|
RealityApologist posted:Strangecoin mining is modeled on bitcoin mining. There are a finite amount of bitcoins, and once they are mined there are no more bitcoins. There's also a finite amount of Strangecoin, and when they are minded they are deposited into TUA, and once they are all mined there aren't any more. If the balance of coins doesn't matter then there is no reason to mine them. Simply have [X] amount from the start, rather than starting with [X/y] amount and "mining" from there. -EDIT- Not that it matters. You still don't have a solution to implementing such a system, or even simpler problems to questions like "why is a new currency necessary" or "how is it less complicated than the current system". Instead you rely of 'conversational charity' to solve all of these things for you, and get pissy when people won't do your thinking on your behalf. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 13:08 on Mar 31, 2014 |
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 13:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Nov 10, 2025 01:50 |
|
|
R. Mute posted:I still haven't gotten an answer why this system should be implemented, so I'm just going to assume it's because normal currency and the normal economic system are triggering to autists. The USD is just so... problematic.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 13:21
|
|
|
Escolopendra posted:Wait a moment, what is the basis exactly for fearing future cyborg discrimination? There are people right now with mechanical prostheses, and they donīt seem to be objects of hate and discrimination. Mechanical prostheses don't count. Those aren't part of your "identity" like your tools (read: Google Glass and Smartphone) are.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
If anyone still has that short-story posted in one of the OP's last threads about the Attention-based Society and the big Cat Video Gundam vs Porno-Titan battle please post it. This is a perfect time to reread it and I wanna share it with some friends.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Your wish is my command, in this and only this specific instance: Awesome, thank you! You're a good person.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I've not done any of those things. The strongest argument this thread has right now is that I'm a bad writer, which hardly makes me a crank. No, you have absolutely overestimated your own knowledge and ability, and you have absolutely dismissed actual PhDs (thats #1). You also claim that your theories have "changed these forums" (that's #2) When actual PhD's post at you, you ignore them entirely (that's #3) And you won't shut the gently caress up (that's #4)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I haven't dismissed or ignored any experts. I'm not sure what you are even referring to. Obdicut posted:[...] Really? You have no idea of when you ignored 75% of an actual experts post not but a few short pages ago? Really?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I mean "spontaneous" not in the sense of "easy" but in the sense of "you already have a corporation once you've engaged in transactions with its members. There's no additional contractual hurdles to jump through." Engaging in a transaction just is forming a corporation. That was not at all what his problem with what you stated was. Like, not ever close.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:Apparently I'm blind, because I didn't see any of that. I engaged and responded to the accountant and the neuroscientist directly and in a noncritical way. I didn't dismiss their objections, I was particularly sympathetic to the neuroscientist's worries, and I attempted to describe how I'd taken those worries into consideration. I didn't see anything dismissive about my response. I literally linked you to a post where you ignored the most thought out and pressing problems with your ideas that were in that post. That's not blindness, that's willful ignorance.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
I'm not a mathematician, or even very good at math, but I'm still fairly certain what you described could be put into a linear algorithm. And if it cant then you've made your own supposed goal of tracking spending trends (or whatever you want to do, you've never been the least bit clear about that) a hell of a lot harder than it needs to be. -EDIT- Before anything else, you need to explain why nonlinearity is a good thing rather than a huge flaw. Also: quote:In this thread, however, I'm required not only to justify my proposal but also the very plausibility of cryptocurrencies. That's because D&D has spent an absurd amount of man hours picking apart all the various problems of cryptocurrencies and their inherent issues. So no poo poo you're going to have to deal with that when proposing a new one. That's like complaining that your creationist theory isn't taken seriously by evolutionary biologists. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Apr 1, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 15:09
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:Money fills that function now, but it's signals are confusing and disorienting and need differentiation. So your solution to this "problem" (that no one but you believes exists) is to make a new currency that is even more confusing, disorienting, and in need of differentiation?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 15:45
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I've taken a few graduate courses with Baez, and we're buddies on G+. He even credits me with helping develop some of this work, although that's really probably not fair. No one cares about your faux-modesty.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 15:47
|
|
|
Good Dumplings posted:So you're telling me that if I want to spend my money, I have to think about a bunch of multipliers and combo effects before I even spend the thing? And this thing is ~nonlinear~, so if I go out to eat, I have to do calculus right then and there, just to figure out how much the food will cost? Again, dollars don't do this to me, the most I have to do is calculate a tip. Why would I want to use your less convenient system? This brings up another point, just how exactly are people supposed to have any access to this information, much less be expected to decipher tens of thousands of pages worth of information that is constantly updating?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Why, that will all be handled by The Computer. Trust The Computer, citizen! The Computer is your friend! Somehow I don't think he would be too unhappy of real life was more like a game of Paranoia. I also have a feeling that engaging in RA's supposed end-goal reality would, in fact, require neural implants in order to keep in constant contact with the necessary information streams. Is that what this is, RealityApologist? Are you just trying to get us to imagine a world where we too would be cyborgs like you so that we will be more sympathetic to the plight of true cyborgs like you?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Ah, that solves it: he's a Copore Metal sympathizer. He did say that cyborg rights are equally important as LGBTA Rights in another thread not long before posting this thread, so it wouldn't surprise me if the overall goal of this thread isn't quite what he's originally said.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I said that my tools are as important to my identity as my gender. Tools can be thrown away, bought, replaced, added to, and subtracted from at a whim. Gender cannot. But that's not important, and if you're going to respond to me I'd rather you answer my more pertinent questions of A)How will people have access to this information in real time, B)How are they to be expected to decipher such a huge amount of information in mere seconds, and C) how is this at all more useful than current models of currency?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:In the cyber future, gender will be as arbitrary as your choice of shoes. Nanosurgery drones will be able to perform gender replacement surgery while you sleep (utilizing your home bank of replacement genitalia). "If a man can marry a man and a woman can marry a woman, why can't I marry my PC rig?!"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Wait, so you openly admit that a buyer may or may not pay more or less than advertised, and that a seller may receive more or less than he asks? And you don't see this as a HUGE problem? You tried to compare this to taxation but you seem to have forgotten that taxes (sales tax anyway, but that's the one most comparable here) are a static percentage of cost, they don't fluctuate wildly.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:'cuz gee, it's just so hard to see examples of inequity in our current system, we really need to make it 'salient'. Worse, not only does it not solve the problem that he setting out to solve but it actively makes other problems much much worse.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:It's a problem if we are talking about implementing this tomorrow to conduct real world economic transactions. No, you can't just hand wave this away. You simply cannot have prices not mean what they advertised. No system can operate that way at all. And would you please directly answer the three questions I posed to you?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I think there are absolutely structural relations between the discrimination of cyborgs and the discrimination of other minority groups. From the perspective of queer theory I'd probably want to treat Glass wearers and persons with a disability. Please stop acting as if you have any idea what Queer theory even is.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Zachack posted:Not true. When I am playing the slots I do not know how much I will lose but I do know I'm not leaving until I get my god drat free rum and coke. Do you see casinos closing down? No? Qed. Aha! But Casino's never say that you will win, they merely heavily imply it while relying on adrelinine highs and pretty colors to tickle the reptile part of your brain to reinforce confirmation bias. Completely different! But oddly not unlike what RA is suggesting.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Eripsa I'm stoked that you're off to see Judith Butler. That ought to help you bring your abstruse, inchoate pop-theorizing down to earth. Do you believe that Judith Butler can bridge RA's Is/Ought gap?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
Good Dumplings posted:Oh, don't tell me he's already defended it! That sounds like a hell of a show, I would pay to see that. "Listen, if we assume that my idea won't be gamed then it can't be gamed!" That's literally his only answer so far. It has been incredibly frustrating.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Attention is attention dude. In StrangeWorld, Bill Maher and Ann Coulter would amass so much wealth through trolling that they would transform themselves into sentient clouds of liquid metal and just go from city to city stripping people's flesh and organs from their skeletons. Michael Critchton already wrote a book about this exact scenario.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
quote:I've repeatedly insisted that the proposal is not intended as a solution to any problem. Then why, and this is super important so really think about this and answer well, why should we even care at all?! Who What Now fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Apr 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
AR, please answer this:Who What Now posted:Then why, and this is super important so really think about this and answer well, why should we even care at all?!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I would be overjoyed if someone else stripped off all the poo poo and did something useful with it. Why should they? Why should anyone give two shits about what you have written?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
So I'm still catching up in this thread, but did RA ever return to his side-claim that cyborgs are more oppressed than LGBTA individuals and he was gonna go to a lecture that was going to totally prove that, guys. We're going to have no choice but to change it to Lesbians, Gays, Bi, Trans, Cyborgs.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 13:08
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Cyborg is also a very uncertain term. Is someone with a pacemaker a cyborg? A cochlear implant? It's trivially obvious that those people don't face oppression--occasional inconvenience is the worst they get. No no no no, those people don't base their identity around those things. But without his smartphone then just who is Eprisa as a person?!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 13:31
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:Click the image for the full text. We're approaching material that I am very much a qualified and competent expert in, so you might want to temper your expectations of how ridiculous I'll look making this particular argument. Haha, no, your complete lack of knowledge of gender identity and insane (and a little insulting) co-opting of LGBTA discrimination struggles are making you look far more ridiculous than I could have ever hoped for. The fact that you're doubling down and claiming to be an "expert" is icing on this tragedy cake.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:So we're clear, I don't think a theater asking you to shut off your cell phone before a movie is a form of cyborg discrimination. I think judging someone to be an rear end in a top hat because they use a particular device is. The you're wrong, have an incredibly inane and obtuse definition of what discrimination is, or most likely both. I cannot even imagine the level of coddling and privilege you must have if you believe someone silently thinking you're a douchebag because you're constantly whipping out your brand new smartphone at every opportunity somehow anywhere close to the same thing as being denied basic civil rights. Do you even read the things you write? For one thing, you can throw away your tools at any moment. Just huck them straight into the garbage and never have to deal with your oh so terrible form of "discrimination" again. But a gay man can't wake up one day and decide to be straight, or to upgrade his sexuality at the Apple Store. It's an immutable part of who he is (unless we're going to start going into some Tumblr territory), and it simply isn't comparable to Google Glass in any meaningful sense. And, again, it's insulting that you would try to. RealityApologist posted:I am perfectly happy to talk about identity and technology, and it's relation to issues like gender and ethics. I'll have home court advantage. How funny, you sound like an ill-informed idiot even in your home court too.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I don't know what you mean by "as bad as", or why that is relevant to the argument I make. Is DOMA or DADT as bad as Jim Crow? Yes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
I have never seen someone so tortuously misuse a word as you are using the word "tool". Although I will immediately agree that you are a tool. -EDIT- That's not true, actually. You've been misusing "discrimination" pretty badly as well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:Gender reassignment surgery is a process that takes months of preparation and cannot be done at the drop of a hat. "My hypothetical about magically being unable to wear clothes ever again is totally legit and should be taken seriously, but your hypothetical isn't well grounded in reality and can therefore be dismissed." Eprisa, could you at least be a little less transparent that you aren't arguing in good faith? -EDIT- Can you please define tool? Because you aren't using it correctly by any metric. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I didn't dismiss the question. I answered it explicitly. But I also explained why I think the question is grounded in poor assumptions, not as a hypothetical but in terms of our relationships to our tools. Which is the very point of the discussion. You didn't answer it explicitly, you dodged the question completely by instead using two paragraphs to try and discredit the hypothetical as valid at all. So now you're outright lying.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
Wanamingo posted:I'll quote myself here to say that this is what RealityApologist literally believes. Thanks, I was going to post that when I got home. When Eprisa says that he has never directly compared Cyborg Rights to LBGTA rights he is outright lying.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:So what are examples of cyborgs being discriminated against? We have that dude who had a meltdown in the Paris McDonalds. People have made disparaging comments towards Google Glass users at some point in the past. You can't text and drive. What else? People silently judging you. Yes, really: RealityApologist posted:So we're clear, I don't think a theater asking you to shut off your cell phone before a movie is a form of cyborg discrimination. I think judging someone to be an rear end in a top hat because they use a particular device is. -EDIT- This example only applies if you bought the inter-neural thought visualizer upgrade in Chapter 2 before fighting the boss of that stage. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
That was the worst metaphor I've ever had the displeasure of reading.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Nov 10, 2025 01:50 |
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I'm not going to talk about gender identity and cyborgs any more because you are all obviously too immature to handle the discussion. Are you loving with us?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 17:53
|
|