of criticisms he would accept because so far the answer is 'none of them'.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:The rhetoric in this thread has have become so overblown that people are starting to snoop into personal details of my life You posted links to your google+ account everywhere, you dumbass. RealityApologist posted:The primary critique of my writing has been that it is too verbose. The primary critique of the proposal is that I don't know economics. No, the primary critique is that it's irredeemably terrible and you've never provided any evidence otherwise. Why don't you write up a cogent argument about how StrangeCoin would address the issue of nepotism, since you love that example. It should have the following structure: 1. Explain why nepotism is a problem. This might be an issue since you didn't think it's actually necessarily a problem, but go for it. 2. Explain why the current economic system can't solve the problem. 3. Explain how StrangeCoin is uniquely equipped to study nepotism in a way that RegularCoin will never be able to.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Is Hackernews like the philosophy preprint server?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Adar posted:You are literally proposing that a specific economic theory "provides tools" for solving economic problems and then stating the fact that you don't understand economics is not an indictment of your theory. Fool, just because he doesn't understand the flaws of current economic theory doesn't mean that his proposal doesn't address them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I'm really disappointed that this has become the caricature of my style. I've come back to this forum for years to talk about and refine my thinking about different aspects of this theory, and I spend a lot of time responding to criticisms and providing interpretations and elaborations on my work. I really feel like the strangecoin proposal demonstrates some improvement, both in focus, organization, and technical clarity, of anything I've written about on these forums. I feel it represents a good faith attempt to meet a lot of the legitimate criticisms that have been put forward. I feel like I get no credit for this work on this forum, especially given how ambitious it is. Boy are you going to be disappointed with your academic career! Would you say that your actual academic writing for courses or publications or whatever it is you do is of a similar quality to your OP? Because you should probably quit academia if that's your standard of writing. You will never get anywhere if you can't handle basic criticism like "you have utterly failed to explain the purpose of this work please try again", or if you can't even formulate an idea that doesn't immediately provoke that reaction. RealityApologist posted:I completely agree that if I were an economics phd doing academic work in economics, then the OP would be embarrassing. Its not professional quality work. I'm not a phd in economics, though, and I'm not claiming expertise in the area. My academic work is on an entirely different topic, and this material never sees the inside of my classrooms. I'm just a dude who is interested in social organization, and I'm to describe those ideas with the vocabulary and knowledge I have, and I'm trying to learn the vocabulary I don't have so I can better articulate these ideas. I post these threads explicitly asking for help, especially with the math. I state up front that these ideas are incomplete, and that I'm not capable of making good on such an ambitious proposal on my own. Do your own homework.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I suppose, for this reason, I really do sympathize with a lot of the criticisms in this thread. I don't know anything about economics. But as so many people have already pointed out, the proposal here really has nothing to do with economics in the traditional sense. Can you name one other person who argued that this has nothing to do with economics? I suppose there was at least one person who argued that StrangeCoin doesn't really qualify as a currency, which you should realize is a pretty strong indictment of your proposal for a currency. Otherwise any sane person would say that currencies have something to do with economics.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I was thinking about this post in particular: I was referring to that post too. He said that your proposal wasn't actually a currency because it couldn't function as a currency in the traditional sense. He also said that it was a radical form of social organization which would entirely break our existing economic structures, not that it had nothing to do with economics at all. In fact his critique was more that you had just assumed that economics would continue to work basically the same way they do now despite the radical social restructuring. Case in point - you literally said that corporations would form spontaneously from networks of individuals despite the myriad of obvious reasons why that is insane. You, of course, chose to interpret this not as a criticism, but as an acknowledgement of the grand scope of your social organization. Did I mention that you called this thing a currency and you're not concerned that someone thinks that it couldn't possibly function as one? RealityApologist posted:Now I'd like to work on developing the nepotism example, because I thinks its the most interesting outstanding question of the many dozen that are still left open. Ok, let us know when you're done! But don't forget to include some evidence that the problem couldn't possibly be solved with another, simpler system, like by a purely electronic and easily traceable currency.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
I vaguely recall someone saying something about the StrangeCoin transactions already existing in some form or another but I don't really get Inhibition, what is that supposed to represent? You and a friend deciding to burn your money to avoid hitting the first bracket of a wealth tax? Can you just return money to a central bank? I guess you can overpay income taxes or something.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
Tokamak posted:I think it means you can reduce someone's purchasing power, by sacrificing your own. You can think of it as cancelling out your capital with someone else's, so if I had more influence then Eripsa I can effectively shut him up, and still have some strangecoins to play with.... It's a two-sided transaction so both parties have to agree to it. It's not just negging someone's wallet. The gently caress is it supposed to be then? e: I read it again and apparently X can inhibit Y's expenses. Uhhh what? Does this cost X anything? Can you inhibit 100% of someone's expenses? Does that mean they buy things and it costs them nothing? Is this where the unlimited wealth comes from? Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 05:44 on Apr 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I don't give a poo poo about Strangecoin at all Progress!  It would be a great sign if you could demonstrate an ability to abandon bad ideas. So y-RealityApologist posted:except insofar as it helps me talk about the organizing relations I'm interested in. If there are better ways of talking about this then you'll never here me say the word Strangecoin again; the term is already replacing marbles from the original discussion, and nothing in the current discussion relies on any discussion of marbles. I see, this is just another one of your non-acceptances of criticisms, where you pretend to acknowledge the validity of the criticism, then deflect it by claiming that it only affects an insignificant part of your grander proposal, which remains just as worthwhile as before. So let's see what's left in your list of important things for marbles or whatever: RealityApologist posted:
That's what I interpreted as being left on your list of important features and/o possible points of discussion for StrangeCoin. I'm having a hard time seeing how this has nothing to do with economics or an attempt at making a currency. I'm wondering, since you apparently don't give a poo poo about StrangeCoin, can we just take out all of the things to do with transactions, individual and universal accounts, balance caps, etc? If we do, is there anything left to discuss? (Hint: no.) quote:
Ah okay, so StrangeCoin invites discussion of corporations. You told us that we should expect corporations to form spontaneously from networks of coupled people (ewww). We outlined how this is insane. You backpedalled without ever addressing the many criticisms, but now you're back to simultaneously claiming that this is a very interesting aspect of your proposal, but not an important one. Or maybe you mean to imply that we should solve the technical problems again since you can't really figure out what to do about any of them. Also half of this paragraph is the usual total bullshit word salad and you should be embarrassed for writing it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:3. Strangecoin doesn't solve this "problem". What it does, instead, is include a measure of this discriminatory bias as an explicit modifier on each transaction, so parties are explicitly aware of its impact on each transaction. This is different from regularcoin because now you'd have to do a large empirical study to study the impact of discrimination on the economy, and with strangecoin its among the core data points to consider every time you make a transaction. Uh, what? How? Is a party in a potential transaction going to be aware of the degree of nepotism in the other party's network? How is it an explicit modifier? What are we supposed to do with this information anyways, refuse to engage in transactions with people who have tightly knit networks? And you still haven't explained how you couldn't do this with an electronic currency with infinite knowledge over past payments... like you could do with btc, or just regularcoin if you're going to be invading everyone's privacy anyways. RealityApologist posted:Concerning nepotism in particular, I'm imagining a situation where it was clear from the pattern of support and coupling relations when a person's wealth and influence is largely a product of nepotistic relationships, or is genuinely a product of broad network support. Where, for instance, we aren't just told the amassed wealth (in dollars and houses and so on) of a Romney or Bush, but instead we are told of the network of economic ties and relations that support that wealth, so that it's clear their economic influence is the result of a tightly clustered and densely interconnected subnet and not a widely distributed and deeply integrated network that is more representative of the broader economy. How would this even work if people aren't using support or coupling transactions at all? You don't need those transaction types to track nepotistic relationships, since all you need to track is payments between family members. Hell, no amount of information about transactions will give you any information on the most obvious form of nepotism - hiring unqualified friends or family relations to a position with no payment from either party.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
Actually wait, I get the nepotism thing now. Essentially, if we had an economic system where individuals were required to form and then disclose their nepotistic relationships, we could see them more clearly. As a result, I propose a new currency where individuals are not required to form nepotistic relationships, and it's not very clear whether they're required to disclose them either. This uniquely solves the nepotism problem in a way that simple legislation and/or a vast invasion of privacy wouldn't because network synergy of architectonic digital philosophy. Also, Aristotle was an arrogant rear end who set back European science for millennia with his half-baked ideas.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 22:07
|
|