A Curated Content Blog of Current Links and Past Events
“I didn’t want to feed my soul into a machine. That was my first instinct when AI tools started appearing everywhere – not concern about jobs or privacy, but something deeper.
These tools promise to make us smarter while systematically making us more dependent.”
https://www.zerohedge.com/ai/ai-inevitability-human-sovereignty
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvaf7XOOFHc
The Munk Debate on the Mainstream Media was held on November 30, 2022. The resolution to be debated was, “Be it resolved, don’t trust the mainstream media.” On the PRO side of the debate were Douglas Murray (The Spectator) and Matt Taibbi (TK News on Substack). On the CON side of the debate were Malcolm ‘Malc’ Gladwell (The New Yorker, Revisionist History) and Michelle Goldberg (The New York Times). At the beginning of the debate, 48% voted in favour of the resolution, while 52% voted against the resolution. At the end of the debate, 67% voted in favour of the resolution, while 33% voted against it, representing a 39% switch to the PRO side, the biggest switch in Munk history.
I got to say it’s a fun app.
Key takeaways
Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin gain value from factors like scarcity, utility and security, not physical backing.
Common methods to calculate intrinsic worth of a cryptocurrency include Metcalfe’s Law, cost of production and discounted utility models.
Estimating intrinsic value is challenging due to market volatility and speculative data.Fiat currencies have no intrinsic value, relying on trust, while cryptocurrencies’ value is based on decentralization and scarcity.Intrinsic value refers to the actual worth of an asset based on its fundamental characteristics, rather than its market price. For example, in traditional finance, the intrinsic value of a stock is often derived from factors such as earnings, cash flow and growth potential.
Source: Intrinsic Value Of Crypto: What Is It & How To Calculate It | ZeroHedge
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/great-thanksgiving-hoax
“In the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622, “all had their hungry bellies filled,” but only briefly. The prevailing condition during those years was not the abundance the official story claims, it was famine and death. The first “Thanksgiving” was not so much a celebration as it was the last meal of condemned men.
“But in subsequent years something changes. The harvest of 1623 was different. Suddenly, “instead of famine now God gave them plenty,” Bradford wrote, “and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God.” Thereafter, he wrote, “any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day.” In fact, in 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists were able to begin exporting corn.
“What happened? After the poor harvest of 1622, writes Bradford, “they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop.” They began to question their form of economic organization.
“This had required that “all profits & benefits that are got by trade, traffic, trucking, working, fishing, or any other means” were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, “all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock.” A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take only what he needed.
“This “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” was an early form of socialism, and it is why the Pilgrims were starving. Bradford writes that “young men that were most able and fit for labor and service” complained about being forced to “spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children.” Also, “the strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes, than he that was weak.” So the young and strong refused to work and the total amount of food produced was never adequate.
“To rectify this situation, in 1623 Bradford abolished socialism.
“He gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit. In other words, he replaced socialism with a free market, and that was the end of the famines.
“Many early groups of colonists set up socialist states, all with the same terrible results. At Jamestown, established in 1607, out of every shipload of settlers that arrived, less than half would survive their first twelve months in America. Most of the work was being done by only one-fifth of the men, the other four-fifths choosing to be parasites. In the winter of 1609–10, called “The Starving Time,” the population fell from five-hundred to sixty. Then the Jamestown colony was converted to a free market, and the results were every bit as dramatic as those at Plymouth.
Elon’s brain in a catapult
Elon’s just another guy. He slipped into a fast moving stream and rode the wave at the right time. That was his smartest move to date. Except for the US Defense contracts, his companies all lose money. But that’s nothing new in the Tech industry.
Read the whole article at source: https://futurism.com/space/elon-musk-catapult-moon