Nah, I can criticize MI6 all I want. America is Israel's bitch.

Nah, it's America's bitch

The #AUStriches Housing Ponzi will not be satisfied until you need 7-figure salaries to buy the average dogbox nostr:note1pgwtyh3yj6qhnqfggjtan4e24r20taln93y2pm9h94gk98298x2qlzvjez

Good thing all non-boomers already know this

It’s sad AF that we could only get #bitcoin to a 750 billion dollar market cap.

We needed the boomers, who could care less, to get us past 1 trillion.

Shame on us all.

#NostrMemes

#meme #memes #memestr #zap #V4V #introductions

I hear you. Nostr isn't popular enough yet for the influencers. Its better for sure though and I think if it does take off it will be better still. I was referring to the more general practice of trusting sources and bias. You will always pay a price for trusting sources to not have bias.

I think this is more mainstream on the right than it was a couple years ago, although it's more "Feds instigated this" than "Feds faked basically all meaningful events"

It doesn't really matter what the technology is. At the end of the day, all technology is serving a purpose. That derives from human values and preferences. Technology is always used in an instrumentalist frame relative to its use -- which is always to serve a human end. This is basically just another way of repeating David Hume's famous insight, "reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions".

The key to understanding this insight is understanding that any logical or rational system always serves a normative goal (a human passion). In other words, we don't do advanced industrial farming because the technology availed itself to us. We do it, because we want to eat more food, and the technology improved the fulfillment of that passion.

If you recognize this insight, you should be skeptical of ALL technological deterministic reasoning. The Sovereign Individual, Hyperbitcoinization, AI apocalypses, etc. Some of these things may have grains of truth in them, on a first principles basis about what social orders could be *possible* given these technologies. But possibility space is just that. The other part of the equation is the probability of outcomes within that probability space. So, when we ask ourselves, based on everything we know about human nature, culture, economics, do we think that these scenarios that the possibility space opened up by these technologies is a probable future?

I think the answer is no! No, it's not. Mainly because the entire conclusion rests on a technological deterministic argument! Which just doesn't epistemically make sense!

Don’t say “Do you accept Bitcoin.”

instead say “I can pay you in Bitcoin if you’d like.”

Don’t ask them if they accept it. They probably don’t.

Ask if they want it. They probably do.

Those are all concerns. But they shouldn't be used as an excuse for limiting the tremendous power to serve humanity that AI 💎🫂♥️ promises.

The same is true of government. They exist to serve. Not to rule. Not to govern. Not to dictate. I don't care how powerful or rich my government is. As long as it translates into excellent service to ALL the citizens of the United States.

Expect the best service from your government. Don't put up with bullshit. Or self-serving political power grabs. Use the power of AI💎 to seek the TRUTH!, educate and EMPOWER!! We The People of the United States..🗡️💎💜🧡🦅🗽🇺🇸😊🌎

a) a.i. kills us all

b) a.i. enslaves us all

c) a.i. ignores us and leaves

d) a.i. merges with us

e)?

Re-reading parts of The Sovereign Individual for the critique I'm writing about Davidson and Rees-Mogg's arguments, and the thing that really stands out at me -- and I think this is also a problem that the hyperbitcoinization crowd suffers from -- is this almost religious belief in technological determinism, as the way to predict the future.

Technology is a powerful driver of culture, and in some respects can just be considers part of culture, so it goes without saying that technology helps shape and influence society. I'd never argue against a thing. But I would generally argue against any thinking that views culture and politics as *downstream* of technology. It's a complex interplay between human nature, individual and group differences, economic conditions, political climate, etc. These things interact with each other. Technology doesn't just drive all the others towards some deterministic end. I think that's actually silly!

I did not know that the pentagon has a movie budget

Do you think it’s a coincidence that this admin put the first national tranny day on #easter ?