Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:30:44 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576412718534152
Source: Original Site Post
-
Untitled Image Post
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:30:17 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576410971362368
-
Untitled Image Post
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:29:31 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576407923003270
-
“One of poison’s great virtues for the politically minded murderer is their capa
—“One of poison’s great virtues for the politically minded murderer is their capacity to combine easy deniability and vicious theatricality. Even while the murderer denies any role, perhaps with a sly wink, the victim dies a horrific and often lengthy death. A message in a poison bottle,”—
—Mark Galeotti, the Royal United Services Institute
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:28:16 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576402994415895
-
ON MARRIAGE, CHILDREN, HAPPINESS, AND THE WAR AGAINST US What, that women will b
ON MARRIAGE, CHILDREN, HAPPINESS, AND THE WAR AGAINST US
What, that women will be happier if they have kids younger, and have more of them? I think [Molyneux is] just stating what the data says. Married people with children are happier. Although it might be that they’re simply better people in the first place, and that’s what better people do.
—“Married people are happier perhaps because happier people are more likely to get married. Never thought of that did you? Thought not.”–@adambutler65
Of course I did:
–Although it might be that they’re simply better people in the first place, and that’s what better people do.–—“No you didn’t. You were saying that women and married people are happier *because* they have kids. So what about married people who think they’d be happier without kids? Or who can’t have kids? They are lesser “better people”? Your argument and world view fall apart. Goodbye.”—@adambutler65
Yes it is what I said. I just also said that better people were happier. And you can’t bear being told to your face that you’re not only dead weight on the planet and mankind, but undesirable, and a lesser human. Conversely you could learn to be a better person by working at it.
Children teach you to be unselfish, collective, and productive, in exchange for insurance against the decline of energy, ability, social and economic market value in maturity and old age.
I don’t make errors. It’s my job – to compensate for the industrialization of sophism pseudoscience fictionalism, and deceit, manufactured to sell hyperconsumption to you, in the ancient war of the underclasses against their betters, by the promulgation of envy.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:28:05 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576402256554029
-
HAVE YOU TRIED TURNING THE WORLD OFF AND BACK ON AGAIN? by Eric Best –We can cr
HAVE YOU TRIED TURNING THE WORLD OFF AND BACK ON AGAIN?
by Eric Best–We can crash the world. It’s easy. And I’m getting reasonably sure we’re going to do it.–Curt Doolittle
Normie Version:
…”Help, there is something wrong with the world! It’s not working right! Everything’s fucked!”
Help Desk Doolittle:
… “Have you tried turning it off and back on again?”
.
.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:27:44 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576400932455750
-
THE ONE MONOPOLY THAT PREVENTS ALL OTHERS You WANT, and all mankind wants, MONOP
THE ONE MONOPOLY THAT PREVENTS ALL OTHERS
You WANT, and all mankind wants, MONOPOLY – which is only achievable in supernatural or sophomoric or pseudoscientific ignorance, poverty, and equality in ignorance and poverty.
This is the muslim religion’s strategy. To drag everyone to the bottom where they are equal in ignorance, poverty and dysgenia.
Whereas the Chinese and Indian strategies are merely stagnation (harmony), ousr is continuous competition, adaptation, innovation.
And that is why our law is ‘scientific’ and why, as a consequence, we developed reason and science: because innovation requires competitive and markets, and cannot function by any other means – particularly markets between frames that reflect a hierarchy of abilities: class strategies that seek to circumvent those markets.
Aristocracy’s duty is the service of the interests of our people – it’s not to tolerate their frames. Instead, when necessary, by father, neighbor, sheriff, court, sargeant, general, and king, to use the law, and military truth – that truth called reporting, which meaning testifying to only what is observable and observed – to produce the ONE MONOPOLY we must: preservation of our market from all competition internal and external, foreign and domestic.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:27:27 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576399770497303
-
SEDATION OF THE HERD BEFORE THE SLAUGHTER —“It’s still better than it’s ever b
SEDATION OF THE HERD BEFORE THE SLAUGHTER
—“It’s still better than it’s ever been – we are just upset because we can see leading indicators of decline….”–Gary Knight
—“Yeah man, it’s pretty awesome that I have an iPhone and burgers cost $1 at McDonalds. Who needs like, borders, or culture and shit…— Ely Harman
In my understanding, saturation with media has replaced evidence of reality, and so people are unaware of just how bad it’s gotten. We forget that $1burgers, cable entertainment, the internet, video games, porn, pot, are forms of sedation. Not fulfillment but sedation.
Socialization has fallen apart.
Civilization follows.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:27:15 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576398991525062
-
BTC has market cap equal to a speculative technology company. What will Apple co
BTC has market cap equal to a speculative technology company. What will Apple correct to with iphone purchases abate? What happens to all overpriced tech stocks? Because BTC are a share of STOCK in the BTC network. This is the optimum use of BTC technology: eliminating the stock markets and their trading fees: ie; “fractional trade of interest in title.”
Excuse making and evidence are two different things:
– The tech is open to monopolization.
– The tech is easily open to state seizure.
– The assets are stolen all the time.
– The tokens aren’t insurable by the insurer of last resort.
– The tech is fragile.
– The usability is sh*t and appears unsolvable.
– The transaction time is waaaay too long for widespread use.
– The data storage scheme is waaaay to big for widespread use.
– There is no means for expiration or consolidation of fractional amounts.
– The entry and exit points require real world conversions to real world currencies (torrents do not).What will happen is what I said will happen: states will move to the next monetary system, which is direct access to treasury, tagged money (tracable), using high response time, redundant, central data stores, taxed per transaction rather than requiring organizations to collect taxes.
AFAIK BTC was developed for the purpose of simplifying the drug and arms trade. That is how it will be prosecuted. Because the state will mandate its own currency as it does now. Every state will do so out of necessity of protecting state financing.
Furthermore the internet will be balkanized within the next ten to twenty years (if not sooner by china), ending the open borders unregulated wild west of the internet exchange of information – largely because it is in tolerable for authoritarian countries to permit political competition on the western model. It will happen in china first then russia, then it will spread from there.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:27:02 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576398118185773
-
BTC RISKS That’s misrepresentation. BTC are tokens (purchased) not debts) so the
BTC RISKS
That’s misrepresentation. BTC are tokens (purchased) not debts) so there is no counterparty risk because there is no debt. But that misrepresents the risk.
On the other hand, it’s entirely possible to shut down the network so that the Tokens aren’t REDEEMABLE, because unlike other instruments redemption is monolithic. ie: the network is a monopoly and the tokens are not tradable without the network.
So yes there is risk. There is risk of being stolen (happens all the time) there is risk of collapse in price (happens all the time) there is risk of state seizure. There is zero access in duress scenarios.
As a store of value (a stock without backing in anything other than demand for savings), yes it has value. As a means of competing with the state and treasuries then no. In fact, the poor transaction performance of BTC is a great example of a bad tech being a market benefit: btc is prevented from functioning as money, only as a stock, and as a stock, only as a token, even if a divisible share (shares divisible into additional token shares.)
So if you mean BTC will serve as an alternative to gold as a means of savings, then I think such a thing is maybe possible if it becomes vastly easier to use, at vastly lower transaction costs.
But it is not the ‘future’ you propose with your overarching argument. In other words, to say a thing has value is not to say it has sufficient value.
I have been consistently right on this subject over time and as far as I know I will remain so and that is because I understand the spectrum of monetary instruments from commodity to money to instruments to debts, and how they function in economies – as such I don’t make the mistake of conflating different types of instruments (when doing so is an act of fraud actually).
I only got involved in the discussion when people in the libertarian and BTC community asked me to. And it’s because it’s not money. it’s a divisible share of stock, sold as a token (dependent upon the network) in a network (dominated by a few vendors) without asset backing only demand backing, and that is costly (in energy and time) to manage. It is less open to scamming than buying interest in gold because it has no reserve (margin) utility. It is however more open to loss so far than any other asset we know of.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-07 15:26:49 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102576397247171650