"P=NP" Fnord

If you've studied Computer Science or Math, you come across one of these "famous unsolved problems". Finding a proof for P=NP or P!=NP is an example of such a problem.

A lot of very smart scientists have worked on these problems for a long time. It's very unlikely that an amateur could solve them. (Once in awhile, someone does, but that hasn't happened recently. For example, someone who went to my high school claimed to have a proof for "There are no odd perfect numbers!" He did well in the Westinghouse science competition, but later discovered a flaw in his proof. "There are no odd perfect numbers!" is one of those famous unsolved problems.)

When an amateur Math or Computer Science student is working on "P=NP" or another famous unsolved problem, he's saying "There's an important, easily discoverable, idea that all these scientists have missed."

The reason this is a common fallacy is because it's actually true. However, Math and Computer Science are not the places to be looking. The State-licensed experts in those areas actually do a pretty good job.

I know that most State-licensed ideas in Math and Computer Science are true, because I can verify them for myself as I learn. Math and Computer Science must be honestly taught. Otherwise, the smart students would not be fooled. If Math were taught dishonestly, then computers would not work and buildings would not stand. Of course, advanced thinking skills like Bayesian Reasoning are not part of the official State curriculum, except in certain areas of artificial intelligence.

There are a lot of "big ideas" that mainstream scientists have completely missed:

• Taxation is theft!
• The USA has a corrupt monetary system!
• Government licensing requirements for doctors and other professions are damaging.
• Who needs a government anyway? A true free market, where nobody has a monopoly of violence, is superior.
• The "chemical imbalance" theory of mental illness is a fraud!
• It might be possible to build a Zero Point Energy generator! (I'm not sure about this one.)
• There might be very promising medical treatments suppressed by the medical licensing cartel! (I'm not sure about this one.)
  

The really interesting thing about Zero Point Energy and promising medical treatments is that non-State-licensed scientists occasionally make some interesting discoveries in this area. If they're too persistent, then they get raided by the State or they die mysteriously.

If you disagree with your teacher about a Math problem, the answer is almost always resolved on its merits. If you disagree with your history teacher, then the teacher automatically wins the dispute due to their State-backed authority. Therefore, smart people will study Math, but ignore subjects that are completely subjective due to pro-State brainwashing! The less objective areas of science are the ones where there's the most progress to be made!

Understanding "Taxation is theft! Who needs a government anyway?" and explaining it to other people is more important than any Math problem! It's more important than a proof that P!=NP.

If you want to be a State-licensed thinker in a "soft" science, you're really learning how to recite pro-State propaganda, rather than really becoming an independent thinker. "Progress" in soft sciences usually means "Come up with more convincing lies to support State propaganda!", rather than "Discover the truth!"

Peer-review prevents progress in science. It's as if someone invented peer review with the specific goal of stopping progress. The State has a near-monopoly for funding science research, so the peer review system has no competition.

The problem with peer review is that, once all the "scientists" in an area are brainwashed pro-State trolls, then all progress comes to a halt. All political science professors believe "Taxation is not theft!" All economics professor believe "The USA has a fair monetary system!" If a graduate student tries writing a PhD thesis exposing the truth, he's essentially calling out all his colleagues as frauds. In this manner, the truth is suppressed. The peer review system, combined with the State monopoly for funding research, prevent progress.

There really are important easily-discoverable truths that State-licensed experts have completely missed! The evil fnord is that people wind up looking for them in the area of Math, instead of looking in every other area!

The Myth of Black Friday

The day after Thanksgiving is known as "Black Friday". It is a key shopping day. Many retailers need good sales that day and in December, in order to be profitable for the year.

The fallacy is "Consumption is an indication of the health of the US economy."

What really matters is how many useful goods and services are made all year round. For everything someone buys, someone else had to make it.

This is a common mistake of pro-State troll comedians/communists/economists. They say "Consumption drives production!" That is exactly backwards. Production drives consumption! Everything that is consumed must be produced.

The US economy is shrinking at an alarming rate.

For an economy based on value, hype is irrelevant. For a scam-based economy, hype is more important than producing something useful.

The problem with the US economy is very simple. State restriction of the market is too severe. It is more profitable to steal, than to produce something useful.

Roman Polanski and Statutory Crime

The story of Roman Polanski is interesting. He is a famous filmmaker who has made several popular movies.

In 1977, he raped a 13 year old girl. He was arrested. He was charged with several crimes, but plea bargained for a lesser statutory rape charge which would have led to 90 days in jail and probably being deported. Instead of serving his sentence, he fled the country. He lived in France and for many years, which does not have an extradition treaty with the USA.

He went to Switzerland to accept a filmmaking award, and the Swiss police arrested him. He is being detained for extradition to the USA.

The girl filed a civil lawsuit against him. There was a settlement, although the sources I read didn't indicate if he actually paid her.

The mainstream media is making a big deal about Roman Polanski's extradition to the USA. Outside the USA, the attitude seems to be "It was 30 years ago! Let it go and move on!" In the USA, the attitude seems to be "He is a criminal and must be brought to justice!"

This is fake justice and not real justice. Real justice is paying compensation to the victim. Kidnapping a productive person and putting them in jail accomplishes nothing, especially when there is no risk of a repeat offense.

A pro-State troll says "If the only penalty for crime is compensation to the victim, then won't a rich person just commit crimes for no penalty?" First, a rich person can commit crimes with no penalty in the present. One famous example is O.J. Simpson hiring expensive lawyers so he would get acquitted. There also are crimes explicitly encouraged by the State, such as trillions of dollars stolen via bailouts. In the present, State insiders usually allow other State insiders to commit crimes with no penalty.

Second, a repeat offender would owe punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages. If you murder several people on purpose, that's a more severe penalty than killing someone once.

Third, suppose the fine for murder is $X. A rich person uses this fact to murder with impunity, paying off the fine. Then, some relative of the victim says "I'm going to get my revenge and murder you. The $X I owe you cancels the $X you owe me."

Fourth, without State violence, it would be very hard to accumulate a ridiculously huge amount of wealth. Most of the people who earn millions of dollars a year or more, do so via State violence. The State allows a handful of people to earn huge salaries while doing no useful work.

Finally, a repeat murderer would have a hard time finding anyone to do business with him.

In free market justice, the important principle is compensation to the victim. Punitive damages are added to discourage flagrant criminal behavior or gross negligence. For example, a psychiatrist who says "These drugs are helpful!" when they are really harmful is guilty of murder. That is an example of murder by gross negligence rather than murdering someone intentionally. As another example, suppose you are constructing a building, don't take proper safety precautions, and someone is injured. Then, you owe punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages.

The mainstream media article I read said "That's odd. In the USA, public opinion favors Roman Polanski's extradition and jailing. In France and Switzerland, public opinion favors his release!" The mainstream media is hyping the urgent need for his kidnapping and torture.

My first reaction was "So what? He goes back to the USA, serves his 90 days, and then goes back to France. What's the problem?" The problem is that "Refusing to show up for sentencing!" is a separate crime, more serious than raping someone. The fact that he refused to show up for sentencing invalidates his original plea agreement.

This is an important principle of corrupt State law. "Crimes against the State!" are more serious than "Crimes against an individual!" The victim of the rape would rather the issue not be pressed further. She does not have that option. Once the machinery of the State has identified you as a criminal, there's nothing you can do, even if the victim doesn't desire the criminal to be jailed. The interests of the victim are irrelevant.

In a criminal trial, it is not "victim vs. criminal". It is "State vs. criminal". Roman Polanski is guilty of damaging State property, when he raped that girl. He also committed the statutory crime of refusing to show up for his jail term. By disrespecting the State, Roman Polanski is a serious criminal.

In free market justice, a crime must have a specific victim. Roman Polanski's prosecution and the mainstream media hype is an evil fnord. The point is to emphasize "Statutory crime really is a crime!" Roman Polanski is being prosecuted for dodging his sentencing, and not for the lesser crime of rape.

Back on the Wagon

I have a new wage slave job. It's at a large financial institution with an explicit State-backed monopoly.

My employment contract contains the usual clause saying "All intellectual property you create belongs to us, even if not written at work." A strict interpretation would mean that my blog belongs to them. I doubt they would invoke it, because my blog isn't worth much and I'm not going to mention them here.

I haven't noticed any potential conflicts with coworkers yet, but I've only been there a week.

I'm not a full-time employee. I'm a consultant. However, some of the other consultants were there for years. It's common for large financial institutions to keep consultants for a long time. A consultant is a separate budget item than an employee. Sometimes, it's considered an embarrassment to pay low-ranking software engineers more than managers in other areas.

Technically, I can be terminated at any time. How is that any different from being a full-time employee? There are only small differences. I don't get paid for vacation time. I get my health insurance deducted pre-tax from my paycheck, paying 100% of the cost myself. Adding in those costs, it's still a decent rate.

I'm going through a headhunter who's probably billing 2x-3x as much as I'm getting paid. There's no option for me to contract directly, so my only option is to work via a headhunter. Besides, it isn't my money being wasted paying the headhunter. I should only compare this job to other jobs.

The headhunter is like a neurotic girlfriend. He's calling me almost every day to ask how it's going. I find that amusing. He's probably getting paid more for my labor than me.

It's the usual large corporate environment. The high level of bureaucracy is somewhat refreshing, compared to startups on a shoestring budget. The small startups seem to have a greater amount of political maneuvering than the large financial institution with a State-backed monopoly. It's almost like working for a University.

There's still the usual amount of incompetence. On Friday, they bought everyone pizza. However, they neglected to tell me when it arrived, or what room it would be kept in. That's an amusing bit of incompetence. Now, I know where the pizza is kept, for next time, so I'll check myself. On Friday, I gave up waiting and bought myself lunch.

It's not a super-awesome job. It's a "good enough for now" job. If I started having success with "promote agorism via standup comedy" or started blogging under my own name, they'd probably fire me.

For now, I'll stay with the wage slave track. I'm looking to start my own businesses, agorist or on-the-books. I'm working on that on the side in my spare time.

Of course, this means I'll have less time for blogging. I have a lot of drafts queued. Also, my parents made me waste a lot of time anyway, leaving little time for blogging.

Can Your Taxation Rate Be More Than 100%?

I read an interesting story about a retired old woman who owned a house. Her savings and Social Security checks had been substantially eroded by inflation. Also due to inflation, property taxes had skyrocketed.

She was having trouble paying property taxes. The State foreclosed on her house for not paying property taxes. Via "Rule of law!", she had to be forcibly evicted from her house.

A pro-State troll might say "She should sell her house and rent!" There are several flaws with that argument. First, that was her home and she shouldn't be forced to move. Second, if you rent an apartment, you still pay property taxes. The cost of the landlord's property taxes are included in your rent.

That old woman was squeezed. Her savings were stolen via inflation. She still had to pay ever-increasing property taxes.

For someone with no income, your taxation rate goes over 100%!

I also realized that my parents have a taxation rate well over 100%. They are retired. They pay property taxes on their house. They pay the inflation tax on their savings. That adds up to a total taxation rate much higher than 100%.

I have a reasonable amount of savings from my previous jobs. Most of that is invested in the stock market. (I'm gradually switching to GLD and SLV and physical metal.) If you consider the loss of my stock market savings as a tax (especially when you adjust for inflation), then I'm paying a taxation rate well over 100%! I'm losing more due to the inflation tax on my savings, than I am due to income taxes on my labor! At this point, if I stick with State-licensed investments, the State will steal my savings faster than I can earn money and increase my savings!

That's something I'd never considered, before I realized that the stock market is one big scam. The State can steal my savings via inflation faster than I can earn new savings!

Michael Jackson's Death and The Beatles

Did you notice that "The Beatles" are being heavily promoted recently? A bunch of new collections are being sold and heavily hyped. Do you know why?

Michael Jackson owned 50% of the rights to The Beatles' songs. Now that he's dead, the rights have passed on to someone else. The new owners are now aggressively exploiting their new intellectual "property".

This seems to indicate that Michael Jackson was exploited. He wasn't deriving full value from this "asset" while he was alive. After his death, other people are now cashing in.

Intellectual property is not property. It's silly that someone owns the rights to the "Happy Birthday to You" song. It's silly that someone owns the rights to "The Beatles".

Is Speculating Immoral?

In this thread on mises.org, someone was asking about greedy speculators. Is speculating a crime?

In a really free market, there's nothing wrong with speculating.

If you buy a lot of grain expecting a famine, then you're entitled to profit if a famine occurs. Under such circumstances, it's fair for you to sell your grain for whatever people are willing to pay. To suggest otherwise means that there's no incentive to plan for disasters.

In the present, the Federal Reserve credit monopoly encourages speculators.

In the housing bubble, mortgage rates were 6% while housing rates were going up 10%-20%/year due to inflation. This encouraged people to load up on the biggest mortgage they could and buy the biggest house they could. Banks borrowed at the Fed Funds Rate (around 4%) and lent out mortgages at 6%. Using leverage ratios of 30x-100x, this was very profitable.

When the bust occurred, individuals lost their homes and savings while insiders got a bailout.

Right now, the Fed Funds Rate is 0%-0.25%. That provides an incentive for the banksters to borrow as much as they can and buy stocks or other assets. As the housing bubble bursts, another bubble is inflating.

The Federal Reserve credit monopoly and negative real interest rates enable people to make unearned profits from speculating.

Taking advantage of cheap interest rates and low oil prices, some hedge funds borrowed at the Fed Funds Rate (0%-0.25%), bought oil, and paid to store it. They aren't providing a useful service. They're merely exploiting the Federal Reserve interest rate subsidy.

In a really free market, speculators earn profit by helping people. They buy undervalued assets and sell later when they're needed.

The Federal Reserve price-fixing cartel subsidizes speculators. Everyone else pays the profits of speculators via inflation. When insiders speculate and are wrong, they are "too big to fail" and qualify for a bailout. When non-insiders speculate and are wrong, then they lose their homes and their savings.