Last I heard, insurance is one of the most regulatorily captured industries in the US

Oh no, Bob? Damn.

Maybe because he thinks it's a way of privatizing something that's been captured the state regulations, without asking for permission.

On its own, it can't 'do stuff'. Nope. A human being can tell it what to do, and only then it will. That's how it is now. And that's how it will always be.

We won't get further if we can't agree on definitions. 'Doing stuff' and 'acting' are the same things to me. And I extensively defined what it means to act. Not sure how the concept of doing stuff differd from those definitions.

It was all related and implied.

The reason why I defined all that was to explain what 'acting' entails. Everything I described as the categories of 'action' are things an AI cannot do.

I thought it to be better than simply saying that an AI cannot act.

•An AI can't aim at ends and consciously choose the means to achieve those ends.

•It cannot own itself or other resources and things. It does not have a will. It has no conception of 'labour'.

•An AI cannot understand the concept of scarcity because it cannot own things.

•Not being able to aim at ends or understand the scarcity in means, it cannot choose between different ends and means.

•Not being able to own things, it cannot bear the costs and risks.

•Not having any conception of costs and risks, it cannot have preferences.

•It cannot have profit and losses as a result of all the above.

All an AI can do is do what it's told. And this function of doing what it's told can increase in complexity. That's pretty much what we're looking at.

Thus, an AI cannot act. Of its own accord.

I love AI and I love using it.

I don't share the skepticism about the economic consequences of its adoption. I think it's going to help a lot of people and companies accumulate capital and increase their productivity. It has certainly helped me.

What I am not a fan of is statists using the tech as an excuse to expand governments.

An AI can't 'act', is what I meant.

The rest was about explaining what I mean by 'acting'. Not separate things.

I've learnt to articulate it a bit better since we last spoke about it:

Only human beings can 'act'.

When we say act, we mean to say:

•Aiming at ends.

•Understanding the concept of scarcity in the means available to achieve those ends, like time, energy, resources, capital, etc.

•Choose the preferrable ends and means by rank ordering them.

•Bear the opportunity costs of aiming at certain ends and means over others.

•Choose the preferrable ends and means based on costs.

•Take the risk of incurring a loss by choosing the wrong means to achieve their ends.

This is basically the action axiom.

Wading further into the philosophical territory, we can say that only human beings can 'reason' about things.

H/T Hans-Hermann Hoppe. His writings have helped me understand the above.

Furthermore, perhaps a theological argument can be made that only human beings have the ability to access 'revelational knowledge'. Only they have the gift of self-realization. But I am too young and inadequately read to elaborate this particular point properly.

Severely underrated and mischaracterized intellectual

His rationalist writings are top notch nostr:note1qeps8tyt53fdtmjkxphlll9w8wv0sja0tug3etw5mant8qz6gqjspt7fzm

That's fair! Hope they get that feature in finally

Man took the time to respond pretty well

Give him something lmao

Hoppe

Massive work on first principles. It's insane.

There's a lot to expand on too, especially when you've grokked Bitcoin

Bitcoin standard gonna bring about an Austrian renaissance, that much I know

Just checked. Well-handled by them GG

Reminds me of how they listened to user feedback on the external signer feature and added it, another one of those flashy updates (which I wanted, so no complaints 😂)

Sometimes devs tend to be adamant about the software they build and what they prioritize. I suppose that's normal.

Damus folks straight up said no to external signers and didn't even want to listen. So I just haven't bothered to use it or download it despite waiting for a long time for it to come on Android 😂

Best part about the Austrians is that after a point you don't need to read them that much anymore

You start thinking on your own

I.e. your mind becomes ripped 😂

I don't think they're gonna listen because I don't think they prioritize the little things 😂

They go for the flashy ones like the wallet, live streams, studio, etc.

Their mobile site still takes way too long to load. Like it's actually terrible. I try to share as little of Primal's links as possible.

But yeah, overall a great client for a lot of things.

So much potential improvements in store for the 'average worker' on a Bitcoin standard

I don't think socialist ideas would be as popular in a hyperbitcoinized world.

Unions will exist, as they should in any functioning market economy, but they'll function as genuine unions that negotiate with companies like normal people rather than retarded revolutionaries who want to burn everything.

Disabling background usage makes Amethyst perform poorly though

Never a good experience everytime I open the app again

There was an argument I heard that workers take as much risk as an entrepreneur/investor.

Backed by the additional point that this is because they're also taking a chance on the job by moving places, leaving their previous job, enduring difficult working conditions, etc.

This is very much true.

Hence, it was argued that the workers deserve to be compensated for the risk as much as the entrepreneur/investors.

If the argument is that the compensation ought to be higher, I can see that. But if the argument is that the compensation should be as much as, I cannot.

This is where the time preference for the receipt of compensation plays a role.

And of course, uncertainty in the receipt.

The entrepreneur/investor is willing to delay his returns and potentially face the chance of not getting any returns at all from his investment whereas the worker gets paid sooner for his labour, ie his investment, and with certainty.

He has the leverage of being able to save what he wants, leaving his job immediately and simply cause production by not working.

In a market economy, as a self-owning individual, he is free to leave anytime he wants and form unions with other workers also.

The worker has all the leverage in a market economy.

But this whole thing misses a fundamental factor that distorts everything mentioned above: the quality of money.

Worker earns in money that depreciates > he has no savings > his standard of living does not improve but the costs keep going up > no wages are enough for him

Entrepreneur earns his returns in money that depreciates > his profits are never enough > he does not accumulate capital to increase productivity > he has to squeeze as much as possible with the existing capital by consuming it > he cannot afford to pay his workers more or hire more workers

Bad money ruins everything

Notifs haven't been Primal's strong suit at all sadly

Great for zaps and video playback though

Yeah I get what you mean. But I've developed a habit of using different clients for different things. One for replies, one for zapping, one for video, etc. It's great that we get to pick and choose from so many options.

They'll also have their ups and downs I think. Like it's been a while since I've used Amethyst because it's a massive drain on my phone's battery and many basic features don't work as they used to anymore.

Goodness me that's goated

Ngl I want Nostur on Android, Windows, web and other platforms as well. Shame that it's Apple-only