10.27.2017

Congratulations to Catalonia

It is a very happy time for Catalonia right now as they declared independence.  A couple nations like North Korea and Venezuela have supported the independence and states including scotland and wales have also supported them.

The important and undeniable thing here is Spain is actively using force to undermine the free will of the catalonian people.  The important thing is that Spain forcefully tried to prevent a democratic vote and the vote was still a huge success and showed the overwhelming support for catalonian independence.  The government of catalonia itself overwhelmingly voted for independence as well.  There is no doubt whatsoever that the will of the Catalonian people is being outright denied by the spanish government.

I stand with catalonia.  As a change agent "I am Catalonia" and to those who support freedom "We are Catalonia".  I am, above all else, a global citizen of peace, individual empowerment and freedom, and love.

We need to vote with our feet and move to and live in a place that is independent and values non-violence and individual liberty.  We should keep a close eye on this centuries new wave of independence movements; these will be fundamentally different than the wave of violent revolutions of centuries past.  This new form of uprising will produce fruits of peace, not constant war like the revolutions in Venezuela and the United States.  Venezuela and the United States are both nations that live by violence.  Violent revolutions lead to violent states; the ends never justify the means, the means create the ends.

It shall be declared that anyone who takes up arms against Catalonia or her people will be devoured.  Catalonia shall be cherished and protected.

Let bees torment those who wish Catalonia to be squashed.

"Not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit; said the Lord of Hosts."

How bitcoin will die: Icarus

Bitcoin will die like icarus.  Or like an airplane that climbs too fast that it stalls out and crashes to earth.  This will be the death of bitcoin.

Like I said in my last post the reason for bitcoins recent spike has been scarcity; china is in a crackdown on bitcoin miners and is not letting them sell their mined coins.  This causes a reduction in supply, and with a constant demand will lead to an increase in price.

As these miners have been able to sneak some bitcoin past the guards and have been able to sell chunks the price has fallen and as the supply again dries up the price goes back up.  This is why we have been seeing temporary dips below 6000 to 5500 in recent days.

We don't know what bitcoins cap is.  What I mean by this is lets say all the supply from china drops out what is the most people are willing to pay for bitcoin?  It depends on the use that it is bieng used for.  With a price at 6000 obviously some people think that it has uses to warrant that price.  In other words they will pay that price.

Whatever the price cap ends up bieng the same fact remains, that once china effectively totally blocks its miners from selling their coins, or just makes it so they can't sell enough to maintain operations, they will stop mining (or greatly slow it down to the rate at which they can sell their coins).  This does not only perpetually keep the supply low and therefore bitcoins price high, but it will slow down transactions on the network.  The slowng down of the network will severely drop bitcoins usability and therefore the "price cap" - in other words what people are willing to pay - will drop significantly.  If it takes a month to process a bitcoin transaction people will dump their bitcoins and move to a bitcoin fork like bitcoin gold or another crypto like etherium (or monero if they are smart) where transactions happen in a reasonable time frame.

Bitcoin will never go away totally; but without the mining prowess it once had, it is just another run of the mill crypto.  And it will be priced accordingly.

10.26.2017

Currency, collectible, commodity, or asset: what is the difference between a currency and a collectible?

These 4 things: currency, commodity, collectible, and cash generating asset; the 4 C's are said to make up every form of property.

How do we differentiate between them?  Well there have been good definitions for asset and commodity but not for currency and collectible yet.  First I will quickly summarize the first two and then propose new definitions for the last 2.

An asset is known as something that you can own whose value derives insomuch from either value it, in and of itself, generates over time or saves you money over time.  Stocks are one since you are benefitting from peoples daily work.  Land is another one, you can use it to make money or save you money from renting.  A slave would also be this.  Your social security number is your proof of ownership to the slave master.    An asset must do actual work or it must insomuch as produce.  A digital asset would be a computer program that performs useful work or a botnet that you control to mine cryptocurrencies.

A commodity is something insomuch that it has a demand (and therefore value) by its usefulness to directly provide for biological type necessities.  Energy (food), solvents (water), and protection (shelter).  I believe I am the first to require that commodities must be linked to the 3 basic necessities.  An example of a digital commodity would be prime numbers (they can be used to create protection; cryptographic keys.  They are also used to create protection in the physical world by certain species like cicaida's)

Now for the last two which I feel don't have good definitions yet.

Currency.  

Currency is an infinitely divisible theoretical system of accounting.  The dollar.  The yen.  They aren't the paper they are printed on, they are the theoretical system that underlies the physical representation.  The "dollar" would still exist even if temporarily all the physical bills were destroyed in a fire.  Currencies can be private (binding between two people only) or widely adopted (legal tender), or anywhere in between.  Some currencies (private ones like IOU's) are protected from regulation under Common Law.

Collectible.

Collectibles have been hard for many people to differentiate from currencies.  The reason for this is because the physical representation of currencies are actually not a currency at all, but rather a collectible.  A collectible is anything who's value derives from it being not infinitely divisible by nature.  Why does infinite divisibility matter?  A collectible is desired for it's degree of completeness.  A barbie doll new in the box is worth more than the sum of its parts if you were to break off all its limbs and sell them separately.  As a counter example lets say barbie arms were more valuable than the NIB barbie themselves?  Well then the collectible would be the arms themselves then wouldn't it?  The same thing applies to a dollar bill or to a quarter.  If you shred a dollar bill it is worth less than the sum of it's parts.  Same with a coin.  Now it makes sense how some people collect things that seem like currencies.  By definition you cannot collect currencies (it would be called hoarding instead) but you can collect any non infinitely divisible representation of it; be it digital, physical, or otherwise.  An example of a digital collectible is a digital code or password that when someone enters in the code online they are rewarded with something be it a form of property or just a temporary sensory display like a "congratulations!" page.  Entering in half of the code would not work.  The full code is required and therefore the code is collectable.  Another example of a digital collectible are files, think songs or pictures.  

These classifications matter for regulators (slave masters) and people wishing to avoid regulation (unwilling slaves).  Regulators have been held in check by common law (the "ants" as opposed to "grasshoppers"...when the people believe in something enough the regulators can't stop them like how a grasshopper though bigger and stronger than ants can't stop the ants if they want something) to not regulate certain forms of property.  Typically commodities and collectibles are the least regulatable property.  Assets are the next least regulated, and currencies are the most regulated with the exception of IOU's.  Decentralization or discentralization of currencies is a current push to minimize regulatability of currencies.

So when we are thinking about or creating digital property we should mind the above definitions so we can be informed on how exactly to create them in a way that keeps them the type of property and therefore the regulatability that we intended.

10.25.2017

What type of electronic music is the chorus to ...Ready for it? Taylor Swift song

The type of EDM music in the chorus to taylor swift's new song is the heavenly sound of Trance.  Popularized by DJ Tiesto, Paul Oakenfold, Robert Miles, Paul Van Dyk and many others.  In this song it is Ali Payami the Trance DJ who masterminded this chorus. To me Trance is the sound of heaven.  Many tend to call this type of trance 'Progressive Trance' or 'Vocal Trance'.  It features uplifting, inspiring, progressive electronic melodies that climax and give the listener a sense of floating weightless over the most beautiful expanses.  It gives one a sense of freedom and exhaltation.  It is produced using high class synthesizers the most popular being the Virus Ti2.  

The lyrics around when the chorus starts around :47 or :48 is "In the middle of the night, in my dreams
You should see the things we do, baby
In the middle of the night, in my dreams
I know I'm gonna be with you
So I take my time
Are you ready for it?"
Not only is Trance one of the most hauntingly beautiful forms of music ever created by mankind, but it is also open source.  A single person can make epic riffs with nothing more than a laptop running a DAW software program like Logic Pro.

10.23.2017

The real reason for Bitcoin's $6000 spike, and soon crash

Bitcoin's price has been hovering around $6000 for the last week or two.  No one is quite sure why it has risen so much especially after China, bitcoin's biggest exporter, has been banning coin sales.

Well to me it just became obvious.  It is just supply and demand.

Since China is bitcoins biggest supplier, now their country is banning them from selling their bitcoins.  So as of now the Chinese miners are still mining away but they can't sell their coins.  This means there is a supply shortage of bitcoin in the market.  What happens when there is a supply shortage?  The price goes up.

The problem with this is that if the chinese miners are being blocked from selling their coins, eventually they are just going to shut down operations. While this is great for the small scale bitcoin miner to become competitive, China has all the mining power and if they stop mining then bitcoin transactions would slow down to a crawl.  Already bitcoin transactions take hours or even days to complete, with china's hashing power stopped all transactions would slow to a crawl, mabye up to a month backlog.  Transaction fees would also skyrocket spooking bitcoin investors.  If their bitcoin assets suddenly become non-liquid - they can't trade their bitcoin - people will dump whatever they have and bitcoin will crash.

Eventually bitcoin will correct itself I am estimating down to $300 and just be one of the gang with all the other crypto's.

10.21.2017

Discentralization not decentralization is the key to a free and open society

Decentralization is all the buzz lately.  We want to wrestle the power from the hands of the few and spread it among the many.  But the way we are doing this is all wrong. Little hints in quotes by regulators let me know that they already know about this hidden truth, and they are the ones actually behind decentralization in order to co-opt the movement and end up controlling it in the end with all of us totally fooled into believing we have actually achieved decentralization when in fact the same people who had the power before still have it in the end.  Decentralization is impossible and believing in it will lead you to the proliteriate while those preaching decentralization will actually be in central control.  The promise of decentralization is the promise of socialism.

What you have to realize is that decentralization is a myth.  It cannot exist.  This is the first step in realizing the fraud that they had told you.  There is never a system where no human being has any control.  Even if robots were making the system there had to be someone to program them.  Even if they use machine learning, it is only by algorithms we designed.  There can never be a case where no humans are in control.  The quicker you come to grasp with the fact that you were sold a lie, will you find the solution.

I could tell you the solution right now (and I will) but unless you can believe that you may have been lied to and believed a lie, you will never find the truth.  I could talk till I'm blue in the face but you would never find it.

So I am believing that you think there may be something to this argument.  Good.  Now I will explain the solution.

Dis-centralization.

We have to accept and embrace the fact that we can and should be in charge of things.  The problem comes, and only comes, when there is a consolidation of power.  When people give up power they were born with, and give that power to another.  This is the heart of socialism.  And it always leads to a two class system.  The controllers, and the controlled.  The key is we all need to exercise our right to be controllers.  Controllers of our own paradigm and our own sphere of influence.  

A system can be created where personal liberty and responsibility are protected.  It was called the constitution and declaration of independence.  These libertarian type ideals are the only correct answer to centralized control.  Liberal ideals of large government that makes everyone equal only leads to the government itself becoming the centralized control it was supposed to protect us against.

What is the libertarian answer to crypto-currency?  It isn't decentralization but rather discentralization...distributed centralization.  It is the whole reason libertarians want us to all carry guns and liberals want no one to carry guns.  The people who enforce the liberal agenda would have guns but no one else would be allowed to.  This is decentralization and is actually centralization.  Libertarians want to distribute the centralization, so we all have it and no one has inherent power greater than anyone else.  This is discentralization of power.  Distributed centralization.

How do we make a discentralized crypto currency?  Well all my ideas have been doing just than; irhn and spork.  But the idea is give everyone power over their own transactions and have their own power to verify.  The key to creating discentralization is empowering not taking power away from individuals.

In bitcoin only the person who wins the block has the power to have the final say on transactions.  And this is why the 51% attack is possible.  What if instead of stopping everyone from verifying transactions once someone else has verified it, we actually allow everyone to finish verifying then see what everyone says?  More like a democracy huh?  And what if you empowered users to believe or not believe what the verifiers say?  If they know certain verifiers are wrong to go to other verifiers instead?  That is empowerment.  That prevents centralization.

Because any "decentralized" system like bitcoin is just a race.  It is a race to the top at who can claim the title of emperor (51%er) and rule the coin.  Of course they would be subtle about it.  They would split their pool up into a few pieces and pretend every pool is autonomous but they really would all have one master.  And they could attack only zombie wallets so that no one would be any the wiser.  Secret centralized control under the guise of decentralization.  Just like socialism is secret centralized control under the guise of equality.

Another example is decentralized wikipedia.  Under the guise that no one has control, in actuality the big players have control because they can hire botnets to keep pages that are financially important to them from being changed.  A discentralized version would allow people to control what is changed on pages they create.  And if people don't like your page they can create a competing page.  Pages on the same topic aren't allowed on decentralized wikipedia but are necessary for liberty and discentralization.

How would discentralization fix this?  Well instead of a race to see who can become central controller, discentralization would empower people to have the tools to resist centralized control.  The tool of choosing who verifies your transactions.  The tool of allowing all verifiers to have their say not just the one who wins the block.  The tool of each verifier allowed to be their own fork and have their blockchain as accurate as possible, not forcing consensus.  Decentralization would say that either republican healthcare bill or democrat healthcare bill will win and discentralization would say that everyone can propose their own bill and vote across party lines.  Mabye it is messier but freedom is a messy process.  Mabye a coin where people can choose who verifies it and verifiers can choose how they verify would make your coins less fungible, but freedom is a messy process.  You would be your own master and by choosing who verifies your transactions you choose how fungible your coins will be.  

That is called liberty.  

That is called distributed centralization.

"Spork" distributed centralized cryptocurrency

IOUTP is now called IRHN, please visit ir.hn to learn more.

IHRN is a great peer to peer truly decentralized IOU network, but we need something a bit more centralized that more people accept to be able to "cash out" one's IOU's from IRHN.  People can use whatever they want, bitcoin, monero, twigs, anything.  But I don't feel like there are any really good digital options out there (twigs are awesome).

Enter Spork.  Spork is a new pseudo decentralized cryptocurrency and is based somewhat on trust.  It solves the 51% attack problem (google that if you don't know about it).  It solves the mining problem.  It solves the veriication problem.  It does not necessarily solve the privacy problem but I'm sure privacy features can be added as time goes on.  Spork primes are not necessarily fungible.  Spork trades fungibility for flexibility, strength, and longevity.

Spork works like this:

Spork's money is prime numbers (but an idea like this can also be used with normal coin accounting methods or a new method for trading).  Yes that's right.  Prime numbers are the currency.  This means anyone can mine it (just figure out prime numbers) and the supply is infinite yet regulated (it will take forever to find more than 100 billion or so)

Spork will transact these prime numbers in whole chunks (but an idea like this could transact partials if desired).  That means you can't send half a prime number, it is all or nothing.  So most transactions will have several prime numbers in exchange for a product.

Spork may or may not start with some set of the numbers "premined" since the first trillion or so primes are widely known and it would just be a race of verifiers not able to keep up with people requesting primes.

The process of mining is finding prime numbers and giving these to verifiers to put them in your name.  The verifier will check that it is a real prime number and also that no one else has claimed it.  Then he will attribute it to you (your public key and private key, works the same as bitcoin).  You want as many verifiers to agree that you own that prime as possible.

Anyone can be a transaction verifier in Spork.  Verifying transactions and mining is completely separate.  Verifiers will take no primes as transaction fees (I guess they could but its unlikely people would use them as a verifier).  Most verifiers will require a subscription fee or something similar in order to submit your transactions to them for verifying.

Every Verifier is their own spork (play on fork).  Verifiers will be incentivized to check their database (blockchain) against each-others but aren't required to.  A pseudo consensus is expected to be reached between verifiers.  You can say that you guarantee your primes will be verified by "enter some names" of verifiers.  If not then the transactee isn't obligated to send you the product.  So basically you have to have some level of trust in the verifiers and can choose who to do or not do business with.  This beats the 51% attack.

I expect a central hub to develop where you pay a small monthly fee to join and it gives you access to hundreds of verifiers.  You submit your transactions there and you can see in real time which verifiers approved (or denied) your transaction.  If this approval rate seems to satisfy you and your transactee, then you can exchange the goods in question.  Maybe if you both vote to disapprove the results the verifiers can take that into account when they do consensus building (not really defined, however they think is best) to where they cancel the transaction (initiated by both of you using your keys to vote to cancel the transaction).  

Don't like the biggest pool of verifiers?  No problem.  Go to smaller verifiers instead with your transactions.  The less consensus you get with verifiers though, the less fungible your primes will be.

In conclusion we are making a distributed centralized cryptocurrency which is immune to the #1 crypto threat, the 51% attack.  In order to accomplish that we have to trade fungibility.  However this will be more fungible than IOU's so it is a good way to cash out your IOU's from IRHN.

Also as a bonus it makes mining much more fair and viable forever.

10.14.2017

IOU Transfer Protocol Program

**Now known as IRHN, see ir.hn for more info**

IOUTP Program

1. GIVER: take inputs for prompt and password.  Save prompt and password. RECEIVER:  Take inputs for prompt and password. Save prompt and password.  Must match what the giver sets.  

2. GIVER: Echo prompt to all connected people.

3.  MIDDLEMAN: If a prompt comes to me echo the prompt to all others connected to me except the one who gave it to me.

4.  MIDDLEMAN: Remember which person gave me the prompt.

5. RECEIVER: If the prompt that comes to me matches the prompt I set, then issue the set prompt and password to the person who prompted me.

6.  MIDDLEMAN: If a prompt and password comes to me from a person I prompted earlier, then send that prompt and password to the person who initially prompted me.

7.  GIVER: If a prompt and password comes back to me for which I initiated the prompt; check if the password is correct.

8.  GIVER: If the password is correct then send an IOU, prompt, and password to the person who returned the prompt and password to me.  Delete prompt and password from memory.  Clear all memory except <<save issued IOU code into database>> as an active IOU but not who it was issued to.

9.  MIDDLEMAN: If an IOU comes to me for a given prompt and password; <<save IOU code>> and <<save who sent IOU>> then submit an IOU, prompt, and password to the person who sent the prompt and password to me.  <<save issued IOU code in database>> After this; delete prompt and password from memory.  Delete who gave me prompts and passwords.  Ie: clear all memory.

10.  RECEIVER: If an IOU comes to me and I originated the password then <<save the IOU code>>.  Clear all memory except <<save who issued me the IOU.>>

11.  If transaction doesn't complete then the receiver tells the giver to cancel the iou's.  The giver will tell the first middleman that the "IOU the giver issued is now cancelled for <<prompt>> and <<password>>.  You are advised to cancel the IOU that you advanced".  This middleman then sends this to the next person.  If one of the people cancels the IOU and doesn't tell the next person, the IOU accounting will be different and the person will no longer trust the person who cancelled the issued IOU without notice.  

No one will know exactly who was the weak link and the reason the transaction failed.  However if you notice that one of your friends has a higher rate of failed transactions than others then you will eventually unfriend them.  Also there is nothing to gain by being the weak link because the IOU given to you will be cancelled anyway.

12.  Next the GIVER starts the echo process again to find another route to the receiver, this time omitting the friend through whom the transaction failed last time.  Repeat all the rest of the steps.

13.  You will need to keep track of an IOU tally between you and all your friends.  You should check your tally against your friends periodically to ensure that the accounting is the same.

14. As long as you buy the same amount as you sell you will have to exchange no money.  If you buy more than you sell or sell more than you buy, then you will have to end up settling your debt with your friends at some point.  You will pick friends based on what forms of payment they will accept for settling debts.

15.  Also you need to set what you pay out for an iou.  An iou should be roughly the value of a half dime in 1792 (currently about $1.25).  So say I will redeem any IOU I issue at $1.25 or I will give 0.0002 bitcoins or I will give 1 luumn or I will give a 1lb loaf of bread.  Then when the person who collects IOU's from me wants to cash out, they can select how much of each thing I offer they want to collect from me.

Behold the first Beast of Revelation: Xi Jinping

This is not the first time that the "end times" have happened in the world.  The revelation 12 sign happens in the sky once every several hundred years and with it come the rise of the righteous two witnesses, the beast, and the second beast also known as the antichrist.  The world is not about to end, there are still at least another 333 years to come I believe are spoken for in revelation.  However the years between 2024 and 2031 may get very very bad.  Persecution may start now but Good will prevail between 2017 and 2024.

Just to give you a rundown of our current place in this cycle, the sign happened about a month ago so in 3.5 years the two witnesses will rise to prominence.  I would say as we have seen from him saving trump and our nation; the brains behind the healthcare executive order and also saved the trump tax plan the horrible publicity of raising taxes on the middle class, Rand Paul is a leading contender as one of the Two Witnesses.




Seeing the recent news about Xi Jinping consolidating control and persecuting business leaders, considered most powerful man in the world by The Economist in 2017, and the fact he looks exactly like the person I dreamed of slitting their throat in 2007 (before he ever rose to power)... (In 2007 I dreamed I was an angel and slit the throat of someone who looked exactly like Xi and he yelled out then his wound was healed, just like the first beast in the revelation of john.) ... I think Xi is the leading contender as the first beast, or at least one of the heads of the first beast.  

Now what will happen is the two witnesses will rise in prominence starting around 2020.  I think that I also may be a candidate as one of the two witnesses. If I am, I think that the way I will sever a head of the beast is by crippling China with my IOUTP monetary system that can divert the control of any government.  Decentralized money - controlled by the people not the government - would be a death blow to chinese communist control.  But according to the revelation, this wound would be healed so somehow China will figure out how to stop its use there.  Other world leaders may also be heads of the first beast, people like the polished Trudeau, Macron, and Sebastian Kurz...mabye even trump, we will see.

10.07.2017

The only 100% fully decentralized peer to peer Monetary System unveiled: IOUTP

Think Bitcoin is decentralized? Think again. 

**Now known as IRHN, see ir.hn for more info**

How do we create a monetary system where there is truly no centralized control? The way to do this is to not transfer money at all; but rather creating a mutual reciprocation system. The answer is to empower everyone to create their own IOU's that they accept back in exchange for money (or other things) and use the principle of "6 degrees of separation" and "pay it forward" in order for everyone to give one of their own IOU's to someone they know, and so on, until the IOU or money ends up at the person who requested it.

That's a mouthful but lets break that down.

1. Everyone creates their own currency.
In a simple form of this everyone has a database of codes that they accept back in exchange for product, money, or services. If the person who created a code gives it away; when the person with the code wants to redeem it, the code creator can destroy it (remove it from the database) and give the person that redeemed it some money or something else.  The codes are like IOU's.   Also if the person who wants to "cash out" the IOU from his friend also has an outstanding IOU given to the same friend, the IOU's just cancel eachother out.  So in essence as long as you are giving away the same value as you are recieving, then all the IOU's will just cancel out and will never need to be cashed out at all.  Just in case someone wants to recieve more than they give through the network, thier IOU's should still be redeemable for something.  But that is between the person and their friends as we will see below.

2. Leveraging the "6 degrees of separation".
People only give IOU's to people they know, and therefore they only accept IOU's from people they know. However if everyone is connected through only 6 different people, then the trust chain doesn't need to be long at all for IOU's to transfer between anyone on earth. IOU's are transferred only 1 person away. Lets say I give my friend Billy Bob a NatureHacker IOU then he gives his friend Jane a Billy Bob IOU in reciprocation. Kind of like a "Pay it Forward" type of system. This chain of paying it forward connects between the person giving something and the person requesting it. At the end of the line the person who requested something ends up with an IOU from one of their friends which can be saved or cashed out by them.

3. Mapping the IOU pathway from source to destination
Now that is all well and good, a cascade of IOU's that go from source to destination. However without a centralized network how do we know which pathway for the IOU's to take? Great question. The answer is, of course, leveraging our "6 degrees of separation" again. We can "scout" the landscape before ever sending the first IOU. If I, NatureHacker, want to send an IOU to "Billy Bob" then Billy and I talk to each other first. We develop a prompt and an answer. So lets say the prompt is his name "Billy Bob". When he hears the prompt "Billy Bob", he will respond with the agreed upon answer (password). The password we agreed to ahead of time was "1237". When he hears the prompt "Billy Bob" he will respond to that person (that said the prompt) "1237". Now the person who finds Billy Bob will give this answer back to the person who told that person to look for Billy Bob and so on until the password makes it back to NatureHacker. Now we have a trace that goes from source to destination. Now NatureHacker can send an IOU to the person who returned the code to him, and that person can deliver an IOU to the person that returned the code to them and so on until it reaches the destination.

So how do we scout for Billy Bob in the first place? We tell everyone we know to look for him. We tell everyone in our group of friends to look for Billy Bob and they in turn tell everyone in their circles to look for him. As soon as someone claims to be Billy Bob he gives the code which makes its way back to the sender and then the IOU goes out back through that pathway used to locate him.

The person initiating the transaction can be made to "overpay" a finders fee which is split among all the people along the correct path to the destination.  This incentivizes to make your friend network the best it can be.   For example lets say there are 10 nodes along the path from NatureHacker to Billy Bob.  NatureHacker could pay 1.1 IOU forward, person 2 pays 1.09 IOU forward, person 3 pays 1.08 IOU forward until we get to Billy Bob who gets 1 IOU.  Reducing the amount of people (nodes) along the path is therefore incentivized.

 Also not only will any correct pathway "win" but the pathway that leads to the destination quickest.  So if you want to win the transaction it would be best to prune your friend list to only include friends that end up having the people of interest most often so you don't waste time talking to lots of friends.

Now there might be a temptation to hack the code running on your system so you keep any IOU you get without paying it forward. If this happens you will never be along the correct path and people will "unfriend" you, effectively locking you out of future deals.  A self grooming network.

Also why not just give an IOU directly to Billy Bob from myself NatureHacker?  Well Billy Bob doesn't trust me.  The whole reason we have the IOU's always go to friends and come from friends are that people we select as friends we trust to pay up when we return to them one of their IOU's they issued us.  Instead of a central power as the trusted party, we use a de-centralized network of friends.  Also even if you trusted me our deal would be a one time deal and you would immediatly ask me to fulfil the IOU which makes it pointless.  But if you have 10 friends and have accumulating IOU accounts with only those 10 people and can deal with every outside person by just racking up more IOU's from one of your 10 trusted friends, then it becomes much easier to manage.

So that is about it. Of course these are all metaphors for technological communication, or it could be in the physical world as well but more likely digitally in this day and age. There would obviously be code involved in this process but it would be modular and run on each system itself. It would be like HTTP, each computer/server would run a copy of the code in order to make this communication happen. Now the question is...who is going to be the first to develop the code for IOUTP? (IOU TRANSFER PROTOCOL).

10.04.2017

The real reason why every mass shooter is on psychiatric drugs Las Vegas false flag fake hoax conspiracy

If you have been seeking truth for a while now you should have realized that all of these "newsworthy" mass shooting are fake.  Eric Holder predicted the epidemic we are seeing 4 years before Columbine with his quote "we need to really brainwash people that guns are bad".  Lockheed Martin perpetrated Columbine and Lockheed Martin also perpetrated this fake Las Vegas mass shooting.  Lockheed must always be first or the biggest at everything they do and columbine and las vegas shooting bore this MO.

The real reason they always claim the shooters are prescribed mind altering prescriptions is because this is how they plan to usher in gun control, start with banning people from owning guns who everyone can get onboard with.  They will start by restricting peoples gun ownership rights if they are diagnosed with a mental disorder, and you have to be diagnosed with a mental disorder to get drugs that treat mental disorders like anxiety or depression.  So this is a huge way for them to usher in gun control if people go along with banning people from gun ownership if they are on medication.

This is the only picture of blood at the event.  Anyone that dies on the spot from a gunshot wound would be in a pool of blood.  Pools of blood are not seen anywhere at this event.


Notice the blood is dripping up and down her legs.  This is from breaking a blood bag between her legs then letting it drip down one side then flipping over and letting it drip down the other side.  Also the crisis actors are together, it is easier to fake bieng dead when you can hide your face.

Great video on security motive for this false flag:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?ebc=ANyPxKoTX6Mu9aX7U81PcVdrxhb1-oSF132FT0ERQMdY0i3Dl1K8bFHQjduixKGeIxep2q_e885Q4IwGJ4giyshb8X23TDTd4w&v=zNqxUuyHFzc

10.01.2017

Truth and Fiction

A narrative.  A history.  A mythos.  It is what defines a culture.  Every culture has had its own origin myth.  Some may have been closer to the truth than others.  This is why I tend to identify most with the jewish heritage.  It seems they are greedy and nepotistic but their mythos is the closest to truth that I have found.  Many of their stories can be literally proven with historical evidence.  And even for some stories that we can't verify, they for the most part promote justice, mercy, and hope, and especially liberty.  And much wisdom.

In order to build a future you don't need to be told how to do something or even what needs to be done.  To build the future you have to have some idea of what the past was.  Wheter your idea of the past is correct or not will determine your sucess or failures.  If your understanding of what happened in the past is complete and accurate you will be able to make better decisions in the future.

We need a true history.  A false history is dangerous because it will lead the people to make the same mistakes that were made in the past.  Manipulators feed their subordinates a false history in order to manipulate their future.

This is why we need to seek truth and buy it and don't sell it.  We need to uncover our true history.  We need to understand how this world really works by standing on the shoulders of those who came before.

But perhaps there is a place for fiction.  Fiction is a test space.  Fiction is a place where we can experiment with alternate possibilities and hypothesize a different outcome.  Fiction can be redemptive.  The only danger in fiction is when it is touted as truth.  When we believe in a lie then we have an incorrect view of the world and how it works.  Believing a lie will sabotage you.

Redemptive fiction is fiction that is touted as fiction.  It isn't masqueraded as truth but plainly revealed for what it is.  You need to be open about fiction.

I think that fiction can be a great way to practice creating the future.  By understanding and embodying a mythos, without believing it is true, and then creating a future based on that mythos can prepare us to do the same thing in real life.  And more than that fiction can pose questions without offering a definitive solution.  Pose tough questions and let your audience come up with their own thoughts on it.  Fiction can be introspective and shine light on important questions.

Video games.  How do we create a storyline.  Do we lead the players by the hand delivering story to them as they go?  May it never be.  We create a mythos.  Something they know is fiction but in the confines of the game it is true.  A mythos that if they can learn from, their gameplay will benefit.  The future is fully emergent gameplay.  No storyline, just backstory.  The past is myth.   The future is open.  This is how a video game story should be.

Dopamine vs Serotonin

dopamine vs serotonin

low dopamine high serotonin:
all satisfaction no pleasure.
tuberculosis.  conservative.  mania.  murder.  Feelings of self importance.  Emptyness of ordinary life and the desire to make something or be something more. Distaste for authority.

low serotonin high dopamine: 
all pleasure no satisfaction.
toxoplasmosis.  Liberal.  Depression.  suicide.  Life is a game and live it up.  Do whatever you want to in order to live the high life.  Money, sex, food, and cars.  Desire for authority.

Each type of person thinks their philosophy of life is morally superior.