kenstauffer

No you may not.

WALSH: Police Murdered This Unarmed Man, But The Media Doesn't Care Because He's White http://www.dailywire.com/news/24470/police-matt-walsh?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro#

A show with Pat Condell.

I'm skeptical of blockchain. Pretend I wrote the following: ========== "Williams said that before we get carried away by all the blockchain magic, though, we need to look at how each distributed-ledger system is put together, and look at its performance. What, specifically, does the ledger record? How smart or flexible is the ledger? Who is involved? Who do we have to trust? What is the basis of consensus? And how is the ledger distributed? Spend a little time thinking through the trust, privacy, and security aspects of each of those components, and I suspect the magic will start to wear off. As for performance, well, Williams points out that Bitcoin transactions do have a cost. His back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that once you add in the cost of the hardware needed to process the blockchain, and the energy it consumes, it's around $6 per transaction. And it takes quite some time for individual Bitcoin transactions to be confirmed as having consensus approval: around 10 minutes on average." Excerpted From: http://www.zdnet.com/article/lets-quit-the-blockchain-magic-talk/ =======================

Thank you. Just to update anyone who is interested. The book is now available on Amazon.

Sam Harris & Douglas Murray: Stefan Molyneux & Guilt by Association ------ those of you interested in this thread may like this brand new sam harris talk.

I read his previous book on Amazon. That one was 'Speculator'. It was good, and I am looking forward to reading the rest of the series. I have watched Doug promoting the second book (Drug Lord) but it doesn't show up on Amazon. Is it out anywhere?

I would appreciate an easy to access button on this forum that shows ALL (read and unread) recent forum activity. Not a small sliver of recent activity (as shown on the right hand side of the page) but a complete list of postings in time order. There already exists a [Unread Content] button but then I need to change the setting to 'everything' on the next screen in order to get all new content.

This book didn't motivated me (yet). It has helped me feel less anxious/worried: Enjoy the Decline: Accepting and Living with the Death of the United States by Aaron Clarey (Author)

With bit-coin at $4000, it got me to thinking about what it must be like to spend bit-coin and I arrived at a point of befuddlement and would like to share my train of thought and see if someone can point out the flaws my thinking. Although bit-coin is valued at $4,000, I am not limited to buying items that cost multiples of $4,000. I can still buy things for less than this amount by selling a fraction of a bit-coin. For example, I could by 1,000 items valued at $4 with a single bit-coin. If I did this, then my bit-coin would be smeared across the internet and owned by up to 1,000 other people. Some people might own 1/1000th of my original bit-coin. Some people might own 30/1000th of my original bit-coin. These people could then use my fraction of a bit-coin combined with other peoples fractions to buy stuff. So... As my chimpanzee brain was pondering this fact, I made the following leap: Why have bit-coins at all? Why not invent a crypto currency in which just a single unit exists? There would be no mining, no algorithmic problem solving. Just create one unit. And henceforth fractions of this original unit are exchanged. At a philosophic level, I am wondering, is having multiple units of crypto currency a fundamental property of the cryptos, or just an accidental feature? Does this thought experiment prove cryptos are bs? Or that mining is an essential property of cryptos? or what?

It can. In order to have human level AI you build a humanoid robot, give it a sex, a desire for reproduction, digestive system, all of a human's senses, desires, etc. Basically you build an artificial human that practically speaking will be indistinguishable from a normal human. Then remove the code that emulates sleep. You now have AI which works 24 hours a day, exceeding the abilities of human level AI.

I'm curious too (what Stefan thinks about Richard Spencer). You also asked what forum members thought, so here goes: I like Richard Spencer and think it must takes a huge amount of courage to do what he does. I am uncomfortable with the position he holds, which as best as I can tell is: White nationalism, white rights, praise for the White race. I saw him interviewed by a black reporter and Richard Spencer said people of all races should promote and defend their race. So at least his position is consistent. The black reporter did a fair and respectful job, even though he couldn't resist smirking at Spencer for holding what he believed to be an insane and morally horrid position. So I cannot defend the logic of Spencer's racism, but I still like Spencer. I like him for the fact that he is pushing back. Why is it okay for every other group to defend itself and use their race/gender as a reason for respect and power (and free stuff from the government)? Why can all other groups get away with this but White European Males cannot? So my appreciation for Spencer is for having someone standing up for my group. I know this is racist and illogical. It is similar to why I like Trump. I know his tariffs are dumb and economically unsound. I know his health care reform will be botched like all centrally planned things are destined to be. But I like Trump anyway for fighting back and causing the liberals to go insane. For now Richard Spencer serves to highlight the hypocrisy of the left. When I think of Spencer I can't help but think of that u-tube video of AIDS Skrillex: "You're f***'ing a white male!". One counter argument might be: Supporting Richard would encourage the wrong solutions. This could lead Trump or some other politician, swayed by Spencer's position, to enact special white biased laws. Yes, that would be bad, but a drop in the pond against the other group favouritism now occurring. There was a time when you could tell Pollock jokes, use racist words to describe groups of people in everyday conversation. And no one batted an eye. When the left made these things immoral, when they shamed us for doing this they gained tremendous power over us. Spencer helps to balance this out, at great personal cost to himself. So one possible advantage of having Spencer around is to suck the wind out of the liberal sails. It would diminish the strength of the club they are using to gain power over us. Imagine if the masses just rolled their eyes and shrugged off the lefts racial guilt-fest. It could happen! I see it happening for certain things, for example I don't observe politicians uttering the phrase, "That's not who we are!" much any more. I think because most people now roll their eyes and groan when they do.