That’s one of the problems.

The other problem is that the billionaires want to use AI to make censorship and kill decisions (see Palantir) to lock up their olygarchy.

It’s winter here, and I wear two or three layers with a sweater on top, because I am saving electricity.

We’ll have ourselves our first trillionaire, and silly me hates all the people with 500mil+ net worth, and their bootlickers.

My point is that what you are saying is simply a convention that for most of us made sense for a long time.

I contend there do exist conditions under which that convention goes away. And at bottom we are all capable of violence.

Doesn’t triangulation depend on an antenna that broadcasts 360°?

If the signal is silent in most of the space most of the time, it won’t be easy to find.

Let’s say it transmits a directed 5° beam to 278° for 1 sec, then random seconds later to 96° for a sec, then after a random interval a beam to 28°, that won’t be fun to look for. Then after an hour of this it rests for 5 (also randomized) hours, while a different transmitter elsewhere takes over.

Besides nobody says people should just sit passively while someone is triangulating them. We have been damn obedient all this time because we believed in the system. What if that belief goes away? Is everyone going to just volunteer obedience? Even if only a few break the norms, while the majority supports those resisters, at some point it will be too costly for the olygarchs to keep raping their way to trillions damned be the bottom 99.9%. The fucks have been ruling us on the back of a buy in from us. Only.

Not if Elmo owns all the sattelites, then it won’t be the Internet.

Nobody has a monopoly on violence.

Might does not make right. But might does make policy.

The good people need wisdom and might, both. Then we will set policy and it won’t suck.

The world has to work for all its denizens and not just for the “top” (only in some sense, not in every sense) 0.01%.

I don’t want to build a gallows from which I myself will be hanged. I am not a masochist. I don’t hate myself.

Yes, yes, yes.

And drastically reform or reimagine all the IP laws.

Copyright: 5 years, one optional 5 year extension.

Patents: 5 years, no extensions. No business methods, no algorithms, no gene expressions.

Owned only by the individual humans and groups of humans. Cannot be owned by trusts, funds, corporations, estates. Cannot outlive the last human owner in a group.

All licensing is non-exclusive only! All licensing is irreversible (once you license out the patent non-exclusively, no way to halt midway through the licensing term).

That way pattents cannot be hoarded by the patent troll entities. Since all exclusive agreements are forbidden, no way to corner the market! Inventors are free to license their inventions all over and cannot be strong armed into an exclusive deal.

In other words, ownerships, paywalls, and corporate control must be severely curtailed.

I can get used to the billionaires begging me.

Patent trolls.

Any universe has at least one sentient being.

Rights aren’t circumstantial. How people are treated IS circumstantial. Rights as a concept is not about outcomes. Rights is what is rightly DUE. Rights get violated all the time. That means we tresspass on the minimums that are due. Someone is due privacy, but we spy/surveil them instead. Rights are worth defending. Without defending, rights will get violated. Whether we defend rights or not, they exist as defined. Anyone can just start defending rights at any time, and it doesn’t mean you’re building rights at that time.

It’s like counting. Whether you count or not, number 3 exists as a distinct meaning. Rights are like that. Rights exist and have meaning. You can even live a million lifetimes and not know a damn thing about rights in all that time, and this would not negate rights any more than if even every sentient being stopped counting and forgot counting negated numerical concepts. Counting concepts exist, are real, are ever available, and their use can be resumed at any time.

Let the unregulated “free” (for some!) market ruled by the winners decide.

The billionaires are the winners and the deciders that our wonderful free market system has given us.

/s

Rights as a concept I described correctly.

I have my interests and my dignity. I prosecute my interests. Where did I get all that from? Interests and dignity, what is that if not another way to describe rights? The fact that I will prosecute and defend those regardless of your opinion, what is that? Rights again.

When we say Nature “gives” we don’t mean it transfers something to us. It’s just a way of saying we have some qualities or properties as beings by way of simply us being what we are. In this case “gives” is not literal.

As for Gods not being real, I won’t bother arguing for God being real in the interests of time. I purposely included Nature as an alternative to God.

Here’s one of the best traders talking about the same issue:

https://invidious.nerdvpn.de/watch?v=bMK8ct6ybjQ&t=1918

It’s eloquent and funny at the same time.

I included a timestamp to jump (almost) directly to the most relevant bit (also 33m, but 31m sets up a better context for an extra 2min of time compared to going directly to the 33m mark). But the whole video is worth watching.

Yes, Krugman is a hack.

Rights always exist. They come from God or Nature. Our fellow men either respect or ignore those rights. But even ignoring a right or disrespecting it doesn’t make the right just vanish.

It is not our fellows who give us rights. Nor can our fellows take them away.

No, don’t challenge the state. The state is too weak as is.

Challenge the billionaires who buy our government instead.

Decouple billionaires from politics.

Give the government teeth and an appetite to regularly and often target billionaires.

Selective enforcement.

But they will kick back to me 30% of a fat contract. And when things go south I will blame Deloitte. So why would I change my highly lucrative for me behavior?

I won’t.

I think these consulting firms exist to help the upper/top management to embezzle money and to shield them from personal responsibility (“Deloitte said so, I could only follow this industry standard guidance, don’t ask me why every project has crashed, lol”).

Who said “have to?”

Can.

We can just acquiesce. That’s always an option.

As for coercion, it’s a spectrum. Killing the bags of bones is only one small slice of that spectrum.

Regardless. Conflicts of interests exist. Coercion exists. We can just try to sleep through it all and hope for the best hopium. Or we can do the adult thing. Admit reality. Prosecute our interests vigorously and sophisticatedly.

We have some thinking to do. I prefer there aren’t any simpleminded and naive folks around me. Being honest about what’s happening is better than our usual game of hopium, copium, fig leaves, whitewashing, and sleeping.

Imagine if every muscle cell in my biceps wanted to self-actualize. I want to grab a cup of coffee, but every muscle cell in my arms has their own ideas. Something that normally takes a second, now takes 10 years of negotiations. It would not do me a lick of good if I had the strongest muscle cells in existence if I could not control them.

Of course people should not be regarded as mere muscle cells, but the point here is to show how obviously valuable and vital control can be when you want to serve some ambition.

Should workers be controlled like they are soldiers?

Whose interests does the business prioritize? And how heavily?

In a worker cooperative workers are the owners. Workers hire and fire their managers at every level of management. All power flows are bottom up. The workers are the entourage. In this case workers are better positioned to self-actualize, because there is no capricious, lazy, ignorant, spoiled silky pants tyrant at the top.

But what about a more typical business? Well, there is either one owner or a tiny cabal of owners, and everyone else is just a resource, a means to an end. And you have to exert control over the means of labor to benefit the entourage at the top. If the entourage can figure out how to produce things without workers, they will get rid of them immedeately, why? Because the workers are just a means, they are incidental, they exist because slavery was deemed too toxic, and because no one figured out a way to get rid of the workers yet. That’s the only reason workers exist in capitalism.

Managers want to give orders and see those orders followed immediately. They don’t want debates, challenges, counter proposals, etc. If workers want to self-actualize, that’s a huge problem for a top down power flow. That’s why it is essential to beat the desire to self-actualize out of workers early. That way mindless servility is assured, which is good for control.

Also, if your workers work 80 hour weeks, they won’t start competing ventures in their spare time. Again, control.

I kinda feel sorry for all the workers out there, because self-actualization is a heavenly mandate for every sentient being, and yet they are plugged into and slotted into a structure where worker (out group) self-actualization is a huge obstacle for the (in group) entourage.

Getting everyone happy can be a slow and messy process. What if you make weapons and your workers decide it is unethical to make weapons? You are a manager of youtube and you order workers to censor channels for entourage’s benefit, but they have their own ideas, and they pretend to be censoring while actually not censoring? There is no end to such possibilities. Hence why the soul of many people MUST be crushed if the top down power flow is to be served in full measure.

Every so often there is an oddball manager like Ricardo Semler. But Ricardo Semler is the exception.