WorBlux

I don't have a facebook account, so I can't see any of it, sorry.

You can say things like "My childhood home was just renovated" without implying a literal ownership. The possessive grammar merely denotes a unique relationship of its subject with its object. Ownership is just one such relation, as such, "my wife", does not imply that she is not her own autonomous person, just that she and I have a unique relationship to each other. I think people are amply able to make these fine distinctions in their language, and that the desire to control comes from somewhere else. (fear, anxiety, insecurity...)

Depends on where you go. It really shouldn't matter if an older language is used if the core principle in the course are solid. C++. Java, Python should just be means to show the big ideas. If you just want technique X, it may be better to teach yourself, if you want the deep how and why of computer science a formal eduction 4+ year programs are appropriate vehicles to that end. As to the outdated comment, you do realize how much COBOL code is still out there and running? If you set yourself up right you can make as much or more with code maintenance as code development.

Think about why France supported the American revolution. Do you think Russia would idly stand by while China amass massive strategic resources or vice versa? This isn't even to mention the realities of asymmetric warfare, or the tactics of systematic assassination, or nuclear deterrence.

If you knew or were reckless in not knowing you are then part of a criminal conspiracy. (The act is immoral)If you were merely negligent in not knowing then you are still financially liable (must return property to the rightful owner, pay compensation ... (The act is not necessarily immoral in the same sort of way, buy an obligation is nonetheless created by failure to do due diligence, though it would be immoral to shirk that duty)

1)If I trade you two sprockets for three widgets, that ratio is an objective and measurable quantity. It is true the value I get from the three widgets may be subjective. The monetary price of a thing speaks nothing of it's subjective value, but of a ratio used to effect recent and current trades. As price in money is a specific ratio seen in trade it's not by any means illogical to make note of the price of things, and then come to demand monetary holding via a subjective valuation of what might be purchased now or in the future. 2)Double entry accounting is one of the great inventions of the modern world, right up there with the printing press, fertilizer, vaccinations, and electricity. Individually or in a group less than 5 a binary system could work, but the essential thing is that prices convey a great deal of information from distributed sources and conveys it as a single number so that a person might tell at a glance whether or not an undertaking in a certain enterprise will be valued by other people. 3)Death, illness, and disease is also disturbing even when adequate treatment is available. Assuming the price isn't artificially high because of governmental regulation and interference, (which it is, perhaps 5X or more a freed market price)the high price is a signal for the need of innovation. 4)This seems to be a recipe for narcissism and other various personality disorders. We are wired to deal with external challenges, and without a reality check from time to time it's possible to go off into crazy. The external motivations require a person look outward and see how his skills might best bring value to his community. Even in the absence of money It is reasonable to assume people would look for and seek out other external motivators (fame, popularity, fashinon, sex, positions of power ... in other words, high school all over again) 5)Your time and attention are inalienable, and as such make a very poor means of exchange. At best you create a time bank or credit ledger for time spent in "useful" endeavours. However again without a monetary system it's very difficult to define quite what is useful and what is not. 6)Actually this does not follow. Copyright is a monopoly granted to an author over the copying or modification of a creative work. You still have barter or the aforementioned High School BS. Eg. To get ZZtops next album, grow a beard of 6" or more in length and send a picture to ... Also, what is your definition of money? The definitions I've heard of so far are: a) medium of exchange b) proof of work performed c) an economic good (just like a bicycle) d) a complexity mitigator (a way to handle millions of transactions) Money is simply the most common media of exchange in a society. (common by distribution and use, and not by some physical quantity) While it is and economic good, it's a specific sort, it also must be a commodity. (Traded with no distinguishment between the specific units thereof.) Indirect exchange arose as a complexity mitigator, in such respect all media of exchange provide the same sort of function. I really doubt money was created simply for military salaries. Specifically coinage with heads + tails was first associated with empires, but goods can stand in a money without being formally coined. So it's true only if you limit your definition of money to a certain outward form rather than the praxeological understanding. It's also unlikely that that empires could or would seek to coopt or standardize indirect trade unless there was already and extensive practice of it.

Midwest city Recently in a studio 320/month + 44/month internet + 35-60 electric bill. - 420 a month Right now splitting 1000/month three ways (350 is my share) for a three-bedroom house. More bills but splitting them means about 420-430 a month. Groceries - 70-80 per week (350/month), but you can definately get below this if you cook alot and avoid alchohol. (I cook 1/2-2/3's of the time and good wine/beer was my slurge item. Fuel - 50/month Entertainment - 50-60 a month, enough for a few CD's , redbox rentals, books, steam games. Free bonus - 50-100 a month, Buffer - 15% or more is you can manage. I manages to save about $8000 over 18 months (about 1/3 of my income during that time) and used to to finish my last year of college. You may have trouble getting a unit of your own with no rental history and not cosigner. I ended up paying the entire 6-month lease + deposit on the studio up front in order to get in.

thanks for sharing

Herbicides - compared to what? Conventional practices still use herbicides. just different ones that are often more toxic.

Lighting the fire was probably against some other law as well. Anyways even if we say a starving man is justified in stealing food as a last resort, such justification does not make the act any less theft, and does not erase the obligation that arises in the act to make the victim whole at some point in the future.

If you are just one credit away can you take a summer class or something? Alternatively --spend the summer learning a language and go do a foreign exchange somewhere next year. Is GED'ing out an option? Homeschool, and take programing classes from a local college or reputable online intitution? If you do plan on a collegiate track, taking a lot of AP courses would probably serve you better than a lot of sub-par programming courses.

Not in any immediate sense. Hawaii would have almost no papaya industry if it were not for GMO. GMO is a very powerful tool and can be used to good effect.1. Selective promoters have been developed that reduce protein expression in the seed specifically. Additionally this pesticide reduces insect damage to the grain that provides incursion pathways to the corn, decreasing the mycotoxin content of harvested seed.2. Wasn't approved, and abuse isn't argument against proper use.3. Breeders and seed companies already have PVP, which is a 25 year worldwide grant of exclusive propagation rights on a specific cultivator of plant. There is also the plant patent which only lasts 20 years, but also covers breeding rights (though also requires the provision of parent or plant material to the patent office).Neither is that problematic for the small farmer. What is problematic is the patent on expressing the particular GMO trait in a plant. Really to me this issue gives me more reason to doubt the wisdom of giving patents on single genes than about GMO per se. Re: Biodiversity,Yes but the issue is more in the philosophy inherent in the system, and is not the result of any particular technology. GMO's actually decrease the maximum potential yield. What they typically do is make the crop resistant to pest damage or make management of weeds more effective. New strategies for weed control really make low and no till management much more feasible options. Under perfect conditions it doesn't help, but under typical conditions it can be a big help. Even being equal Farmer Joe would rather go watch his son's baseball game than go spray thousands of acres to control insects or to cultivate out weeds between the crop rows. It really depends on your assumptions. There is a certain sort of extremely intensive bio-aware sort of management that can achieve yields greater than conventional, but it requires very educated and trained farmers and a very intensive level of crop management and ecosystem manipulation.Just assuming your typical USDA organic production there is often a significant decline in productivity. We unlike the bird are aware of the changes we make, and we unlike the bird can create changes of scales so large there is no undoing them. Ever. I don't think we should be so arrogant as to assume we can safely alter or discard parts of the biotic community on which we are member and depend upon for survival.GMO is a really powerful thing and it raise entirely new sorts of challenges, issues and concerns that we really never had to think about before. But the green revolution came at a price. The loss of biodiversity and locally adopted crop cultivators, the increased use of fossil fuels, and a depression of food price level to the point of increasing the hardships of those stuck in a cycle of sustenance farming. New irrigation leads to problems with the development of newly saline and sodic soils. How many deaths are we setting up in the future, how much of the natural bounty did we spend? Will the people of the next several centuries share the judgements of those of the past several decades?There really are tough and important issues within this It refers either to trans-species genetic transferrer into somatic cells, or the introduction of an engineered genetic component to any species. Traditional breeding rarely comes across something entirely new. 1. You can sequence DNA, and it's fairly cheap (so long as you have and existing template for the species) so you can know where it lands2. Instertion targets tend to be regions where non coding is likely.3. Most traits in commercial cultivars are backcrossed from plants where location in the genome is known rather than a new introduction in each cultivar.4. Artificial chromosomes are a potential way to manage with the issue.5. Proteins can also be extracted and sequences.6. Conventional breeding can also yield new toxic proteins. (The shift of wheat cultivation to semi-dwarf varieties.)So it's an issue, but not an insurmountable one. Compared to what? I'd rather my local farmers be spraying glyphospate instead of atrizine.

Nooooo, it should be stefsbotsOr Molynewbs

No, long term jewelry demand depends on people waking up in the morning and wanting to guy buy jewelry. Long term monetary demand is driven by people waking up and saying "hey I'm going to go get some money today". Even when the same material base might be used they are really different sorts of demand. Almost always set off by either an inflationary shock, or the coase cost of use. So congress lied, what else is new? From what I can tell Bretton-Woods was first an agreement to peg currencies against the dollar, and then the dollar against gold.Anyways was still speaking generally and theoretically at that chapter of human action. Credit expansion is problematic on other fronts, not merely because it is also inflationary.Show me an fiat currency that failed simply because people stopped wanting it. That is a government currency or a currency used on the same sort of scale that fell from use without some inflationary shock or politically controlled phase out. Yes if you wan't to do a gold standard correctly that's what must happen. However see above, politicians lie and we have no reason to believe they would actually ever implement a gold standard correctly. But if all things were equal you wouldn't have made the sale in the first place. Your argument only works if you assume everybody already has as much cash as they would like to keep in reserve and never comes back around with a renewed demand to replenish thier reserves once some are spent. The truth is that at any moment some will have surpluses and others deficits. The total supply of cash in reserves does not change with a transaction. Land isn't transportable, fungible, or easily divisible. Consequently it's impracticable to use in indirect exchange and there is no demand for such use. Currency can be a general term and nowhere in this conversation have I limited it's meaning merely to banknotes. Errors like... ?I'm not saying this is the way it happened, just simply as a way it could have happened. Gold became money simply when people started using it as such. You want the value to start with so you don't have to carry around of mess with a lot of it. However when carrying around 1000 units or potential money is just as easy as one unit or 1/1000 of a unit, it's reasonable to believe this requirement will be relaxed. You still can't rely on zero price, but you can rely on fairly small price. Here you confuse basis (reason or explanation) with base (first, original or majority). Well the human species must go extinct as well. That doesn't mean it's not worth having kids. It's potential stability is greater than any system now existing or likely to come to exist in the next half century.

The block-chain is not encrypted, it's signed,

As the demand for anything drops, so does it's price other things being equal. So what?Having a second or third or ... source of demand for an economic good can keep the price more level if the demand for one use drops, but so to can changes in those alternate demands influence the price. It's not a pure benefit here. And from evidence with modern fiat currency it takes huge shocks in demand to effect a collapse like you describe, and mises associates it with inflationary policies, and not to the lack of industrial uses for the monetary unit.Second why should assume the buyer of money already has a cash reserve as high as he'd like it? Additionally these demands are not static. Some people can be looking for an increase or decrease.And you weren't responsive to my question here. Why doesn't the exchange value of money, gold or otherwise, give adequate explanation as to why a person comes to demand a cash reserve? Let's back up here, because this doesn't jive with what you just said. You just relied on an argument where people we acting on the speculation that the price of money would continue to drop.Lets take an example with gold. An city is introduced the the idea of gold as currency and a few people start to use it but it's still kinda spotty because nobody is really sure how well the idea is going to work for them. A few other people are pretty sure it's going to take off so they start buying up gold in anticipation of a later greater demand creating a subsequently greater price. Yes this is a different sort of activity as a demand for cash reserves, but it's not prohibitive of gold coming to be money in that city.One of the reason reason you wanted a valuable unit before is so you didn't have to carry around a lot of it rather then being a categorical requirement for a thing to be money. With a ledger system though it's just as easy to transfer 1,000 units and 1/1000th of a unit. It makes it feasible to drive initial demand simply by curiosity, novelty, or ideology. The basis for the price of Gold when it was money was the composite it's demand for industrial and monetary uses. Both because it satisfied some wants directly or through a production chain, and because it satisfied the demand for cash holdings. The price of bitcoin should be become a monetary instrument will be almost entirely in the demand for cash holdings. See my prior example of the city and gold.The same stock might be subject to both sorts of investment by different people. Some people are buying bitcoin because they are saying "look at the price.. up, up, and up". And other people are saying, look there's a huge potential demand for a monetary instrument with the particular qualities bitcoin has.When you invest on fundamentals you can certainly be wrong and end up with nothing also. That bitcoiners could end up with nothing doesn't prove there are no good reasons to believe that are sound fundamentals. No. The specific exchange value of money is best explained by the exchange value it had in the immediate past, and not by the nonmonetary services it renders.At one point just before the economic good serves as an unit of indirect exchange the value was based simple on industrial used, as no regression can be actually infinite. Was the refutation of a basket based on categorical or practical grounds? If the first I'd certainly be surprised and would like a link.It would be best if you could point to textual sources, listening to Hoppe speak at 1x speed is tiring, any files I download with him speaking I set to playback at 1.5x. Anyways it seems to be an attack on the philosophy and not the economics of Hayek.Yes Heyek isn't exactly an Austrian, but he did contribute some very important material to Austrian thought. Bitcoin is not just the network it's the blockchain as well. And it's not the encryption that's being sold as the ledger is block-chain is public. The service the blockchain provides is simply secure verification that data on the block-chain is correct. I think the initial demand was simply a curiosity to experience what a decentralized crypto-currency would be like to use. When I first heard of it nobody was saying OMG you sha256 hash these series of bytes people on the network are sending you. The way saying OMG something like this this might change the world in and you can download this programs to see how now.

Why not? As soon as it's spent, the payee can turn around and get the same sort of use from it. The exchange value of money is a price, (albeit a odd sort of price not expressed in terms of money, and price is a social/market phenonomon. It is this price that drives the demand for cash holdings. That these cash holding are used only as a means to satisfy other wants makes the demand to cash holdings no less real in a persons scale of values. Human Action, Chapter 17 section 4And there are several good reasons as to why a person might think gold is not the best sort of money, even from an Austrian perspective (F.A. Hayek, The denationalization of money)

Austrians are methodological subjectivists. Human action is necessarily individual. While Jones doesn't set the price of gold coins, he certainly knows why he wants to get one. (It's value to him) It is improper to concieve all the users of gold as a medium of exchanges merely as middlemen between producers and consumers of gold. There is a general demand for money just to hold onto for future transaction. Yes if you go far enough back you get to a point where there is no monetary demand for then the price is based purely on the industrial use, yet when gold is money demand for industrial use correspondingly becomes a smaller fraction of demand. And these are really distinct ends and uses rather than a single supply chain. Let me clarify. Silver coinage commanded a price far above that of silver. Or money made of silver could buy far more silver than it was made of.

I don't believe I've said anything wrong, though I may have failed to make myself suffeciently clear. With free coinage the industrial and exchange values tend to even out, with seniorage + the coase cost of minting gold the ceiling of the exchange value, and the industrial value as the floor. However, this confuses the issue as changes in the exchange value induce changes in the monetary supply, feeding back to induce changes in prices to keep exchange and industrial values (prices) close. When Gold was currency, if you asked Jones who worked all week to get a gold coin "Why did you labor to get that coin?" he would say "So I can buy other stuff with it;" and probably not "I think gold is just that pretty;" or "I want to make something else with it." The exact sort of labor Jones is willing to do to get that coin depends on just what he believes he can exchange for it. That's what I'm saying. I'm not denying the process described in the prior paragraph. Gold isn't even money until or unless enough Jonses and Smiths demand it for use in exchange. Look at what happened with the demonetization of silver when the practised of free coinage ended. You saw exchange value of silver coinage far above the industrial value. This shows that there really is two distinct sorts of utility metallic money possesses, and that it's value in indirect exchange (what you can buy with it) is what determines the demand for it as money.

I'll just let people read for themselves. Look we can track the price of bit-coin back to just a hair above zero. Industrial demand doesn't need to be significant. We aren't starting at the first place, we are stuck in today in which the prices of the medium of exchanges are heavily influenced by what people expect to be able to buy with them in the futures, an appraisal heavily influenced by what people actually exchanged for that medium today.

There is the proposed zero-coin extension, and there are ways to embed a private key into a smartcard type device so you could transfer a wallet with reasonable assurances the person holding the device is the only one with the private key. I wouldn't keep a million dollars of bit-coin like this, but it could be reasonable secure enough for amounts in the thousands.

You might find it usefull to brush up on Mises's monetary theory. If your currency is made out of gold coins, then when you hold a gold coin it has two distinct sort of value. The first as a an instrument or exchange, that is its use for inderect exchange. The second is it's industrial use. You can pick one or the other, but not both. Most of the time you ignore the second and use it in the first. The value of money qua money is always what other people are willing to sell you for it.The value of the gold currency as gold acted to regulate monetary creation and destruction but really wasn't the basis for it's value.

If you're squatting you really don't need much money. That being said there are a lot of real opportunities for entrepreneurship starting from little to no capital investment.

I've seen some SIP's proposed that use agricultural wastes with fungal mycelium as the "glue".

Right now Plastic lumber is 3x the cost of actual lumber, and it's not as strong. I still think you can automate a lot of it, just that extrusion printing just doesn't make any sense. How to you support the ceiling with a large amount of fill that you have to remove later? Most of the newer cheap building materials I've seen are masonry, need forms, or require a step of curing under compression.