Video Of The Week: A Reminder

As the US government thinks about regulating big tech and constraining crypto-currencies, I think a reminder about the value of open markets and freedom to innovate is important.


Comments (Archived):

  1. Tom Labus

    Well said!!

  2. William Mougayar

    Why do governments do the opposite of what’s logically good for the countries they are supposed to serve? It happens over and over again, all over the world.

    1. pointsnfigures


      1. William Mougayar

        Power corrupts and shows off one’s real character, just as money does too.

    2. Gayatri Sarkar

      Because they like to screw things as they listen mostly to lobbyists.

    3. Matt A. Myers

      It’s because there are people who though have good intentions, who are blind to the actual impact of what they’re trying to implement is different than what will unfold in reality – whether due to their own ignorance, bias (vested interest or otherwise), or their critical thinking ability limiting their scope of understanding.Logic, interesting you mentioning it as in my current draft longer reply to this I touch on this – logic is different than empathy and compassion, the nuances; logically Mark Zuckerberg knew where his actions would lead – morally, ethically, and external costs wise he didn’t care however – and look where that’s helped accelerate society towards, giving less time for a response from society to deal with the externalities – empowering bad actors that only those who were thoughtful would foresee, like the original group who were going to launch an online version of The Facebook that the university had been already doing in print.Logic is efficient that is lacking important nuances of outcome. Bitcoin et al will rapidly rally people through financially incentivizing people globally, and in a decentralized way, however its leading metric is greed and manipulation via hype. That’s not naturally how systems safely expand and scale, it’s instead stemming from the insanity of the ego mind and greed – stemming from scarcity mindset vs. abundance mindset. You can’t force trust or collaboration, and incentivizing collaboration through a Ponzi-Pyramid scheme structure is greed driven – and frankly it just doesn’t feel safe because it isn’t safe with how greed influences behaviour.

    4. JLM

      .There is not a single issue facing our government that does not have strong advocates on both sides.When these ideas clash in the legislative forum, one hopes that every viewpoint is represented in the debate. The harsh reality is that lobbyists, electoral politics, and money begin to put their thumb on the scales of justice and judicious thought from the very beginning.One has only to look at the current 2020 Dem primary — still six months out from the first actual votes — to see how far afield politicians will wander in the process of being elected. It is a circus.Because of this clash of ideas there will always be some segment involved in any intellectual confrontation who will come away disappointed in the outcome.s Simple numbers. Not everybody gets to go home with Prom Queen/King.I serve up as Exhibit #1 the continuing inability of persons to accept the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election as an example of being intellectual immature sufficiently not to recognize simple reality. There are some very smart people who are acting like babies and who are really not all that smart.There will always be winners and losers.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      1. Salt Shaker

        “Intellectual immaturity”…that’s rich JLM. Seriously, if I’m saddled with a guy who I didn’t vote for, I nonetheless most def want him to succeed. Why would I want him or her to fail? How does that legit serve my interests? Just because someone was elected doesn’t mean they get a free pass to unconditionally govern they way they like. They should be held accountable w/ legit checks and balances that, unfortunately, no longer apply. Politics run amuck. Some systems allow for a no confidence vote w/ their elected officials, sadly ours doesn’t. It’s fundamentally a 4-year contract w/ out severance terms.

        1. JLM

          .The English language — which gives us the word “amok” — does not contain the words to express how deeply I disagree with your utterance.One has only to look at the current state of legislature to know that the system of checks and balances is hard at work, exactly as designed by the Founding Fathers.Once done there — studying the Congress and its Senate and House — take a peek at the judiciary which has Federal District Judges making rulings that impact the entire country. Why make districts if they are really nationwide fiefdoms?No, the system of checks and balances is working exactly as it was intended. One has only to look to the House of Representatives that has thwarted the White House at every step in the pursuit of a wall on our Southern border (something they all supported just a few years ago) and their ability to cooperate on legislation such as the First Step Act.While I may personally decry the result, that is the way the system is supposed to work. The House is supposed to oppose stuff and thwart stuff they don’t like, and, conversely, applaud and support stuff they do like.We, the voters, will grade them come Nov 2020. If we find their opposition to The Wall to be intransigent, then we will vote somebody else into their jobs. Again, the way the system is supposed to work.People are not accepting the outcome of the SCOTUS decisions.Most recently, Sen Whitehouse filed and defended an amazingly stupid brief — he a representative of a co-equal branch of government — with the SCOTUS threatening them with reorganization if they didn’t abandon their recent conservative tilt.It displayed a remarkable lack of knowledge as to how our co-equal branches are supposed to work together.We absolutely have a no confidence vote. That is planned for Nov 2020. You should look into it.There is also the impeachment process whereunder the House of Representatives may prefer charges of “high crimes and [high] misdemeanors” thereby acting like a grand jury based on a simple majority and submitting their beef to the Senate to conduct a trial requiring a 2/3s majority.If your complaint is pure, the logic correct — tee it up.What we do not have is a system that allows the losers to repudiate the winners because the losers want to because they don’t like election outcomes.You are structurally wrong when you suggest that “motions of no confidence” focus on the President. In fact, motions of no confidence are exclusively focused on the government, the executive branch. An entire government falls, not just the President.Countries like Australia, Canada, Germany, England, India, Italy, Japan, Pakistan, South Africa, Spain, and Sweden — countries with Parliaments with upper and lower houses have had a long history of no confidence motions.Almost every one of them has failed. Indira Ghandi of India was subjected to 15 votes of no confidence — every single one was defeated.This is a perfect example of lazy observers spouting nonsense without actually knowing how such things work.We are a collectively lazy nation led around by the nose by the dishonest media.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          1. Salt Shaker

            In theory, everything you state is true. In reality, the system hardly adheres to anything close to ethics, morality, healthy debate, etc., only partisan politics. Look no further than Mitch McConnell’s unwillingness to bring a Supreme Court nomination and dozens of pending bills for a floor vote, many the voting public wholeheartedly embraces. All rigged to appease a partisan agenda. How do you justify Mitch saying now he’d gladly bring a SC Justice vote to the floor if a position became avail before expiration of the current Presidential term, when he used the same logic for a no-vote on Merrick Garland?? Curious to hear your justification on that. There is no justification, just party bs and rigging.

          2. JLM

            .This is where we diverge — you say the “system” while I say the “people”, the Senators, the Congress persons (see what i did there?). It is the people who are not operating the system correctly.We have people like Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, Diane Feinstein, Orrin Hatch, Dan Young — note these are both Republicans and Democrats — who are accomplishing NOTHING. I am totally bi-partisan.The Nancy Pelosi led House has done nothing but oppose Trump legislation and investigate Trump — to which I say BRAVO! I say this because I think it will turn out to be huuuuuuuge at the ballot box in 2020.Guys like John Dingell served for 59 yearsStrom Thurmond — 46 yearsTeddy Kennedy — 46 yearsOrrin Hatch — 42 yearsFor the record, the longest serving Senators and House members have been overwhelmingly Dems. Not even close.These fossils needed to go at the halfway point of their tenure. It is an obvious problem — Hell, the misguided Dems are looking to a 77 year old Joe Biden, who has been in government for most of his life, who has been the “system” for his entire tenure, for FRESH, NEW IDEAS.He is the “before” that the rest of the Dems rail against in their quest to deliver a new tomorrow. He is the problem, not the solution.Why does everyone think that politics is not partisan?I think you and others confuse partisanship or differences of governing philosophy with bi-partisan legislature.I totally applaud Mitch McConnell’s use of the rules of the Senate for any lawful purpose consistent with the powers imbued in his office, Majority Leader of the Senate. If you don’t want to give the Majority Leader certain powers, then deny them to him, but don’t bitch if he uses the powers given to him.If you give a position powers, you cannot cry foul when the person exercises them.If you embrace certain powers — talking to you, Harry Reid — don’t bitch when the next guy uses them in a similar manner. Goose meet gander.The governance point is very clear — Mitch McConnell felt that the addition of Merrick Garland to the then composition of the SCOTUS would tilt it in a liberal direction. To follow one’s governing philosophy is not partisan. It is just politics. It is why the state of Kentucky sent him there; it is why his colleagues gave him the gavel. It is simple politics, governance politics.As it turns out, Pres Trump’s legacy will be founded on moving the SCOTUS slightly more conservative. Today it stands slightly conservative, say 5-4. Before Trump leaves office it will be 6-3 and stay there for 30 years. It may become 7-2.Nothing wrong with that.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          3. sigmaalgebra

            Yup. Second week in US middle school Civics.I regard Nasty Nancy as a disaster, but the voters of San Francisco — “hurry up, get it while it’s still free on the streets, The San Francisco Treat, human excrement mixed with needles, opioids, HIV, hepatitis, measles, and tuberculosis” — and the House Democrats voted her Speaker. In 2020 we will see how the voting citizens react.Nancy likes all immigrants — maybe she will help import Ebola??? ISIS???

          4. Salt Shaker

            “This is a perfect example of lazy observers spouting nonsense without actually knowing how such things work.”Just for the record, 11 PM’s have been removed by a no-confidence vote in the UK. Spain and Sweden’s PM’s were both ousted in 2018. Yes, not very common, but no-confidence generally has a chance of succeeding in multi-party gov’ts. Our fundamental two-party binary system is a disaster. Wasn’t always the case, but certainly is now.

          5. JLM

            .Thin gruel, amigo.First, all bets are off with England — they are a centuries old monarchy (except for that lapse with that bastard Cromwell) with a House of Lords and a House of Commons, for goodness sake.Comparing anything in the realm of governance to that convoluted governing setup is nonsense. The Prime Minister can call for elections and a vote of no confidence is often used as a stratagem as an alternative to force that election.Spain, by its 1978 revised constitution placed the King of Spain (our pal Felipe VI) as head of the government. The Spanish King is literally the head of state, the commander in chief.Why is this important?Because the power succession is hereditary. You don’t get to elect the King of Spain. It is a crap shoot in the gene pool. Worth noting that this monarchy goes back to the Holy Roman Empire.I refuse to comment on Sweden. That would be piling on.We do not have a “fundamental two-party binary system.” That phrase should offend your former English teachers for its total lack of clarity and redundancy.We have a constitutional, bi-cameral, representative republic with three co-equal branches that provide a check and balance on each other.Doing nothing, even thwarting the noble undertakings of a President, is baked into that cake. The delicate system of having a House that presents its bona fides every two years for the voters’ inspection, a Senate that stands before their constituents every six years, and a President who vies for office every four years is nothing short of genius as evidenced by the enviable fact that we have changed governments peacefully more than two centuries.What we do have is a bunch of elderly, ideological, control freaks who have stayed too long, accomplished too little, and who need to be put out to a pasture with deep grass.In that instance, the low voter turnout of the citizenry is the culprit. We get the government we get off our collective asses to vote for. If people stay wrapped in their comforters and don’t vote then my vote is more powerful. (Not an altogether bad thing, in my view.)JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      2. William Mougayar

        But is this related to the elections?You had me in your first 2 paragraphs, but you lost me after that.

    5. jason wright

      Country amounts to everything, but government is organised by division, by departments. Each one is concerned with its own particular remit and issues. There’s no way to effectively coordinate for the greater good.

      1. William Mougayar

        Few governments are very efficient at what they do, sadly.

        1. jason wright

          Yes, but they are expert at perpetuating themselves, and that may be their number one priority. Much of what government has to say is public relations waffle. The smaller the government the better off are the governed.

  3. Chris Phenner

    That tap at the end (‘and…scene’); it will never get old.

  4. pointsnfigures

    https://johnhcochrane.blogs… this fits with your statement on crypto. governments don’t do enough positioning of policy like this either

  5. Mike

    Freedom, fair and functioning judiciary, legal, banking system, capital markets, democracy, free press

  6. jdrive

    Remember that day like it was last week. So long ago now.

  7. Gayatri Sarkar

    How old is this video? How can I hear the entire video?

    1. jason wright

      It’s quite old. I remember it from some years ago.

  8. JLM

    .As a guy who had skin in the game in protecting our freedom, I cannot applaud enough the recognition that the USA is a country in which freedom underpins our culture.It is what makes US different from THEM. It is the fundamental difference.In fact, we fought a bloody revolution for freedom and won it at the tip of bloody bayonets fighting what was the most powerful country in the world, the largest and most professional army/navy in the world and we — with some substantial assistance from France — whipped their asses.Nobody gave us freedom. We took it. We revolted against a tyrant and took our freedom. That is in our DNA.It did not come easy and our countrymen died to make it so. I wonder how many folks reading this blarney would drop their plow, take up their musket, and get into the fight. I wonder if we are still those patriots?But, I caution us not to wrap ourselves in the flag and shout “freedom” in the face of every controversy that faces us.The freedom that we enjoy is a personal freedom granted by God to us individually and “unalienable.” Our government does not grant us our freedom. All it does is recognize it and enshrine it in the documents that created this country and by which it is governed.It is not a freedom for corporations or organizations or business interests to do whatever the Hell they want. There is no recitation in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence granting those same individual freedoms to corporations or organizations.When one talks about “free” markets, that is an economic theory, not a recitation of something in the Constitution or Declaration of Independence.We — through our constitutional, bicameral, representative republic — legislate how such entities must behave. It is a police power that we the individual, several states grant to the “united” states by specific recitation in the Constitution.Let’s keep it real and if you slept through history class, read the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. Don’t over play the freedom card.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

    1. Matt A. Myers

      Using the freedom card is most often used as a platitude when there’s no other substance to other arguments presented, platitudes inherently being the weakest of arguments only attempting to sway people emotionally.

      1. JLM

        .”Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel,” sayeth Samual Johnson on 7 April 1775.It is not a new idea.Many times a government is required to protect its citizens from corporations, businesses, organizations who would harm citizens.The freedoms of the individual are superior to the economic theory of free markets. Markets should be free within the legitimate police powers of the government.In any clash of free markets and the rights of citizens enshrined in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence must be decided in favor of the citizens.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        1. sigmaalgebra

          The freedoms of the individual are superior to the economic theory of free markets. Markets should be free within the legitimate police powers of the government.In any clash of free markets and the rights of citizens enshrined in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence must be decided in favor of the citizens.EXCELLENT short civics lesson. Lots of people could be fuzzy or wrong on this inequality or try to fool people who were!Quite broadly China is missing this respect for the individual.

    2. Salt Shaker

      This weekend is the 50th anniversary of Woodstock, an event embellished w/ time and on the back of a well done documentary film. Richie Havens, the 1st performer at Woodstock, sang about Freedom and that “sometimes I (he) feels like a motherless child.” The metaphor is as apt today as it was then. Gov’t is only as good as those who are in charge. Back in the late 60’s we were saddled with liars, not the harmless kind, but the life threatening kind. Today may be a bit different, too early to say, but confidence in our govt’s decision making abilities to do the right thing is, nonetheless, highly questionable.

      1. Matt A. Myers

        It’s why I love Andrew Yang’s championing $1,000 / month to every adult American – let people vote with their dollars. The most efficient systems using automation, technology, will get more and more money funnelled towards them – allowing their systems and organizational structures continued stream of revenues for innovation – leading towards “$1,000” / month having an exponential increase in buying power.

        1. JLM

          .Haha, let people vote with THEIR dollars?He wants to let people vote with the dollars of the doers, the makers, the productive. Not quite THEIR dollars.Innovation is the realm of the doers. The doers don’t need $1000 of somebody else’s money to be doers. Doers can’t help but to do.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          1. Rick Mason

            Anytime you hear a politician talk about taking from the rich substitute the words ‘job creators’ for ‘rich’ and see if the sentence still makes sense. More often than not it won’t.

          2. JLM

            .I agree more with you than you do with yourself.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          3. Matt A. Myers

            Dude, are you really being this narrow minded?VAT is a tax that is to be paid in order for ANY COMPANY, ANYWHERE in the world to sell products and services to Americans – to have access to that market.It is FIRST society’s money – of which these current products and services are built on the “shoulders of all before us.”E.g. If you want access to “OUR MARKET” – you agree to return “10%” to society. It’s simplest equation and foundation possible. Conservatives should be loving it – government is just role of collecting and distributing the resources, and no worrying about badly or inefficiently managed agencies for that money to first funnel through.Doers need a healthy, stable society – else it leads to war and tyranny, we know this for fact. Doers MAKE MORE MONEY if people are healthier.It’s not rocket science.You understand the idea of counter-productivity too, right? And you understand the idea of minimum amount of resources/money you need to survive, right?I think you have a bit of Fred’s close-mindedness, not allowing your logic of different ideas to connect to your other logic pathways – so you can see these conclusions are illogical, wrong.

          4. JLM

            .You disqualify your rant by suggesting that MY money is SOCIETY’S money.It is not.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          5. Matt A. Myers

            You’re not getting out of the conversation that easily! :)You’re scoping too narrowly still – gatekeeping of what time period is valid to include in the conversation.You were born into the society – as were your parents, as to whether you started off with inheritance or not – otherwise you earned whatever money you had which was society’s money before – using roads, existing infrastructure and technology – to gain what you have today, and were only able to do so because that infrastructure and technology already existed.Let’s say there is debt you owe to society for this – and I imagine you consider that taxes you pay is paying that debt, right? But the problem is – due to technology and economies of scale – companies that get bigger than you, like Amazon – unless you lead a double-life and are actually Jeff Bezos; invest $1B in me if so – aren’t paying their debt, their taxes, for using the infrastructure that they require in order to be able to operate.Maybe you just need to go to an Ayahuasca ceremony with me to break open your mind a little bit – it’s can be good for Alzheimer’s-dementia, arthritic pains as well, in case that’s a current or growing concern for you as you age; Ayahuasca is legal in Canada by the way, and also the US, with registered native or church groups.

          6. JLM

            .Can’t do it, Mattie. Had Ayahuasca for brunch yesterday.One thing I can assure you is NOT happening is me and Ayahuasca. But, I could be wrong.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          7. Matt A. Myers

            Sorry to see you giving up on the discussion.

          8. Matt A. Myers

            Here’s a video compilation I just stumbled upon between Mark Cuban and Andrew Yang re: UBI –

      2. JLM

        .Government is only as good as who WE put in charge.The voting penetration the American citizenry is abysmal. We have nobody to blame for government other than ourselves.Still, when we have an election, Americans should recognize the results and move on.We are a nation of whiners unable to accept the results of reality.I think there has been a healthy distrust of government since Washington left office. That is why the Seond Amendment was drafted the way it was. It provided the opportunity for a Second American Revolution.With all of our flaws, whining, victimhood — we can take comfort it is still the best system in the world.Those Founding Fathers were smart as Hell.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        1. sigmaalgebra

          “Those Founding Fathers were smart as Hell.”Yup. Apparently they fully understood duplicity, greed, graft, manipulation, exploitation, lying — not nearly new.

      3. awaldstein

        I do not think today’s government is any less pernicious, more potentially.

        1. Salt Shaker

          “Pernicious” is a perfect word. With war, it’s easy to see a cause/effect correlation. With decimation of climate change, environmental protection, etc., it’s more of a longterm play, with damage playing out over time. You could be right re: more potentially. You had DJT pegged right out of the gate, I wrongly assumed there’d be some semblance of checks and balances.

    3. Tom Labus

      This is gaslightening on steroids. Jeff is supporting the GRU dupe in the US

      1. JLM

        .Haha, I love that Tom. You have a way with words.Jeff is calling bullshit on people who are hustling a buck telling the rest of us that it is an exercise in freedom when it is an exercise in greed and a thumb of the nose to fair regulation — why? Because they said so.If anybody wants to change the system, change the damn system and stop whining about how your pathway to riches being a little rocky is an abuse of freedom.As to the “GRU dupe” — Hell, they couldn’t even find that the old boy had eaten Russian dressing or been to the Russian Tea Room after turning loose the entire power of the FBI/DOJ — come on, man.There are plenty of things in the policy realm for smart folks to disagree about, but the idea that Pres Trump is a Russian agent is not one of them.I would tell you to fight fair, but it is probably more important to say, “Fight intelligently.”Be well, amigo.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      2. sigmaalgebra

        “Dupe”? I assume you mean POTUS Trump? Who the heck has a signal wire inserted between your two ears? Or, where’s the evidence? You have been listening to Fauxcahontas, AOC, Bozo Beto, the Hollywood/TV Meathead, late night comics, Mika and Joe, the NYT?

    4. jason wright

      Home field advantage. Playing away is a whole other ball game, as you know full well from personal experience, the kind of experience i would not want to experience.Free is often very cheap, but freedom very costly. You’re right to make the clear distinction. ‘Well played’.

      1. JLM

        .In the end, the business of ensuring freedom is a very messy, but simple business. George Orwell got it right:”We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.”Having been in that line of work, I can assure you there are no subtleties. Our job was simple when it came to the bad guys — “Find them, fix them (meaning keep them from squirming away), kill them.”That ignoble, violent sentiment is what delivers the freedoms we live. Taken to the extreme, is why venture capital works — we are a free people able to allocate capital freely to make bets on engines of production and reap the benefits because rough men in the shadows will prevent anyone from taking that freedom from us.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

    5. William Mougayar

      What part of this post overplayed freedom?Or were you being generic?

  9. Matt A. Myers

    Confusing the argument by convoluting big tech with crypto-“currencies” is at minimum dirty.The financial transaction layer is perhaps the most important transactional layer we regulate – save for open, free communications – of which transactions would be a layer of. Protecting society from Pyramid-Ponzi scheme structures is equally important.The joke to invest in anything that China bans is cute but a shallow distraction from the long-form argument that no pro-Bitcoin ally or cheerleader like Fred reaches – keeping the scope narrow enough to allow their rally call to not seem insane, greedy.It’s disingenuous and intellectually dishonest – perhaps scoped by bias, unwillingness to explore to see the full picture because its inevitable endgame realization – to ignore that China wants to control not only their currency but information via censorship capabilities.China wants to control their society including financial transactional layers – they’re not banning owning Bitcoin et al for their inherent Ponzi-Pyramid scheme structure; they also have allowed mining to continue – to extract $ from the gullible tricked by hype, the greedy, and undereducated by using their cheap electricity sources.The hole all of these pro-Bitcoin people have dug themselves into by ignoring and dismissing the logic presented by myself and others, simply choosing to be angry about it (now projecting their anger to regulators who “just don’t understand” and who they’re putting concerted effort to influence, e.g. regulatory capture) – perhaps not realizing their own bias and indoctrination, how deeply financially deep they are into their own willful ignorance, blinded by greed and their own hype/excitement at the possibility of how amazing the world could be if only we financially incentivized everyone, aligned everyone to join their flavour of Ponzi-Pyramid scheme. I get it – I see that exciting pattern too, how the army of HODLers builds stronger the longer it goes – and greater the more newcomers with losses there are – which then rallies more and more people to being incentivized together in its adoption.This structure in a democratic society is extremely dangerous because once enough people are embedded in politics who are “pro Bitcoin et al” – or enough voters in place who are financially interested in Bitcoin et al being adopted by – and probably even forced to adopt Bitcoin et al at some point – so the earliest adopters can realize their “profits” by unreasonably, unnecessarily transferring wealth from later adopters weighted towards the earliest adopters.Parading around the patriotic platitude of “freedom” and “freedom to innovate” is a seriously weak argument; @JLM:disqus says it more eloquently – “Don’t over play the freedom card.” It’s the type of empty comment that the likes of people like Donald Trump use to rally their followers; remember your post about how you’re not a fan of Orthodoxy? Do you notice the similarities yet in yourself, or are you ignoring yourself, your behaviour – lacking in your present moment self-awareness?… – “I appreciate the power of religion although I am not religious personally.”Imagine the level of indoctrination, orthodoxy that will develop – has developed for Bitcoin et al – for a religion where early adopters are all financially incentivized to “spread the good word?””Freedom to innovate” – you’re allowed to innovate, so long as you’re not attempting to break through mechanisms that were put in place due to greedy people taking advantage of society. As Jordan Peterson compares at times – we need both Conservative and Liberal minded people as part of a systems of checks and balances, both innovators and those who prefer stagnancy for what seems to be working fine. Uber developing an application that makes getting a ride from point A to point B disrupted the archaic taxi-licensing system that – that everyone in society I’m sure is happy except for the last people “holding the bag” who were the taxi license owners, who last purchased them. Likewise Airbnb has some benefit to free market and fluidity – however it’s not accounting for or paying towards the externalized costs of what their system is allowing; so there will be shift here once society organizes properly. And to highlight, this archaic system regarding taxis would have been implemented perhaps under the guise of good intentions – however was really a mechanism of regulatory capture. This kind of innovation to disrupt the free market is fine – and as is becoming more obvious as leaders are emerging to champion educating society regarding technology, automation taking our jobs, along with the most efficient organizations like Amazon avoiding paying taxes – we can simply force them to, and distribute “$1,000” monthly to everyone – and allow people to truly vote with their dollars by buying into the systems that give them the best value, which will accelerate the advancements of the most efficient systems – increasing the buying power of that “$1,000” on an exponential path towards increasing the quality of life of everyone.Bitcoin et al, on the other hand, it isn’t attempting to displace a service – it is intending to disrupt *the* transactional layer – and it’s incentivized financially. And guess who’s “holding the bag” if society is directed/guided/forced towards adopting Bitcoin? It’s the latest adopters of society – who will have to buy into these Bitcoins at whatever artificial value/price each Bitcoin is at – in order for the say last 60% of society to adopt it, unnecessarily transferring wealth; even if it’s a “1 time event” and then it somehow balances out – I don’t give a fuck how what positive false light or guise it’s shown under, it equates to robbery.The greed of Bitcoin et al is unnecessary to align society. Solutions with blockchain without a layer of a Ponzi-Pyramid scheme will likely be part of a secure, global solution – decentralized with trusted allies, voted in by each democratic government. That’s how trust works, and creating a “trustless” system could only be seen as a great idea by those blocked from heart – who don’t intuitively understand trust – those who’re stuck in their head, mind, a product of greed and insanity of the mind disconnected from heart, empathy, compassion – holistic thinking, not just long-term logical thinking that has no nuances associated because subtle feeling is flattened out by pure, narrow, mathematical logic gates.If anyone wants guidance towards breaking through their ego mind coping mechanisms – the ego mind’s guard, always formed due to childhood trauma and a lack of adequate support to recover from trauma, physical or emotional – ego death or ego dissolution, then I’m happy to guide people in the safest way possible; how fast of a ride you want or feel you’re ready for will dictate your path of healing – yoga and meditation being a good start, however the ego mind’s guard can have many deep layers, some that may be impenetrable without ancient shamanic plant medicines. This is in part why Burning Man has gone mainstream – a necessary counterbalance to the suffering the ego mind’s guard leads to, why these medicines found popularity on west coast and Silicon Valley earlier – and which ‘[Steve] Jobs once said that taking LSD was one of the “two or three most important things” he ever did in his life.’ – although LSD from my understanding works more on logic, opening the mind, and less on opening the heart than some other plant medicines and practices; these medicines coming mainstream however with in reality very little adequate guidance and support afterwards for people is a growing concern, especially even though they are powerful at breaking physical world addictions, dependencies, attachments – they are addictive to the ego mind itself with a cost, limitations set with their ongoing use.

    1. JLM

      .China — a brutal, despotic, murderous regime — is prepared to control their society by killing their dissidents.Keep an eye on Hong Kong. It is going to turn really bloody.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      1. sigmaalgebra

        My guess is a little different: Beijing wants to discourage dissidents so will spill some blood in Hong Kong, have some ambiguity, find a way to save face, back off, and, net, leave few or no significant changes.It may be that for Beijing and all of China to try to adopt anything like what is in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, or South Korea would lead to civil war with maybe 200 million people dead — maybe.Yes, Beijing is a “a brutal, despotic, murderous regime” that kills lots of their own people, including via abortions of babies, and maybe they kill some millions a year but likely not the 200 million.Apparently China has nothing at all comparable with English common law, the respect for life and freedom in Western Civilization, the US Constitution, democracy, judicial system, etc. So, all they have is their one Communist Party where the internals are inscrutable.

        1. JLM

          .The problem with “discouraging” dissidents and dissent is that it rears its ugly head again in the near future.Hong Kong had riots five years ago in response to heavy handed actions by the mainland over the issue of how the Hong Kong government was to be run. China prevailed and they inserted their hand picked candidate to run things.Since 1997 when China took Hong Kong over after centuries of British rule, they promised “one China, two systems” and have been steadily diminishing the Hong Kong system.The most recent riots were kindled by a new extradition law that would have enabled the Beijing government to demand that Hong Kong criminals be extradited to the mainland and tried in Chinese courts. Hong Kong has its own courts, jduges, and rules of civil/criminal procedure.What the Chinese want is to be able to snuff out dissent by “disappearing” Hong Kong faux criminals into the bottomless, corrupt, violent Chinese prison system. It is a death sentence.The new proposed law would apply to both Hong Kong citizens and visitors, so it is a broad reach. If Hong Kong is to be the #2 sytstem, has its own law enforcement, its own courts and Judges — why is this new law necessary?The Beijing government doesn’t think that law will pass any time soon, but it gives them a chance to get part of it, and they loosed the Triads on the activists/rioters.This association between the Triads (the Chinese Mafia) and the Beijing government allows the government to target and kill dissenters while blaming it on the criminal Triads.These riots have very specific and precise objectives:1. Killing the extradition bill2. Forgiveness for the riots — a riot is a big legal definition in China3. The release of all rioters, prisoners, and exoneration4. An independent commission to investigate police conduct during the protests, specifically their use of force5. The resignation of Carrie Lam as Chief Executive — she was a Brit politician before the hand overMore than 2,000,000 persons from a population of 7.3MM have participated in the protests. That is a huge number of persons.The protesters took down the Hong Kong International Airport.In the institutional memory of China is always the issue of Taiwan which they describe as a “wayward” province. Whatever they do with Hong Kong is going to spill over onto the Taiwan problem. On the other hand, whatever they work out with Hong Kong will be thought of as the future of Taiwan.Don’t miss this — China kills anybody who gets in their way. Period. They have re-education camps as we speak.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      2. jason wright

        The 70th anniversary of the revolution is approaching. September could be the moment of truth for both sides in this dispute.After Brexit is done and we’re finally out the British government should extend an offer to HK’s citizens to allow them to emigrate to the UK. We need committed democrats. We need a new injection of energy and drive to propel an independent UK forward. Alternatively the US could have them resettle in Greenland.

      3. Matt A. Myers

        I agree – and it will be horrific. It will also be the beginning of the downfall for China.Andrew Yang will become President and right the ship that is the leader of technology and industrialization.

  10. jason wright

    I saw a black swan today. Feathers ruffled in the wind, and that red beak. Quite the sight.I was watching interviews given by Tim Geithner and Jamie Dimon this morning on YT, their recollections and their experiences of 2007/ 2008. Open markets and innovation go hand in hand, but adequate regulation is necessary. How to establish ‘adequate’? Geithner said the political class of that time were too frightened to regulate the financial system for fear of criticism and that an ‘event’ was needed to give them the leverage they needed to pass new laws. Crypto will bumble along until there’s an ‘event’, or someone works out how to crack private keys at scale and brings this experiment to a temporary halt.

    1. Tom Labus

      If directors or partners of banks were liable for the losses, there would not have been CDOs leveraged out at 100.

      1. JLM

        .Not a single person was ever disciplined or held accountable for a catastrophe that was created by greedy persons with mousse in their hair who tried to milk the last drop of value out of a security — mortgages — the should never have been allowed to be chopped into tranches.It is a huge injustice and you are absolutely right that persons should have been held accountable.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  11. Nicholas Palance

    Right side of history, for sure. This one’s been filed in my tech inspo Youtube folder.

  12. TeddyBeingTeddy

    Fred did you ever actually answer his question?

  13. Richard

    The Venture Capitalist shouting Freedom, is akin to the politician shouting racist – it means they have run out of (constitutional) arguments. The courts have held and history has shown is that the federal government’s monetary power is inherent in its sovereignty.

  14. sigmaalgebra

    We don’t have the “freedom” to “innovate” by, say, using a very high quality color photocopying machine to print money.I can believe that China doesn’t want their people to do that either, and that means that we should have such “freedom” to “innovate”?More generally, the stock market crash of 1929 resulted in, IIRC, the Glass-Steagall act, took away some “freedoms” to “innovate” in finance. Now from what I’ve read from JLM, the SEC has lots of regulations that have taken away some “freedoms” in finance, accounting, reporting, etc.Yes, I’m for freedom to innovate: E.g., AMD is now selling processors with 7 nm line widths, and IIRC Amazon already has some of them deployed in their server farms, and to me that looks innovative. E.g., the crucial core of my startup has some original applied math I derived, with theorems and proofs, based on some advanced pure math prerequisites — that looks innovative to me, and it appears that I’m fully free to do that math, write the corresponding software, etc.

  15. Semil Shah

    Hot damn!

  16. Sierra Choi

    “The lesson is that anything China bans, invest in.” -Fred WilsonThis kind of says it all…

  17. Prokofy

    Everything you say is true, and is well said. In addition to freedom from government, you need the rule of law over government and freedom from other people and their excesses (which range from nuisance trespassing to assault and murder). And it’s the “freedom from other people” part they I worry about with Bitcoin *because of its anonymity*. Anonymity on the Internet gives us many great things like pseudonymous avatars that provide at least some protection from direct assault of a real person online, but they also breed lack of accountability.Why does Bitcoin have to be anonymous? Anonymous like 4chan or 8chan or Anonymous which are definitely not as cool as they once were seen, eh? Couldn’t it be all the wonderful things you say yet encourage public accountability? Think of what that might mean. Why does decentralization have to mean lack of personal accountability?