This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at realfreemarket.org.



Your Ad Here

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Reader Mail #97

I watched "Krod Mandoon". There was an interesting evil fnord. Krod's girlfriend is very promiscuous. The evil fnord is that it's two extremes. Either you have a sexually exclusive partner, or you have 100+ partners. A small number of regular partners is probably healthiest.



This article on dailypaul was interesting. Squatters are moving into foreclosed homes. Sometimes, the family refuses to leave after foreclosure. Other times, homeless people are moving into now-vacant homes.

Interestingly, they are able to buy electricity and telephone service, even though they aren't the legal owner.

A debt contract with a bank is not a valid contract. This is one of the main points of the Compound Interest Paradox. When you borrow from a bank, it merely prints new money and lends it out. In order to earn the interest payments, the borrower must perform actual work. The scam continues only because new loans are continually issued. During a deflationary depression/recession, there's a statistically guaranteed number of defaults.

Even though the financial system is corrupt, I don't advice people to borrow and refuse to pay. The correct solution is to boycott a corrupt system.



This article, via Hacker News, was interesting. There is a recently-released "DiggBar". If you submit an article to Digg via the DiggBar, it wraps a frame around your page with the DiggBar at the top. It also acts as a tinyurl service.

The problem is that the links are to Digg's site and not to your site. Any SEO ranking flows to Digg and not your site.

There are scripts you can put on your site to ensure that the DiggBar doesn't work. Because DiggBar steals your SEO and SERP, it's in your rational self-interest to do this.



I briefly considered experimenting with working as an on-the-books massage therapist. I read the requirements. You need to get 1000 hours of education first, before you get a State license. I guess I'd have to do that as an agorist!

State licensing requirements are an artificial barrier to entering a new career. I can't say "I'll experiment working for a few weeks as a massage therapist!", because I need a State license first.

The reason I seriously considered it is that, if my customers have the productive personality type, they'd really like me. I would refuse customers with the parasitic personality type.



I noticed another interesting bit about productive/parasite relationships. If you're a really strong pack leader, in the "Dog Whisperer" sense, you can get other people to switch from playing the parasite role to the productive role.



eagledove9 has left a new comment on your post "Reader Mail #95":

Reading about 'The Mother's Act' - it's unbelievable. It pushed my 'outrage' button. If any law on earth could be written against me personally, THIS IS IT.

It actually isn't as bad as it superficially seems. If you have half a clue, you can figure out what answers to give.

For example:

Are you hearing voices? No.
Do you feel like hurting yourself? No.
Do you feel like hurting other people? No.
Do you feel you have special powers? No.
Do you feel angry and frustrated sometimes? No.

I noticed that a psychiatrist conducting an interrogation is always reading the same questions from a script. If you deviate, they assume you are sick. A State-licensed psychiatrist has almost no emotional empathy. They have to, because otherwise they'd go insane when they see the suffering of their patients.

As another example, I observed some policemen today, and noticed they have very low emotional awareness. That's probably a prerequisite for the job. Even if you have high emotional awareness to start, it gets driven away as you work. Policemen and psychiatrists are enforcers who police the cracks in The Matrix. If you're meeting a policeman or a psychiatrist as a "customer", you're probably someone who's already seen parts of the Matrix.

As a side benefit, a policeman on the street will not notice me at all. I have incredibly high emotional awareness now, but the police don't notice anything unusual or dangerous about me.

I plan to raise my children and teach them anti-government ideas, and about taboo subjects like mind control, from the very beginning. So apparently, that's going to be viewed as being mentally incompetent to raise a child, and they will take your children away from you merely for teaching them unorthodox belief systems. I see that law as a direct threat. No one can teach their children the truth about what's going on in the world. No one can teach kids about taboo subjects. In other words, you have to hide your kids from the police, and teach them to smile at strangers and act like they believe everything that the mainstream world believes. I'm not sure how I will work around that... but it is an outrage.

It's a stupid law. The correct solution is to give them the answers they want to hear, rather than the truth.

I noticed that you cited my blog. When I was having a panic/manic attack, I also had the strange idea that someone was tampering with my E-Mails.

There's also good voices and bad voices. The good voices might really just be your desires that you can't consciously express. I never really heard bad voices, because I want to try and do good things.

I've become more in touch with my emotional side. It's like recovering from "high functioning autism" (Asperger's syndrome). I now have a much greater emotional awareness. Now, the voices are quiet, because my logical thoughts and emotional thoughts are mostly synchronized.



robert30062 has left a new comment on your post "Discharging a Debt vs. Paying a Debt":

One of your best posts ever FSK. Your knowledge, along with the research I have done on my own, has made me a person who is free from pro-state brainwashing.

How can you be sure you're free of your pro-State brainwashing? There may still be more progress in areas you haven't discovered yet. You should keep thinking and observing. You may have logical freedom, in the sense that you realize "Government is terrorism!" Do you also have emotional freedom, in the sense that your emotions aren't controlled by parasites around you?

The nature of insane productive/parasitic human relationships is more important than the evil of government.

The State isn't just government. It's the State of mind that allows big evils to exist without people going around saying "Hey! That's evil!" There are some people saying "Government is evil!" and "Anti-psychotic drugs are evil!" They are a tiny minority.

I still endure the everyday struggle of endless debt and inflation imposed by the bankers through their government monopoly, endure the economic disadvantages found therein, but I am free from the effects of media control propaganda and the parasitic behavior type that is encouraged in the population as a support mechanism of their system. I've been a fervent supporter of Andrew Jackson's policies as President for a long time and have studied his communications and history for years and I KNOW he would support our agorist movement.

It's hard to say what a dead person would have done. You'd have to ask them and interrogate. I suspect that any great thinkers of the past, if they had the "abused productive" personality type, would agree with agorism if properly explained.

It's so interesting to see how the bankers attack any threat to their power represented by an individual, even posthumously!!

Andrew Jackson's picture on a Federal Reserve Note, along with Lincoln and Benjamin Franklin, is an insult. Each of them were severely critical of the banksters' power.

I agree with you about the US constitution and the prevailing reasons for its creation among the political powers that existed in this country during the times of our nation’s sovereign separation from Great Britain. However, as is found in the case of every generation given due historical exploration, there were individuals, even in high positions of power and prestige, who vehemently opposed the creation of a private central bank and the basis of a fiat, debt-based economy. Thomas Jefferson, along with Mr. Jackson, was such a person. If you or I ever mention these two men in public it is almost certain that the response will be either Jackson’s “erratically emotional behavior”, his principal blame for the forced migration of North American Indians in the “Trail of Tears” episode that is still a part of elementary curriculum, and the absurdly trivial emphasis given to Jefferson’s connection to Sally Hemmings and the scandalous speculations offered with it. I mention this because I think it might be useful for our living citizens to discover those of the past, perhaps even in positions of prominence, who understood and rejected the many forms of evil which exist today. In terms of realistic applicability, our agorist movement should never seek perfection in the existence of humanity outside of the socio-economic principles we hold as sacred or villainy. But truth is omnipresent and just as our enemies can attack our long since dead friends, we can find value and strength in temporal associations.

It's hard to make arguments from history, because the facts may have been retroactively altered. I'm more interested in observing and pointing out evil in the present. The historical arguments are interesting, but not the main point.



The above part of this post was prepared before I was involuntarily hospitalized. Now, I'm answering more recent comments.



David_Z has left a new comment on your post "Agorist Philosophy Overview":

Kevski, next time open a goddman dictionary, I do not think the gaffe is nearly as terrible as you imagine:

tr.v. en·sured, en·sur·ing, en·sures
To make sure or certain; insure: Our precautions ensured our safety.

in⋅sure
  /ɪnˈʃʊər, -ˈʃɜr/ [in-shoor, -shur] -sured, -sur⋅ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to guarantee against loss or harm.
2. to secure indemnity to or on, in case of loss, damage, or death.

Anyone who prefaces his commentary with what draconian criticism of a very minor grammatical slip, ought to be kicked in the scrotum. Repeatedly.

I've already concluded that commenter was an idiot.

Looking at that post and David Z's dictionary citation, it seems that I used "insure" correctly. In many ways, English is a flawed language.

"FSK has a minor grammar error in a post. Therefore, FSK's ideas are wrong." is pro-State trolling.

I'm planning to go back and make updated versions of my older posts. There's no need to rush. I'm still not fully at 100% recovered.



Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Ruby on Rails Sucks!":

@Sasha
"Though SQL does suck in many ways"

Typical statement usually made by someone with little to no experience with SQL (or generally a developer).

SQL is extremely powerful and in many ways can accomplish tasks faster than any language. The problem is MySQL (which I refuse to use) created a lot of bad conceptions and habits. I've written SQL procedures that processed data in 5 minutes where a purely compiled (using row-by-row analysis) language took hours to do

It depends on what high-level language you're using. If you're using an inefficient interpreted language, or a stupid algorithm, then the SQL might be faster. For a complicated query with multiple joins, I doubt that SQL would outperform well-written C or C++. For simple queries, SQL is probably better.

Plus, certain types of number-crunching analysis can be more easily performed in C++ than in SQL. My background is with number-crunching financial calculations, where C/C++ is a good choice. For other types of queries, such as simple grouping and summing, SQL probably is comparable to well-written C/C++. SQL would outperform poorly-written code.

At one job, I rewrote a very complicated SQL query in C++, cutting down the runtime from 2 hours to a couple of minutes. It was very complicated with multiple joins. A skilled DBA had already spent a lot of time optimizing the query. This was with Microsoft SQL Server.

I agree that mySQL has defects and shortcomings compared to other SQL implementations. However, it seems to be the most commonly used SQL server.



Bas has left a new comment on your post "The Trade Defecit Myth":

But China (the government) uses their US$ denominated trade surplus to buy US Treasuries - reversing some of the negative effects of having the extra dollars... Shifting the cost back to US citizens.

No. You're missing the point. China is holding a huge pool of dollars or dollar-denominated bonds. This allows the US financial industry and US government to inflate with less severe consequences.

Over time, the return on Treasury debt is less than true inflation. China loses the purchasing power of its dollar reserves. The wealth is transferred from China's people and China's State insiders to the people who print and spend the new US dollars. In this manner, China subsidizes the US financial industry and US government.

Don Libes has left a new comment on your post "The Trade Defecit Myth":

I like your "... which China's government then burns" but I cannot accept your conclusion that the US benefits from its trade deficit. At some point, China is going to use that pile of paper (no matter how devalued it becomes) and it will force the hidden US inflation out in to the open. Painfully so.

In the meantime, the US benefits as China loses its purchasing power to inflation. Eventually, China will be losing its dollar reserves due to inflation faster than it acquires new dollar reserves. If you calculate inflation correctly, China may already be at that point.

The people in the USA collectively benefit by importing goods in exchange for a piece of paper. However, there are a handful of people who get most of the benefit, the people who print and spend the brand new money. The average person does not benefit as much. The average person gets cheaper imported goods, but they also lose their jobs or are forced to accept lower wages.

No scam can continue forever. The US monetary system scam still has 15-20 years left until the end.



fritz has left a new comment on your post "Stages of Agorism":

I am in stage 2, partly bleeding into phase 3, lets just stay the course we have already started. I am glad you are feeling better FSK!!

I'm feeling better. I convinced my parents to let me stop taking the harmful drugs. I've mostly finished the withdrawal process.

I feel greater awareness and alertness compared to before I was hospitalized. Maybe I've finally fully healed my brain. I'm noticing things that I didn't notice before. I feel like I'm fully using my brain now, but before I was only using half.



Rob Cox has left a new comment on your post "Who's the Richest Man in the World?":

Hi. You are pretty on target. There is a cabal. It has been confessed by David Rockefeller in his Memoirs. (just google it)

I've read the bits and pieces. However, it's possible that the insiders who think they are pulling the strings are themselves enslaved by another group.

Now that I have greater awareness of the Matrix, I see that it's probably true that humans have wound up collectively enslaving themselves and now nobody is free. Even though there are secret groups trying to control things, those people themselves are enslaved by the Matrix and their false beliefs.

I'm much more inclined to believe "There is no Supreme Leader of Humanity." or "The Supreme Leader of Humanity is an alien. There are super-advanced aliens watching and trying to help clean up the mess."

The ultimate ruler of the world would surprise you though. His name is Lucifer, aka Satan. Oh I know some of you are laughing, but hear me out.
Actually, in the Christian mythology, if you read it carefully, Satan is the hero. He's the guy who tells the Christian God that he's a fraud.

My attitude towards Christianity is simple. It's just a bunch of lies and exaggerations that are used to manipulate and control people. "Be a good Christian." is almost the same as "Be a good slave."

If you read the Christian Bible, and only follow the good advice, it's helpful. However, most/all mainstream religions are a carefully calculated mixture of good advice and bad advice. That makes it easier to manipulate and control people. By carefully mixing lies with truth, it's harder for people to figure out what's going on.

For example, "Don't murder other people! Don't steal!" is good advice. "If other people try to abuse you, let them!" is bad advice ("turn the other cheek").

What is going on in the world today and the coming one world government that will be led by the antichrist (a fake christ) was predicted / prophesied in the bible a couple thousand years ago.

Sure, I know everyone has their intellectual arguments and can prove that christianity can't be true. Nevertheless, things are happening as predicted. If you see a one world government, a one world religion, solomons temple being rebuilt in jerusalem then watch out for the return of Jesus the Christ soon after.

Global economic collapse could bring about a one world government rather quickly so as to solve all of the problems that would be caused.

Research the united nations, research what obama has done and said related to the UN.

Research Lucis Trust which is associated as an NGO with the UN (previously published books under the name Lucifer Publishing) - all kinds of "new age" "ascended masters" teaching and pages on their site explaining how Lucifer is the Good guy.

Research the Sanhedrin in jerusalem. They reformed several tears ago and have already put together plans for the new temple and have also made up all of the various devices and goods to be used by the Levite priests.

As I said, all things are coming to pass NOW or soon. If you are not christian, maybe you should read some of the new testament gospels, and even if you don't believe, just pray to God that you don't, and if he is for real would he please make it very clear to you. Try it out as a test - hey if you get nothing out of it you can yell at me for wasting your time.

God bless you all, remember this - God loves you, and that is why Jesus came. He rose from the dead - average humans don't do that. There were hundreds of witnesses. Many of those eyewitnesses died rather than take back what they were telling people about him coming back to life. He loves you even if you have done VERY bad things, Heck, Paul who wrote half of the new testament books KILLED many early christians.

Adios.
I don't take arguments from Christianity or the Bible very seriously. A lot of religious predictions are so vague that almost anything could be interpreted as validating the prediction.

If you want real mental freedom, you have to see that Christianity and most/all mainstream religions are a bunch of lies. Mainstream religion teaches you how to be a good slave.

In that sense, I am arguing the same position as Satan from the Christian Bible. Any God who says "Worship me and obey me, without evidence that my orders are just!" is obviously evil. "Obey God!" and "Obey government!" and "Obey the State!" all seem the same. You should follow, without questioning, the arbitrary rules made up by parasites.



barry b. has left a new comment on your post "What is the Natural Way to Blink?":

What the hell? I'm glad you're blinking one eye at a time but this is not the result of an awakening you are having. One eye at a time is NOT more efficient and has nothing to do with pro-state brainwashing.

Now you can make up any reasoning you want to go with whatever interesting experiences you are having. But how you relate this experience to pro-state brainwashing I have no idea.

I'm just relating my observations. If you don't like it, just mark the post read in your RSS reader and move on to the next one.

I'm not referring to intentionally blinking one eye. I'm saying that my blinking reflex is now "one eye at a time" instead of "both eyes simultaneously" as most people do it. Most/all of the people I've observed blink both eyes simultaneously. Also, most/all people blink with a much greater frequency than me.

It seems that there is a correlation between blinking and pro-State brainwashing. I'm not 100% certain. I'm just putting it out there as an idea. I don't have to be 100% sure about something in order to write about it. I did notice that I'm only blinking one eye at a time now. I'm also noticing a lot of other new things.

Xavin has left a new comment on your post "What is the Natural Way to Blink?":

I have spent a significant amount of time around anarcho-primitivists and rewilders who spend a lot of time studying the way that native peoples act (many without any semblance of pro-state brainwashing). I have spent a lot of time around alternative treatment and health nuts.

I have not seen any mention of this behavior, and these people would probably have mentioned it. They care about little details like that.

That isn't a valid comparison. Most "primitive" groups of humans have already been tainted by exposure to modern humans.

With that said, that's kinda cool. Have you timed your reading, or done any other strongly visual tasks, and timed yourself one eyed and two eyed blinking?

I still sometimes blink both eyes simultaneously like I used to. However, my reflexes gradually seem to be changing to "blink one eye at a time". Also, I blink with a much lower frequency than other people. My mother likes to complain that I don't blink often enough.

It's taking awhile for my reflex to change, because my eye muscles and nerves have to become accustomed to one-eye blinking. Blinking one eye at a time feels more natural.

chronosaidit (http://chronosaidit.wordpress.com/) has left a new comment on your post "What is the Natural Way to Blink?":

WTF...

Dude, be rational. Explore your emotions, and your ability to experiment and try new things.

But at the end of the day, compare them to some kind of norm...

If my hypothesis is true, which is "Everyone in the world is insane due to their pro-State brainwashing.", then there's no valid "normal" humans for me to compare myself to. I can compare myself to "average" or "typical". I have no idea how a human who hasn't been pro-State brainwashed would behave. I have to figure that out myself.

If you had at least said "I noticed that cats blink with one eye," or "Dogs only blink with one eye at a time" or "I observed that wild animals actually blink one eye at a time," etc...
I observed some dogs that blink both eyes simultaneously. That isn't a valid comparison. A dog is the slave of humans and is part of the Matrix. A captive dog is insane just like a captive human.

Wild animals typically run away when you observe them. I believe that wild birds blink one eye at a time, but I haven't observed that carefully recently.

Then you'd have a norm to compare it to...you'd be full of $%^&, but you'd be making a comparison and you would sound like you weren't talking bull%^&*.

Most of us would still know y0u

But look, you didn't do that, because you can't. It is not natural to blink one eye at a time. What is this? I know you've been through some rough experiences, but ... WTF? How can you (with the same mind) read the black-scholes theory and call bullshit, then come to this 'insight' and be like "I'm not kidding!"
They're both related. I'm questioning assumptions. The reason I say "The Black-Scholes Formula is wrong!" is that I questioned the assumptions of the model and did my own reasoning.

Similarly, I'm questioning the assumption "It is normal for humans to blink both eyes simultaneously." I've noticed that recently, I've started blinking one eye at a time instead of independently. I should get a vlog so I can demonstrate.

Dude...both answers are had via the same process...

Freedomain radio is longwinded, but if you listen to enough of that stuff (or maybe just take a course in logic?) you will learn how to build an argument and or form a conclusion without incorporating bull%^&*.

Come on, FSK...stop the bull%^&*!
Why are people getting so offended by "FSK blinks one eye at a time now, instead of both simultaneously." I can't prove it unless you see me in person or I make a vlog.

My point is "I feel that, after my most recent panic attack, I've achieved a higher level of awareness. Simultaneously, I noticed that I now blink one eye at a time as a reflex, instead of both simultaneously. Therefore, I conclude that 'People blink both eyes simultaneously.' is a symptom of pro-State brainwashing."

I don't understand why people are getting offended by this observation. Pro-State brainwashing is not just about government. It's about people having their emotional thinking and logical thinking not be synchronized. As part of my "panic attacks", I feel that my emotional thinking and logical/conscious thinking are much better synchronized now.



Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Who's the Richest Man in the World?":

Ever notice how anyone who becomes informed or cares about stuff gets progressively more and more bitter.. Why? Well they generally start to see lots of destruction around them caused by lots of dumb people around them. Its undeniable that we are surrounded by destruction caused by ignorance. Even seemingly clever people like the "holier than thou scientists" (reductionists) seem to destroy more than they create (or what they create causes destruction). One can quickly comes to a conclusion that people suck.

The current state of affairs is pretty bad. Therefore, the more awareness you have, the more disturbed and depressed you get.

In my case, I feel that I've achieved enough awareness that I'm now able to do something about it. Seeking enlightenment and seeking to understand things is always good. The Matrix punishes people who start to achieve awareness of what is happening.

For example, my high level of technical and emotional ability paradoxically makes it hard for me to find another wage slave job. A middle manager does *NOT* want to hire someone more qualified than himself. I don't have the experience or qualifications to get a higher-ranking job. I'm way overqualified for the grunt coder jobs I qualify for based on my resume. I really should start my own business, but that takes time. I'm still working on healing myself.

I imagine "He" has this view in the extreme. With all that power he's had a lot of free time to let this notion of mankind fester in his mind.

If you your self have contempt for the masses whether you are an environmentalist or a wallstreet banker or what ever your angle is – maybe it is worth considering that you probably have more in common with "him" than you think. Not that that’s a good thing.. With such a tremendous unbridled ego he must see him self as god - his ultimate goal might be to get rid of the stupid masses as he sees fit.

I'm trying to do the best I can, given the circumstances. I don't have any secret hidden angle. I'm a wage slave software engineer who's had a bunch of unique experiences.

Here is a question for you:
If you were "him" and you saw that since the advent of oil, man has gone absolutely ape shit out of control (population, soil erosion, pollution, industrialized slums etc...) SO: If you then came across technology to create free energy would you give it to 6 billion people based on their track record? Especially if you had a good knowledge of several thousand years of human history which reads like a greedy narcissistic horror story. (the question is regardless “clean” free energy and focused on energy as tool to expand and do more work for us) ???

Given what I now know, my goal is to help as many other people as I can. The evil State isn't just about government. Monopolistic government is a symptom of a larger problem. The problem is the evil mental State that allows other evils to exist and spread.



Bob Fairlane has left a new comment on your post "The Fluoride Conspiracy Theory":

No one has the right to put this shit in the water. If you want to buy it and put it in your own water, you should be allowed I suppose, but I don't want it.

That's one problem with monopolistic government. If you want to buy fluoride-free tap water, you're SOL.

I consider "Fluoride is beneficial!" and "Fluoride is harmful!" to be not proven either way. There's been no proper scientific research. Any improvement in tooth decay rates could be due to other factors. Any decline in health could be blamed on factors other than fluoride.

My guess is that fluoride is, at worst, slightly harmful at typical dosages found in tap water.



Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Intellectual Property is not Propety":

Hey FSK,

Where is Mondays post? Where you at?

I'm fine.

I thought I queued something but it turns out I messed up.

I also missed yesterday!

I've mostly recovered my blogging energy now. It takes awhile to recover my mental abilities after being involuntarily hospitalized.

Kyle has left a new comment on your post "Intellectual Property is not Propety":

WRONG, IP, like anything, can be enforced as long as you have gun, with or without government.

Just because you deny IP does not mean it doesn't exist, just like I can deny the law and your property, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

You're missing the point.

According to natural law, intellectual property is not a valid form of property.

According to insane State law, you can have intellectual property. If a handful of insane people have a monopoly of violence, then they can make up whatever laws they want.

I agree that, in the present, a lot of people act as if intellectual property is a valid form of property. That doesn't make it right.

Intellectual property rights aren't enforceable unless the bad guys spy on what everyone is doing all the time.

For copyright, the bad guys can make stricter laws and more severe spying. That will just force filesharers to use cleverer and cleverer techniques. The mainstream media has a problem, because downloading something via BitTorrent is usually more convenient than buying it.



LibertyTiger has left a new comment on your post "Beginner Resources":

Liberty Radio Underground is a podcast dedicated to introducing the concepts of liberty to the uninitiated:
http://www.libertyradiounderground.com/

I prefer written resources to podcasts or vlogs or audio. I can read much faster than most people can speak.

Some people prefer podcasts, but I find the written format to be more efficient. "Experiment with a vlog" is on my list of things to do.



Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Trade Defecit Myth":

"There have been invasions of countries who were threatening to drop the US dollar."
You can't make a statement like that without backing it up. Which countries? When?

One example is Iraq in 2003. They were planning to sell oil for Euros instead of US dollars. Some people say that's the real reason for the invasion.

Normally, most oil exporting countries only sell oil for dollars. That forces people in other countries to use dollars, so they can purchase oil.

Iran is planning to sell oil for a currency other than the US dollar. I don't know if that's started yet. Is that the reason that Iran's government is considered to be one of the United States' top enemies?

The US uses its military might to directly or indirectly control almost all oil exporting countries. For example, the US military supports Saudi Arabia's leaders. Some coups could be orchestrated by State insiders in the USA, even though they are not publicly blamed. If you give one side in a civil war a couple hundred million dollars in funding and weapons, then that's a big advantage.



Steven Shaw has left a new comment on your post "Beginner Resources":

I reckon Mises.org LewRockwell.com and FreedomainRadio.com are excellent resources. I'd have to agree that Molyneux is sometimes very windy :). I'm not sure that the forums are really worthwhile at either Mises Institute or Freedomain.

What books would you recommend to newbies?

Freedomain has some books. You can get the pdf for free and print it out, or make a donation.

Kevin Carson has some books. I find him tough to read.

There's stuff by Mises, Rothbard, and Konkin.

Most of the best stuff is available for free on the Internet already.



stocksystm has left a new comment on your post "Are Bernard Madoff's Victims Total Scumbags?":

I don't see any comments. Where are they?

You were the first person to publish a comment for that post. That's the only reason.

"Madoff Victim Bailouts" attracted a lot of hate comments.

My policy is to publish all comments except for obvious spam. I try to respond to all comments, but I'm a bit behind now.



Mike Gogulski has left a new comment on your post "Anarcho-capitalism vs. Agorism":

*sigh*

Anarcho-capitalism is a theory of utopia.

Agorism is a revolutionary theory.

They are complementary.

I've never seen a definitive definition of anarcho-capitalism, which is part of the problem. It's one of those words that seems to have different definitions depending on what the speaker means.

Daniel Patrick has left a new comment on your post "Anarcho-capitalism vs. Agorism":

Interesting. I've never heard someone calling themselves an-cap say that we need the State now. I definitely wouldn't agree with them.

I've heard some people calling themselves anarcho-capitalists who were pro-State trolling. That was on mises.org. I haven't been there in awhile. Allegedly, it's gotten better.

Kelly W. Patterson has left a new comment on your post "Anarcho-capitalism vs. Agorism":

"If lots of pro-State trolls start calling themselves agorists, then do I have to find a new name for my philosophy?"

Therein lies the problem, at least from a standpoint of discussion. People that don't know or don't care to know what something really means glom onto it and eventually give it such an inaccurate and/or negative connotation that those who legitimately believe in it end up having to find some way to distance themselves from them and its new definition.

For this reason, I prefer to say what you actually mean, instead of using words without thinking about it. For example, "anarchism" covers a lot of things. This is the "Taboo Your Words" game. To avoid confusion, replace a word with what you actually mean. For example, instead of "taxes", say "wealth or money taken from people, backed by the threat of State violence".

Fortunately, agorism isn't widely used yet. I haven't seen anyone calling themselves an "agorist" who is badly pro-State trolling. That might change over time.

Kelly W. Patterson has left a new comment on your post "Anarcho-capitalism vs. Agorism":

BTW, the crew of the Motor Home Diaries did a rather good interview with Charles Johnson (Anarchist philosopher/blogger) concerning agorism.

http://motorhomediaries.com/charles-rad-geek-johnson-chats-about-agorism-with-the-motorhome-diaries/

He has some interesting bits on his blog. His "anarchoblogs" site is somewhat lame.

That interview was suitable for a complete beginner. I'm looking for more advanced material on agorism. Also, I prefer written resources to videos, because I can read faster than most people speak.



Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Ruby on Rails Sucks!":

rails books are outdated by the time they go to press.

That's a sign that Rails is not a stable language, suitable for serious development.

The web-based resources for Rails also sucked.



rotu has left a new comment on your post "Prisoner's Dilemma Fnord":

Prisoner's Dilemma is not at fault for the subsidy situation. The problem is the application of PD. Whoever uses this analogy as you cited it fails to see that this is actually an instance of Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma, where players can base their decisions off the other player's past decision. Under IPD, one has to deal with the ecology of other players: If it is expected that the other player will follow a course of action regardless of its consequences (e.g. always cooperate or always defect no matter what the other player has done), then it is rational to always defect. However if there is a reasonable expectation that the other player will cooperate if they see you are willing to cooperate and the other player will defect if you try to take advantage of them, then in IPD, it is a very good strategy to do the same.

Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma is, in fact, a very good model if and only if the decision is controlled by those people who are economically affected. Unfortunately, this is not usually the case.

You missed the point. Prisoner's Dilemma and most game theory is not a good model for real-world problems in a true free market. "I refuse to play with someone who defects" is barred by the model. Further, "I will warn my friends and they will refuse to play with the defector." is also barred by the model.

The model does not offer "I refuse to play with you!" as an option.



fritz has left a new comment on your post "Anarcho-capitalism vs. Agorism":

Thank you for this post and making things clear. I often have trouble on Mises live chat.And there seems to always be a person arguing Agorism philosophy against Anarcho-capitalism. But when asked the difference they are rude and tell you to look up the meaning. I really think they themselves don't know.

I believe that we have enough people to start a movement.But most people dwell in shades of gray on the fringes of Agorism. If they could mostly embrace one central philosophy.And be connected so they can network. the unfolding would gain momentum.

It's not clear that my definition of anarcho-capitalism is correct. I haven't seen any definitive source.

For this reason, I prefer to discuss ideas instead of labels.

It'll still be another 5-10 years until agorism starts to take off.



Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "StackOverflow Sucks!":

Want to know what a good hard drive to buy? Go to a freakin' hardware site already or read some reviews on CNet. The link to programming is pathetically slim.

I thought there was a link. The site's censors disagreed. I've already discussed this many times. I'm not going to convince StackOverflow's censors that my question was reasonable. That's fine. I choose to leave. StackOverflow's censors aren't going to convince me that I was being unreasonable. That shouldn't bother them, because I'm not using that lousy website anymore.

Of course, that wasn't your point though was it? Clearly you are just trolling for AdSense traffic.

Can't wait to read your next "Site XYZ Sucks!" post. Twitter maybe? That should really bump up those page hits.

I noticed that "X sucks!" posts in general tend to be relatively popular. Actually, I think that Twitter is lame, but I never even bothered using it.



Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Steroids and Plastic Surgery":

Athletes, celebrities etc. legitimate the State and distract the masses (classic bread and circuses).

Making a few 'stars' and plastering their 'glamorous' lives everywhere, makes the rest 'entertained' and desiring the same 'one day I too can be rich', 'I can emulate xyz and be like them. Meanwhile the State tightens its grip.

That's sort of the point. However, why is it immoral for an athlete to use steriods, but acceptable for a celebrity to have plastic surgery? That's a weird double standard.



I'm still way behind on answering reader comments. I'm going to publish what I have so far.

I'm mostly recovering my blogging energy.

1 comment:

chronosaidit said...

On your response to my 'blinking one eye...' comment, you wrote.
Dogs/cats are not a valid comparison...and, it's possible that birds...
You would be better off researching birds, etc. Likewise, you assume that because an animal is domesticated that it is 'pro-state brainwashed.' You might look into the history of animal domestication. The first dogs/cats were animals that fed off of the scraps of human consumption. It is not likely the state had anything to do with that. When you associate the state 'carte blanche' with everything, you use the same 'straw man fallacy' that you yourself frequently argue against.

Again, the reason your 'blink one at a time' hypothesis makes little sense, is because you have made a statement without comparing it to anything in reality. I strongly encourage you to compare your 'hypothesized blinking pattern' with some other animal. Dog, cat, monkey, cow, whatever, I seriously doubt that the relationship between an animal and a human affects its instincts severely to the point of affecting its blinking habits. Do you see how ridiculous this is? It's like saying that pro-state brainwashing directly affects the volume of air that the lungs can hold. Now, wouldn't breathing and exercise make more sense? In the same way...

If you want to say that you are no longer afraid of looking people in the eye, because you are releasing yourself from habits and thoughts from your history, I understand that. That makes sense! Because you are comparing your past behavior to your current behavior, or because you compare your behavior to others, like you did when you mentioned people frequently blinking. You have a point on the blinking. I find that it is people's own awareness of either the fact that they are full of **** and are trying to take advantage of you, or they have prejudged you with a stereotype and are uncomfortable around you. There is absolutely nothing wrong with theorizing and I am not offended, however in its current state, your hypothesis on blinking has no correlation to reality.

This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at realfreemarket.org.