Threat Level Paradox *As implied by the Zero Sum Property, presumably the only way to defeat external subsidy is to mine at a capital loss relative to market return on capital. Similarly it seems that only way to defeat tax, up to and including a 100% tax (prohibition), is to mine beyond the reach of the taxing authority, such as in secret. As with all black markets there is an increased cost to subversive mining. Competing against subsidized mining compounds the cost. If one accepts the Axiom of Resistance one must assume that both tax and subsidy will be used to reduce the cost of controlling Bitcoin. Using the power to subsidize mining (via tax revenues), states can cause pooling in the region of the subsidy. Once majority hash power is focused the state can use its taxing (regulatory) power in the region to compel censorship. Therefore in order to enjoy the benefits of a hard currency, it would seem that people will ultimately have to mine at a loss. However, censorship creates the opportunity for others to mine profitably to the extent that people are willing to offset this cost with fees. This black market is Bitcoin's censorship resistance. People pay a higher price for certain transactions, and in order to maintain that higher price the state must also suffer the expense, despite its ineffectiveness. Paradoxically, this tool works well when money is under attack and poorly otherwise. If there was no internal pooling pressure these cases would be balanced. But risk distribution is essential to subversive mining, and pooling pressure works against distribution. So there is ever-expanding attack surface with no pressure to contract unless effective monetary alternatives are suppressed. The suppression of alternatives raises reward utility to the miner in the region of suppression. The paradox applies as well to centralization pressures. The expected consequence is that Bitcoin will not be well prepared for attacks because it is financially disadvantageous for people in a low threat environment.*
*humans convert discipline, focus, and purpose into outcomes that shape our lives and the world around us* View quoted note β†’
Comte is on fire today..... *a country either has a formalized mafia or they have some other country's mafia, in which case they're not a sovereign country* View quoted note β†’
*The beast is driven by hunger ; the hunger of the beast is debt* View quoted note β†’
*China's gazillion factories are deflationary : that makes China the enemy. You buy cheap shit from China : debt doesn't get devalued as fast as the corrupt class would like.* View quoted note β†’
A brutal reality check. Although i frame Bitcoin as an ethical exit from fiat, i am still 'gambling' that I am right about it Not just ethically correct but assuming the market 'votes' in the same way i.e. NgU. *Markets are about the edge. If you don't have it, you don't add anything to the price, except for liquidity. You are gambling and the odds are not in your favor. Good.* View quoted note β†’
*Privacy isn’t extreme. Mass surveillance is.* View quoted note β†’
*Helm, the Oxford professor, argues renewable energy will remain more expensive than fossil fuels because the overall system is more cumbersome. The U.K. used to meet its electricity demand with 60-70 gigawatts of power capacity. Now, the country requires twice as much capacity, 120 gigawatts, to meet slightly lower demandβ€”not to mention the additional storage facilities and interconnector supplies to and from continental Europe.*
*a sound money future gives people room to choose work they care about. To stop trading their purpose for a paycheck* View quoted note β†’
Villermaux derived a mathematical equation that describes the pattern of fragment sizes from a shattered object. He then validated the equation by comparing the equation's predictions to years' worth of fragmentation data collected on various objects, including glass, spaghetti, liquid droplets, gas bubbles, plastic fragments in the ocean, and even flakes from early stone tools. All matched the predicted size distribution. New physics equation describes universal law of how things shatter, from glass to pasta | Live Science