tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post9016049852970293740..comments2024-03-28T10:56:52.861-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Where do we stand - verging on 2014?David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-83791104871634615032014-01-02T13:46:05.660-08:002014-01-02T13:46:05.660-08:00Back in 1999 and 2000, when everyone was still pus...Back in 1999 and 2000, when everyone was still pushing tech stocks as the only thing worth investing in, I wanted to get some gold in my portfolio, and there was no easy way to do so.<br /><br />Now, everyone has jumped on the bandwagon. Of course, that means it's overpriced, and not a good time to jump in.<br /><br />Following most investment fads involve jumping in too late, after the thing is popular enough to have been bought up. To truly buy low and sell high, one almost has to be a contrarian.<br /><br />BTW, I just enjoyed a fantasy novel by Terry Pratchett called "Making Money" that actually found ways to explore questions like "Where does the value of gold come from?" and that it does one no good on a desert island. He even found a novel basis for currency. I'd highly recommend it for anyone who likes that sort of thing.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-81751346137560166662014-01-02T13:21:05.244-08:002014-01-02T13:21:05.244-08:00I really should read some Adam Smith. I first cra...I really should read some Adam Smith. I first cracked open a copy of <i>Wealth of Nations</i> in a public library when I was some 15 years old. The page I randomly selected had tables of the price of wheat for the year seventeen something, so I guess I got the impression that it must be an incredibly dry read.<br /><br />This thing about silver and gold as "dead stock" mirrors some of the rhetoric I have been slinging concerning gold buggism and other hard currency fetishism; the idea that investment, by definition, means (or should mean) active or passive financial participation in the "creation of wealth," or as I prefer to say, the provision of goods or services. One thing about the idea of gold as investment (and the IMHO ill-advised policy decision of "gold IRA's" and the like) that I've noticed is that one thing that talk show hosts of both the right and left seem to agree on (based on certain endorsement deals they've scored) is that gold is advisable as an investment, and everyone should have some in their portfolio. During the renaissance of left-of-center talk radio prior to the folding of Air America, you could hear the voices of progressive talk show hosts such as Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes and Thom Hartmann in radio commercials for "ITM Trading," promoting gold as an investment, with the strong implication of it being a hedge against some kind of serious shit hitting some kind of fan on the global stage. As Randi Rhodes' ad copy read: "Gold isn't about the left or the right." I'm inclined to think that gold is about the left <i>and</i> the right (and their fantasies of armageddon) and <i>not</i> about the center. Even the mainstream financial press sometimes talks about gold price spikes as if they represent "uncertainty," or even a vote of no confidence in the future.<br />Lorrainehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13567383019731167967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-60915400648212814302014-01-02T05:48:20.667-08:002014-01-02T05:48:20.667-08:00As one who is continually accused of being any pol...As one who is continually accused of being any political affiliation the accuser intensely dislikes, I've more or less given up on even starting to claim I am anything other than a independent minded apolitical. My views are founded on evidence, not ideological bias, but regardless, everyone always seems to believe I simply have to be whatever political viewpoint they oppose.<br /><br />For example, when I point out the advantages of sousveillance in eliminating abuse of power by authority figures, I am often called a fascist out to destroy privacy rights. When I point out how technology is equally able to repair damage to the environment as it is able to harm it, I get called a rightwing nut job. When I discuss the inequality of our current economic system, and how it is collapsing, I'm a "libtard."<br /><br />The moral? When you stand up for evidence based rationality instead of irrational belief, you're everyone's target.<br /><br />The other moral? Political and ideological labels are little more than social tools that people use to try and shove "consensus" down the throats of those who seek to change the status quo. It's a sad testament to the "herd mentality" we're stuck with from our genetic heritage.<br /><br />But even despite that, we ARE improving. No matter how many people deny it, no matter how many people desperately strive to prevent it, Progress happens.<br /><br />Time doesn't stop. Neither does mans continual accumulation of knowledge, or the ways in which we find to use that knowledge to make a better life for all humanity.<br /><br />Do we stumble? You betcha. Can we be nasty vicious monsters? Oh yeah. Our demons of the ID are ever-present. <br /><br />But we still keep getting better. Most of us just don't wish to see it, because it robs our self pity of justification.<br /><br />So yeah, David, it's nice to see some cautious optimism every now and then. Valkyrie Icehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08847675099789308340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-77103859755436853242014-01-01T14:23:07.709-08:002014-01-01T14:23:07.709-08:00Actually, if you count Dec 25, the eighth day IS N...Actually, if you count Dec 25, the eighth day IS New Year's Day. And that's just it. The thing all the world celebrates.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-29837197273149679172014-01-01T13:58:44.289-08:002014-01-01T13:58:44.289-08:00Johnatan S:
Traditionally, the circumcision takes...Johnatan S:<br /><i><br />Traditionally, the circumcision takes place eight days after the birth of a boy. So really, the celebration of His snipping should be tomorrow. :)<br /></i><br />Depends if it's eight days later or "on the eighth day."<br /><br />I used to think it was funny that He arose on a Sunday three days after His death on a Friday. But I've been assured that it really translates as "on the thrid day" rather than "three days later". Too bad, because my way was funnier.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-65528878542259821612014-01-01T12:51:47.144-08:002014-01-01T12:51:47.144-08:00Oops, my computer's playing silly buggers with...Oops, my computer's playing silly buggers with me - that last comment was mine.Jonathan S.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-60694623779527084922014-01-01T12:50:58.810-08:002014-01-01T12:50:58.810-08:00Dr. Brin: "LarryHart, New Years is the most c...Dr. Brin: "LarryHart, New Years is the most celebrated holiday on the planet… and it happens to denote the day of circumcision of a nice Jewish boy…"<br /><br />LarryHart: "And here I thought that happened on Dec 25. :)"<br /><br />Traditionally, the circumcision takes place eight days after the birth of a boy. So really, the celebration of His snipping should be tomorrow. :)<br /><br />(I still like the line I read some years ago, that Jesus of Nazareth was just a nice Jewish boy who went into His Father's business...)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-58698024665169383692014-01-01T11:20:49.164-08:002014-01-01T11:20:49.164-08:00@Alex Tolley,
I presume (hope) that you are parap...@Alex Tolley,<br /><br />I presume (hope) that you are paraphrasing the right-wing talking points, rather than voicing your personal opinion of the way things should be.<br /><br /><i><br />not only should you gain nothing from the sled with wheels invention, the shoes that another inventor made that help you drag the sled without injury to your feet should be taken away from you too (or made too expensive to acquire).<br /></i><br /><br />And yet, strangely enough, the food, shelter, sanitation, police protection, etc., that kept the inventor alive, healthy, and free long enough to make his contribution are ok for <b>him</b> to lay claim to.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-17591930519119906402014-01-01T10:51:33.093-08:002014-01-01T10:51:33.093-08:00@LarryHart - to add to your metaphor, not only sho...@LarryHart - to add to your metaphor, not only should you gain nothing from the sled with wheels invention, the shoes that another inventor made that help you drag the sled without injury to your feet should be taken away from you too (or made too expensive to acquire).Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-53128978923418347902014-01-01T04:52:45.463-08:002014-01-01T04:52:45.463-08:00Happy Arbitrary Orbital Alignment Day to everyone...Happy Arbitrary Orbital Alignment Day to everyone, and good luck to you and your social and genetic co-investments in the coming new Earth orbit.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-35526349825324982312013-12-31T19:44:14.489-08:002013-12-31T19:44:14.489-08:00Dr Brin:
LarryHart, New Years is the most celebra...Dr Brin:<br /><i><br />LarryHart, New Years is the most celebrated holiday on the planet… and it happens to denote the day of circumcision of a nice Jewish boy…..<br /></i><br /><br />And here I thought that happened on Dec 25. :)<br /><br />Don't mind me. Just trying to have the last post of 2013.<br /><br /><i><br />Tony Fisk: Someone actually read Heaven's Reach? Huzzah! What a lovely New Years' present!<br /></i><br /><br />Hey, next summer I'll do my re-read of that book, bringing to a close a six-consecutive-summer reading of both Uplift trilogies.<br /><br />"See" y'all in 2014.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-44579790525023004062013-12-31T19:30:07.568-08:002013-12-31T19:30:07.568-08:00I agree that by many measures things are improving...I agree that by many measures things are improving. The thing I don't know is how much of the improvement is "paid for" and how much is borrowed from the future.<br /><br />An example: yes, rising standards of living reduce the numbers of very poor people. But, if some of that economic activity is based on dumping carbon dioxide into the air and sea, how many of those formerly very poor people who live on low ground near the sea (there are hundreds of millions of these) will be very poor again, or simply dead, when the water rises? <br /><br />A second example: part of improving education levels requires a minimum number of calories each day. Again in the seaside areas, fish has provided extra protein to bootstrap children and their families to a higher level. But, we've fished the oceans to lower and lower trophic levels. This is another borrowing from the future problem. Will the children of today's fish-nourished schoolkids return to kwashiorkor because the boats are no longer bringing in a catch?<br /><br />I don't have answers to these questions, but I think they're worth considering.Clement Kenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03861060989781345200noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-9643945588849656702013-12-31T15:07:05.756-08:002013-12-31T15:07:05.756-08:00Mind you, as the world's top Keynsian, Krugman...<i>Mind you, as the world's top Keynsian, Krugman is only right about 70% of the time.</i><br /><br />I've seen you state this before, but can't find any time you've expanded upon this statement. I'm curious what 30% you think Krugman is wrong about.<br /><br />In particular, what has Krugman been wrong about that Krugman himself hasn't admitted. I know he was wrong about the deflation he expected, but he admits his model was wrong and looks for explanations why it went wrong. (Probably sticky wages, in this case.)Xactiphynhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08254344563346437079noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-47753354682844351952013-12-31T14:31:42.784-08:002013-12-31T14:31:42.784-08:00Further expounding on the win-win thing I posted a...Further expounding on the win-win thing I posted above...<br /><br />Let's say a metaphor for our society is a group of people on a sled-like object moving about over land. Like a shark, you must move or die. Moving the sled is hard work, and everyone must (literally) pull his weight or else it puts an intolerable burden on everybody else.<br /><br />Now, one of the brighter citizens invents the wheel and axle and affixes them to the sled. Suddenly, the movement of your entire society is a much easier task. Going down slopes requires no work at all, and even most other motion requires no more than a few people to effortlessly push the whole shebang. People have time for rest or leisure activities during which time others are doing the pushing, but even those people are still doing less work than they did before.<br /><br />The fairest thing in the world would be to allow the inventor of the wheel to never have to push again. That concession doesn't much alter the improved circumstances I just mentioned for everyone else.<br /><br />To me and those of my political ilk, it seems the most natural thing in the world that everyone (except the inventor) would continue to do a fair share of pushing, that fair share being much less time and much less effort than it was before.<br /><br />Today's right wing seems to think that the most natural thing in the world is that everyone else still must do as much pushing as they did before. Whatever increased benefits accure (covering more ground, I guess) belong solely to the wheel's inventor. Anyone else doing less work than they had to before is "mooching". And when you've reached capacity--there's just no more work for (say) half of your people to <b>do</b> any more? Those people are non-productive dead-weight and should be abandoned to their fate.<br /><br />Point being, what exactly are civilization and society <b>for</b>?LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43583631179847924772013-12-31T14:02:51.836-08:002013-12-31T14:02:51.836-08:00Hi Dave,
Really good stuff! And it pretty darn po...Hi Dave,<br /><br />Really good stuff! And it pretty darn positive. I was just writing up a diatribe to know one in particular so I thought I would just post it here...<br /><br />An open question to conspiracy theorists:<br /><br />(1) Is the active discrediting of global climate change being directed by a powerful group of people? Is there a philosophical overlap between those people and the ones who insisted smoking tobacco caused no problems to health? <br /><br />(2) Are the Koch Brothers behind the funding of the Tea Party and infiltration of the Occupy Movement? Where is all of their dark funding going?<br /><br />(3) Why is so much money spent on worthless military projects and why do people not complain about massive corporate welfare? Why did we really go to war against Iraq? Why do some individuals want us to go to war against Iran?<br /><br />(4) Is the public familiar with the secrets revealed by Eric Snowden? Why does the public care so little about the revelations? Is the ultimate NSA plan to intercept *all* communication and to analyze everything once the computing power is available? Why didn't the head of the NSA get in trouble for lying at a congressional hearing?<br /><br />(5) Is the way to determine the truth about what is going on to follow the money? Are there are people in the world that have great power and they want to keep it?<br /><br />(6) Do you think that UFOs, HAARP, chemtrails, ghosts, spirits, the hollow earth, angels, demons, gods, MiB, and all other aspects of mythology are a distraction, a shell game, to help keep people from paying attention to what is really going on? <br /><br />(7) Is religion, science denial, anti-intellectual trends, the rising cost of education, control of the media, advertising and the white washing of history all used to keep the people in check and not challenge the status quo?<br /><br />(8) Are you familiar with American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and other groups that set the political agenda in the United Staes and other countries?<br /><br />(9) Did you know the Rupert Murdoch media empire has for many years controlled media in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States? Do you know he used the media to select who was elected and to brainwash the public?<br /><br />(10) Did you know Richard Nixon extended the Vietnam War before being elected President in order to get elected? Did you know Ronald Reagan cut a deal with the Iranians before being elected president in order to be elected? <br /><br />(11) Is there a conspiracy to imprison millions of Americans on silly drug charges, with the added benefit that it keeps "undesirables" from being able to vote? Are there two levels of justice in this country: one for the wealthy and another for the poor?<br /><br />(12) Is there an agenda to keep power in the hands of the rich and powerful? Did the Supreme Court act to bolster the power of corporations via Citizens United to help them be able to control elections? Was the repeal of key parts of the Voting Rights Act done to further reduce the power of the disenfranchised? Is there an coordinated plan to keep certain classes of Americans from being able to vote? What does the power elite fear the public would do if more people voted?<br /><br /><br />I think these are the real conspiracies and I wonder why so few people talk about this agenda.<br /><br />Cheers and Happy New Years,<br />JohnJohn Stantonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16061064350982690350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25929261584701437192013-12-31T08:00:05.024-08:002013-12-31T08:00:05.024-08:00Paul451:
Weirdly, the majority of people are pret...Paul451:<br /><i><br />Weirdly, the majority of people are pretty mundane, and have quite mundane wishes. They want things to be a little bit better, and a little bit fairer. That's about it. All the rest is the ranting and hysteria of tiny minorities.<br /></i><br /><br />In the Reagan years, the right at least touted the premise that "a rising tide raises all boats". The stated goal and justification for Supply Side was not that everyone would be as rich as everyone else, but that everyone would be richer than they had been before. In other words, a win-win situation.<br /><br />They won't adimit it in so many words, but currently, the right wing has dropped that philosophy altogether. The "rising tide" itself is to be perceived as <b>their property</b>. Boats that rise on their tide (without paying royalties for the privilege) are perceived as moochers for "demanding that the government lift their boats."<br /><br />When I was growing up, my dad used to explain the benefits of capitalism--that the inventor of useful things like the telephone or the automobile could get rich off of his invention, but all of society ends up with a higher standard of living because of it. In fact, the two go hand in hand--the better standard of living is what people are paying the inventor <b>for</b>. These days, the right-wing talking points are that it's not enough that people pay the inventor an affordable price which (collecively) makes him wealthy. They must be charged an amount at least equal to <b>all</b> of the increased standard of living they get from the invention. After all, what right do <b>they</b> have to be better off than they were before?<br /><br />Because, to badly mangle Captain Kirk: They don't be<b>lieve</b> in the win-win scenario. LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-16299686142951259942013-12-31T06:22:01.007-08:002013-12-31T06:22:01.007-08:00An interesting critique of TED as "middlebrow...An interesting critique of TED as "middlebrow megachurch infotainment", among other things.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/30/we-need-to-talk-about-ted" rel="nofollow">http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/30/we-need-to-talk-about-ted</a>sociotardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11697154298087412934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-29200378101904672662013-12-31T06:14:12.187-08:002013-12-31T06:14:12.187-08:00Ryan Dancey,
From polling I've seen on social ...Ryan Dancey,<br />From polling I've seen on social and economic issues in the US, I doubt that you would find even 4% that subscribe to either views you claim represents 80%.<br /><br />Weirdly, the majority of people are pretty mundane, and have quite mundane wishes. They want things to be a little bit better, and a little bit fairer. That's about it. All the rest is the ranting and hysteria of tiny minorities.<br /><br />And indeed, the views you claim represent the majority of Americans, are merely the two stereotypes created by one small (far right) minority about itself and its claimed opponents. But like most minority propaganda, it's nonsense.<br /><br />Dave Dorais,<br /><i>"What if we the people, by law transferred ALL emails the the USPS- the Post Office."</i><br /><br />What if we the rest of the world said, "uh no"?<br /><br />[It physically couldn't work. Email is just a protocol. If you taxed it (or charged for it), people would just use a non-taxed alternative protocol.]Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-32379275559478644082013-12-31T02:54:10.849-08:002013-12-31T02:54:10.849-08:00An excellent list of tidbits. Micropayments for co...An excellent list of tidbits. Micropayments for content are the endgame for editorial freedom versus advertising and will be a huge change for the culture. Advertising has been such an integral part of mass culture in the last 150 years that its fall will transform things at least as much as every other change that's transforming mass-culture into multicast-culture. <br /><br />It's important to pick out the long-term issues from the sensationalist dross. The furor over the Utopian dream of Bitcoin somehow "winning" over fiat currency (accompanied by the inevitable flood of comments from the Bitcoin brigade that descend upon any widely read blog that mentions it) simply ignores the dynamics. Bitcoin's infrastructure in micropayments is the only innovation that's actually new. Every other part of the enterprise, the fact that it acts like an asset of pure volatility rather than a currency, the inability of the Bitcoin world to stabilize prices denominated in bc, these are from the bad old days, the worst economic crises of the last 400 years of Western history. They're bugs, not features. Yet it's precisely Bitcoin's failings that are seized upon and promoted by the true believers as its supposed strengths.<br /><br />I hope that your brand of micropayment becomes so much the norm that people will be looking back at the history of media and find advertising quaint, media conglomerates inexcusably oppressive, and be baffled by the obsession so many smart coders of our time have with the idea of a transnational Bitcoiner's Gulch.hilmerahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03338583828053196238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-65474840332923550032013-12-30T22:00:58.445-08:002013-12-30T22:00:58.445-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-32352940558444949842013-12-30T19:12:48.603-08:002013-12-30T19:12:48.603-08:00Ryan Dancey:
40% of the voters of the United Stat...Ryan Dancey:<br /><i><br />40% of the voters of the United States want the government to engage in forcible wealth redistribution, seeking some form of "average" lifestyle for everyone at the expense of the "lavish" lifestyles of the wealthy. They want free healthcare, free education, and a social safety net that includes free food, clothing and housing on demand. They want full employment. And they want industry - specifically banking, manufacturing, and resource extraction to be regulated by, with prices and production quotas set by, some form of collective body with strong governmental representation. They want everyone to belong to a union and they want those unions to actively seek to enact the redistributionist agenda.<br /></i><br /><br />Mischaracterize much?<br /><br />40% of Americans in 1860 probabaly wanted the government to give free stuff to slaves too, right? And another 40% just wanted the government to leave everyone alone, slave and slaveowner alike?<br /><br />But then, as Paul Krugman put it a few weeks ago, you probably root for President Snow against Katniss too.<br /><br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-21915736860440474622013-12-30T19:03:11.570-08:002013-12-30T19:03:11.570-08:00Regarding payment to see/read something on the Net...Regarding payment to see/read something on the Net. What if we the people, by law transferred ALL emails the the USPS- the Post Office. Then let them charge any sender a penny a send. And charge the receiver the same penny. Floods of spam would not cease but the free ride of online junk mailers would be over. Surfing online could still be free aside from ISP access fees. ISPs could then, freed of the email servicing, concentrate on delivering content-news, gossip, education, blogs, apps, business services etc. It would also be a good thing if Congress found the wisdom to repeal the pay ahead onus of health care currently crippling the USPS's bottom line.Dave Doraisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-28192769670669960632013-12-30T16:30:57.739-08:002013-12-30T16:30:57.739-08:0040% of the voters of the United States want the go...40% of the voters of the United States want the government to engage in forcible wealth redistribution, seeking some form of "average" lifestyle for everyone at the expense of the "lavish" lifestyles of the wealthy. They want free healthcare, free education, and a social safety net that includes free food, clothing and housing on demand. They want full employment. And they want industry - specifically banking, manufacturing, and resource extraction to be regulated by, with prices and production quotas set by, some form of collective body with strong governmental representation. They want everyone to belong to a union and they want those unions to actively seek to enact the redistributionist agenda.<br /><br />40% of the voters want a government of the size we had in 1928, if not smaller. They want taxes lowered until they're barely noticeable. They want individuals to rely on private charity when they need help. They want the government to end wealth transfers. They want to shut down government involvement with education, with labor relations, with environmental regulations, and with civil law within the individual States. Basically they want an army, a navy, and a highway commission, and not much else.<br /><br />These two blocs have diametrically opposed views of what it means to succeed in the context of running the government. And they are becoming more, not less concentrated. Between these two blocs any change is a zero-sum game; one bloc must lose for the other bloc to win.<br /><br />Unless one party (bloc) controls the House, Senate, Presidency and 5 Supreme Court justices, we are going to have gridlock. In a gridlocked environment, the only change possible is minute and on the margin. So we have become a nation of marginal politics. <br /><br />This situation is inherently unstable because we got half of the wealth distribution bloc's desires - the payments. They did not succeed in getting the other half - the receipts. Without a huge gusher of new tax dollars flooding the government we will be unable to pay the bills for the wealth transfer programs. This used to be a "someday maybe" problem. Now it is a problem that will begin to bite in 2016, and by 2020 will consume every moment of every day of the Congress.<br /><br />How is this not a recipe for revolution? Just under half the country will feel utterly betrayed if they don't get what they want. They'll feel the American System, as an institution, has fundamentally failed. Either way, 40% of the population will believe the End Times are Upon Us.<br /><br />David Brin, what's your road out of that swamp?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07835160507477347646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-76813855769097034442013-12-30T13:51:36.873-08:002013-12-30T13:51:36.873-08:00Rob sorry, but you are wrong on all counts:
1) mo...Rob sorry, but you are wrong on all counts:<br /><br />1) most people will not demand their nickel back if 1) the article was okay and they would have to actually interrupt their surf flow in order to demand a nickel. And (20 if there were a slow-gradual reputation effect upon you if you greedily reclaim all nickels.<br /><br />2) If you have not run into the lefty response to good news then you hide in a bunker or are willfully ignoring it. It is everywhere and utterly pervasive. Experiment around your lefty friends and start talking about all the ways things are better… only Mildly mentioning that the world still has problems and NOT weighting the deck linguistically.<br /><br />Mark, the left would claim that it is wishy washy liberals who are compromising with the banking biz. Whatever. Rent INSIDE JOB and share it with friends.<br /><br />Alex you raise the core question about micropayments without passwords, and the secret sauce has an answer! ;-)<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-53575013169933160512013-12-30T13:32:08.717-08:002013-12-30T13:32:08.717-08:00"One click and you send them a nickel and rea...<i>"One click and you send them a nickel and read… AND you get to say "that turned out to be baloney" and take your nickel back!"</i><br /><br />That is interesting. That might work as there may well be some mental (or other) barrier or other "task payment", to get the refund. Maybe it is just my good will, but I paid for an online legal answers service, and did not ask for a refund even though the advice was useless. I just simply never used the service again.<br /><br />One obvious issue with such a system is what happens if your browser is hijacked? Can you be sure that you can protect against this, because even Google's Adwords is nowhere near tamper proof. Is the security system all worked out, because as you've said yourself, control of information is nigh impossible. Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.com