Comments

  • Cryptocurrency
    I remember hearing similarly naive discussionsssu
    When I read this, and then this:

    What kind of currency would cost nearly $20k?ssu

    I know that you don't know what you're talking about - meaning that you don't understand the fundamentals at all. The rest of your post is really a reasoning by analogy, as if crypto was anything like social media. But before anything, let me explain to you how I know that you're speaking nonsense above, regarding the 20k.

    You can buy anything as small as 0.0001 BTCs. That's $2/unit at a price of $20K/BTC. Does that seem like a lot for a currency to you? Of course not. What's really relevant isn't the price per unit, as much as how much the currency should be worth to allow for a certain daily trading volume.

    There's $5 trillion that changes hands everyday in Forex. There will be a total of 21 million BTCs on the market, and no more. If BTC is to become a major currency, how much should 1 BTC be worth to allow the necessary daily trade volumes to happen? At the moment, there's about $300 billion worth of BTCs on the market. That's nowhere near enough.

    On another note, you seem to think I'm some kind of finance idiot who doesn't know that this is currently a bubble. So...

    Have you read this post?

    What about this one?

    Market crazes (& speculative bubbles) are always marked by people dogmatically sticking to one idea, and greedily chasing it, thinking that they too can earn. They are generally unable to provide even one single rational idea behind their actions.

    Funnily enough, in this thread, some reputable atheists are doing exactly this, backed by absolutely no rationale or reason, except that the price is going up, and they want in. They are behaving much like the crazed cultists who strap bombs to their chest and blow themselves up thinking that it's the will of God.

    Generally, market crazes are created. Those with money can buy strategically placed media assets to inseminate such ideas in people. They can also create the necessary fluctuations in price. And people bite the bait because of their greed (or fear). However, once created and on the way, like now, they're entirely irrational and uncontrollable. So one has to be careful when they cash out.

    It will never reach that high. By New Years' Eve or Christmas, it will have tanked, that's my prediction. Until then, it may reach 20-30K. Or it may tank sooner. The reason I'm saying that is that most people want to cash out for the holidays ;) - they don't want to be playing stocks on Christmas Eve.
    Agustino

    I remember hearing similarly naive discussions about the social media and it's positive effects couple of years ago.

    Especially that a) governments are too old fashioned and dumb to understand it and b) as social media is so decentralized they cannot control it and hence c) with the social media and new media, freedom will ensure and nation states cannot influence the discourse as they could do earlier.
    ssu
    Nope - social media was the exact opposite of this. In fact, with social media I said from the very beginning that it will be a goldmine for the government. You have a centrally controlled platform (for example Facebook) - all government has to do is go to Facebook and request access to any of their data and they will pretty much get it. So it's a way for the government to have access to databases containing almost everyone's personal information.

    That's not the same in this case. There is no centralised authority in the case of crypto-currencies.

    But yes, governments are old-fashioned and cannot deal well with social media very well even now. Just look what happened with the last US election.

    And I never claimed freedom would ensure either with regards to crypto, or social media. So that's just strawmanning.

    But you are. You are a citizen of some country, and if you get income, you have to report it to the government or otherwise you are avoiding taxes. Wouldn't matter if you made a fortune in barter trade and never would have taken actual money. The worth of the barter trade can be measured quite easily. And if it's a too big hassle to go at the user, you simply go after any merchant vendor accepting any cryptocurrency. After that it isn't so cryptic anymore.ssu
    Well, of course, they will be able to track if I pay my taxes, was that what you were thinking about? :s

    Bitcoin isn't anonymous. I think you also didn't know that. The owner of a certain wallet cannot be known, but when you cash out of that wallet, then your identity IS known. That's why many of the hackers who have stolen Bitcoins cannot get them out of their wallets currently.

    So I most certainly wasn't referring to that.

    I wouldn't bet on it going to those levels.ssu
    Why don't you short this then?

    Now I've known a lot of people here from the old PF times, and I know that they are interested in philosophy and perhaps current topics. But not investing or currencies.ssu
    That's not true, there are people interested in finance here, just not as many. I'm one of them, I would guess Benkei is also one of them, and so on so forth.
    ______________
    Now there are problems with Bitcoin. As Maw said, one big problem is the volatility. You cannot adequately trade with a currency that drastically changes in value from day to day - well, you can, but you need to structure contracts accordingly, which represent significant additional costs. The idea is that as more people start using Bitcoin, it will stabilise at certain values.

    Another problem is what happens to Bitcoins that are lost? If you lose your private key, you lose access to the wallet, with no possibility to get it back. So if you're the one who has the key, for example, and you die, and nobody else knows about it, then those Bitcoins are essentially off the market forever. So that 21 million Bitcoins, will, over time, decrease. This means that there will be an inflationary pressure on the currency at all times, and we may even reach a stage where not enough Bitcoins are available to adequately trade (in very long term future I imagine)
  • Transubstantiation
    Only a philosopher will ask. 23 pages on transubstantiation and nothing happened. We can pin a link to this thread next to the word "useless" and let that be a definition by demonstration.Benkei
    I believe it's actually a very relevant question. What you mean by useful is very important. Many things are not useful in the sense that they don't have immediately observable results, but without them, everything falls apart.

    In the Christian tradition, for example, prayer, worship, meditation and contemplation are means for the believer to get in closer communion with the Lord through His Son Jesus Christ. You may say that getting in closer communion with God is useless - it doesn't put food on the table, it doesn't make your wife happier, it doesn't make you more successful, it doesn't save your kid from an illness, etc. etc. While it's true that very often it may not directly do those things, it does help.

    For example, without meditation or contemplation, you find that you lack motivation. You don't feel like going to the gym, you don't really feel like working hard anymore, you become more depressed, etc. All these things impact every single area of your life. So while the spiritual side may not play any direct role in providing what is useful, it plays an absolutely critical role in making what is useful possible for you in the first place.

    So I think that without a solid spiritual foundation many aspects of life are impossible. And that doesn't necessarily require that you are a Christian, or even a believer of any of the particular religions when it comes to the box that you tick on surveys. But it does require that you are a believer in heart.

    For example, the one version of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

    Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion. The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion.

    29 Q: But if a man through no fault of his own is outside the Church, can he be saved?

    A: If he is outside the Church through no fault of his, that is, if he is in good faith, and if he has received Baptism, or at least has the implicit desire of Baptism; and if, moreover, he sincerely seeks the truth and does God’s will as best he can, such a man is indeed separated from the body of the Church, but is united to the soul of the Church and consequently is on the way of salvation...

    Baptism of desire can be explicit…The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit baptism of desire. This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows that amongst Muslims, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this way they become part of the Church…"
    Last one is from here.

    So I think many atheists, including people like yourself, really do have a poor understanding of religious traditions.
  • Transubstantiation
    anything useful to say about realityBenkei
    What does useful mean?
  • Transubstantiation
    Of course it now remains for you to show that they were delusional.
  • The Ontological Status of Universals
    It's only for my own benefit.apokrisis
    What's the benefit? You compile them into books you then sell? :P
  • The Ontological Status of Universals
    Man apo, you really are writing books on here... >:O You ought to get an award for longest posts.
  • Kundalini
    Irony is a mastery of truth. Perhaps it's the opposite.Wosret
    I don't know - again, I've seen people take your attitude, and reach their goals. How they do that remains a mystery to me. I haven't found that to be the case for me when I tried it, so then I adapted, and learned that I have to work on things in a systematic way, and hold onto every little win I get along the way, before the "big" win. That's why I said that I think it depends on what you're trying to do, and really your context and personality. That will determine the methods you use.

    Or maybe... just maybe... thy're the same thing! Zomg I'm doing it! Damn... gave too much of a fuck, ruined it.Wosret
    >:O
  • Kundalini
    Have you tried not giving a fuck? Lol. I swear by it.Wosret
    No, because then you can't reach your goals man :(
  • Kundalini
    I also think we form these "techniques" based on our goals and what we're practically trying to get done. So if you have different goals, I'd expect you to have different means of pursuing them too basically.
  • Kundalini
    I'm saying that he has the same method of anxiety relief. Falls to shit though when things do stuff you aren't expecting.Wosret
    Hmmm, maybe, but you can get quite efficient at controlling those things. It just requires that you take a step by step approach to things, much like the scientific method itself. It requires that you leave nothing to chance. And of course, with regards to many things, it requires that you avoid them altogether, especially if the chance of failure is great.

    So if one or two things go haywire, not a big issue. But if five, six different important things go haywire at the same time, then it is a problem for someone like me. I don't see how you can avoid that though.
  • Kundalini
    Oh yeah, death imprisoned him in a sack of his own skin, and seeing as the outside world became entirely unknowable to him from there, he decided that it didn't exist.Wosret
    Asura is the villain of soul eater, he swallowed his own soul out of fear of it, and spreads his madness of paranoia and existential anxiety, only feeling confident with a complete grasp of the causes, and situation.

    Make is a weapon master, that wilds her soul like a weapon, he father being death himself's scythe, but since she harbored resentment towards him, she become a weapon master reason than a weapon herself.
    Wosret
    Hmmmm - so are you suggesting that I am like a villain who swallows his own soul out of fear of it? :P :-O
  • Kundalini
    Sounds like Asura's shtick, trapped in a sack of his own skin. I'm of course Maka, the weapon that took the path of the meister.Wosret
    I'm not sure what those references mean :P - so if you wish that I understand better, you'd have to explain in idiot language. :P
  • Cryptocurrency
    Remember when we never used our real birthdate, our real location, our real names?ArguingWAristotleTiff
    Oh? I still don't use real birthdate >:O (unless it's an official, business related thing). But I think I'm just paranoid. Looking around, many people give just about everything, including their address online :-O - and someone can obtain your rough address (city) from your IP anyway - so basically every website you visit. Moderators here may be able to access those details anyway.
  • Cryptocurrency
    There was a time when people didn't advertise they had kids on the Internet (think WAY back in the day)ArguingWAristotleTiff
    Just out of curiosity, why was this?
  • Style Over Substance
    So, how do you feel about the practical consequences of this change? (How do you intend to celebrate this hollow victory?) And is this not yet another example of the shortcomings of a certain sort of idealism, or, dare I say, political correctness?Sapientia
    I look at this change as a defeat. The people in charge of this website used you as (1) a sacrifice in order to be able to say that moderators (themselves) are not immune to action, (2) moderators who don't fit the bill with regards to POMO views of sexism, political correctness and so on so forth will be eradicated (a warning to other moderators to watch what they do), and (3) a way to get rid of a pernicious element who didn't fit in on the moderator team in terms of modus operandi and beliefs.

    I predicted your downfall here:
    Right. If the North Korean people don't like Kim Jong Un they should go vote. It says it's a democratic people's republic afterall, so it must be true. It's sad to see you defending the status quo, I thought better of you. You do lack class consciousness in this regard.

    Your only fault was that you didn't realise that you were the weak link early on, and worked to get the right people on the moderator team to prevent something like this. Instead, you allowed the very people who meant your doom to come on the moderator team. It was only a matter of time before the right circumstance to get rid of you came along. In other words, you allowed others to outmanoeuvre you.

    What are the practical consequences? The solidification of the existing power structures, which means less dissent and more obedience. The diminution of the possibility from those dissatisfied with the moderators to complain anymore.
  • Kundalini
    I know exactly what this means. You're worried about all sorts of shit you can't control so you're trying to assure yourself that you're doing exactly what you ought to be doing and that you're exactly in the right place and you're using as evidence of this some completely irrelevant things that you're trying to convince yourself are important, but you know deep down they're really not, and this is so not what you want to hear.

    It's all self deception to alleviate your sense of hopelessness. It's distressing to me. I can't imagine what it's like to you.
    Hanover
    It's funny that I see this much like you, but I've also been deceived with regards to Wosret in the past, so I wouldn't jump to your conclusion so quickly on this issue.

    I have a very logical and methodical personality, and I've found that that extreme logic, attention to detail and step-by-step method was essential to my success in education, philosophy and in entrepreneurship for that matter (and a few other things, like chess). But, I think it's dangerous to translate expertise in any of those domains to other domains, because it doesn't translate very well.

    Wosret processes information and does things very differently than you and I. From our discussions together, we don't share the same premises, but we're quite similar in our approach otherwise - we both approach things very methodically, in a step-by-step fashion. Wosret doesn't seem to be like this at all.

    I have no clue how he can function with what I identify as very little structure to life, compared to myself. But he does it. And I've met people like him, who I never thought could actually do anything, who actually do things that amaze me. I have no idea how though :s

    I would personally describe Wos's OP as a panic attack kind of situation. I would definitely feel terrible in that situation lol.

    the near complete absence of anxiety already is worth more than all the gold.Wosret
    I've also experienced a great reduction in anxiety for the past 8 or so years, but it's been gradual for me, definitely not sudden. And it has been proportional to the growth of my knowledge, and my capacity for action, doing things, and understanding things.

    So for me, if I'm not logical and analytical, and don't know everything, then I would be anxious. I always need to be on top of everything to avoid anxiety. You don't seem to be like that, so I'm curious how it is that you got over your anxiety? You (and people like you) seem to be moving in leaps whereas I move in steps.
  • Cryptocurrency
    The stupidity was not buying a Bitcoin a year ago and making about 14 000$ of profits.Akanthinos
    I don't think it's a question of stupidity and intelligence. People often take practical matters to be matters of someone being more intelligent than someone else. For example, we often think of Bill Gates, say, as being more intelligent than most other people. But while intelligence can help, it's by no means the critical factor in such decisions.

    The critical factor is access to knowledge. I have a very high IQ, but I didn't have access to the right knowledge with regards to Bitcoin 1 year ago. Why not? Becuase I was busy working on growing my business, learning marketing, learning design, perfecting my development skills, studying philosophy, etc. And more importantly than all of those, because I didn't have the right people - people with relevant knowledge - around me. So I could have been 100x smarter than the person who happened to be working in a Bitcoin-related startup because he happened to be around the right people who were involved with it in University, say. But that person would have made the dough, and I wouldn't have.

    None of us can see the future, and that's largely because we don't know what knowledge will be relevant to the future. To know that Bitcoin would be relevant I need to (1) hear about Bitcoin, and more importantly (2) devote the time required to study Bitcoin and understand what repercussions it would have. If I just hear that there's this new currency around that some people are interested in, etc. etc. I'm not gonna do anything about that usually, because my attention gets devoted to other things. In other words, it doesn't strike me as sufficiently important at first glance for me to start devoting the necessary resources to really see that it's important and relevant.

    Like if someone were to say eating grass cures cancer. I would probably not even bother to investigate whether that's true, and just reject it out of hand. Why? Because our current medical understanding would offer no mechanism through which eating grass could achieve the effect. So I would discard it, even though empirically it may actually be true.
  • The Ontological Status of Universals
    Aristotle and Kant are both Platonists!Wayfarer
    That Aristotle is a kind of Platonist isn't very much in doubt. However, saying that Kant is a Platonist is very much different. In what sense is he a Platonist?

    The only senses in which I can see Kant being a Platonist is in thinking that:

    • The forms are prior to experience, and make experience possible.
    • Intelligible qualities (concepts) are prior to sensible qualities (sense impressions).
    • Appearances have an underlying unity which is prior to difference (unity underlies difference).

    But Kant very much disagrees with Plato/Aristotle on:

    • The speculative capacity of reason to go beyond the bounds of experience.
    • The centrality, availability (to Reason) and explanatory power of God.
    • The existence of a realm of forms or the inherence of the forms in the things themselves apart from us (realism).
    • The independent existence of things apart from the (transcendental) subject.
    • Certainty being of objective origin (our view matching reality) versus subjective origin (spatial judgements are certain because they make reference to the form of space which is subjectively given)
    • Experience is a given - a gift - as opposed to a construct of the mind.
    • The origin of the forms as both internal and external to us.
    • There is one underlying reality behind appearances - and that's what gives coherence to the appearances.
  • The Ontological Status of Universals
    That is mistaken. They’re not ‘subjective’ in the sense of ‘pertaining only to myself’.Wayfarer
    Ummmm. No, they are subjective and they pertain to whatever creatures experience things in space. I never meant by subjective that they pertain only to yourself - Kant was quite clear that the forms are universals and necessary - nothing can be imagined without them, and everything presupposes their existence (from your point of view at least).

    Strike two. ‘Percepts without concepts are blind’.Wayfarer
    You are not following closely what I've been saying. Your understanding can have the form of space (which you can take as a concept), without you being able to analytically describe this concept, break it into its parts, derive Euclid's postulates from it, etc.

    So Kant's point is that sense impressions without the understanding cannot be experienced in any way - they are blind, since it is the understanding that provides the form and organisation through which they are understood. And inversely, the understanding without sense impressions is empty, since it has no content to apply itself to.

    Strike three.Wayfarer
    Nope - what I meant by conceptual ability was ability to linguistically break things down into their component parts and perform operations with them. Cows do lack the latter part for sure, though very likely they do NOT lack the understanding that assembles experience through the forms of space, time, causality, etc.

    In other words, cows don't lack the ability of synthesis - they lack the ability of analysis.
  • The Ontological Status of Universals
    There are divergences. Kant did a dissertation on the Ideal Forms in his early days, but changed his view later. But arguably they became internalised in Kant as forms of understanding.Wayfarer
    Right, I agree that they are internalised in Kant, but that's precisely the problem. If they are internalised, then they are mind (understanding) dependent - they are of subjective origin. This is precisely what allows Kant to call space, time, causality, etc. as transcendentally ideal, as opposed to transcendentally real.

    Not so - only perceptible by a mind, a rational intelligence, that is capable of understanding 'north'.Wayfarer
    In Kant's terminology understanding and reason aren't the same. Kant's point is that the understanding gives (or creates if you want) the forms. So perception itself is fashioned by the understanding according to Kant. Understanding + sense impressions = phenomenon. So it's not that the understanding understands forms that are out there in the objects. But rather it creates the very objects that are objectively given in the phenomenon.

    They do it without thinking about it (and science doesn't know how!)Wayfarer
    Sure, but presumably (we can't know for sure the subjective experience of a cow though), cows also have spatial perception. In order to have any kind of spatial experience, the understanding must supply the form of space according to Kant (refer to the transcendental aesthetic). Cows may lack conceptual ability, but this isn't to say they lack the forms. One can drink water without having the concept of drinking water. And one can perceive in space (ie their understanding provides the form of space), without being able to think about it.
  • The Ontological Status of Universals

    Hence we must admit that the relation [‘north of’], like the terms it relates, is not dependent upon thought, but belongs to the independent world which thought apprehends but does not create. — “Bertrand Russell”
    It's a crucial point that has been lost ever since the mind has been reconceived as "constructive" by the neo-Kantians - in that they took the mind's function to be adding form onto sense impression, instead of perceiving (the form).

    In a way, it's funny (to me) that you have both Plato and Kant as favorite philosophers, because in many ways, they are opposed to each other.

    The way thought operates constantly relies on such judgements, that are not dependent on a particular mind, but only perceptible by a mind.Wayfarer
    There we go, this is a realist position and is opposed to the Kantian. According to the latter, "north of" is dependent upon the mind, since it is the mind that adds spatial form to the contents of sense impressions - that gives the experience of whatever is perceived as "in space". It is also this spatial form that puts sense impressions in relations of "north of" etc. to each other.

    Plato's position differs from this in that Plato (and Aristotle, and the Scholastics) takes "north of" to inhere in the things themselves. We don't only perceive sensible qualities in things, but also relational ones.
  • Do people need an ideology?
    Yes, much simpler. Thanks.Bitter Crank
    No worries :)
  • Transubstantiation
    I'd think bias would count against the witness, offering a motive to fabricate.Hanover
    No, I wasn't referring to that sort of scenario. I was referring to the sort of scenario where, say, someone saw a murder, but the murderer later threatened to kill all witnesses, and this person nevertheless comes forward to testify. In that light, his testimony, because he is willing to risk his life, has greater weight.
  • Transubstantiation
    The basis presented for it seems to be a biblical passage or two then supported by some Aristotelian philosophy then in vogue, which draws upon distinctions not really supportable.Hanover
    What distinctions aren't supportable?

    I think you still misunderstand the nature of substance. If a person is composed of two substances, then the person is two individual objects. To say that one thing is two substances would really be contradictory because substance is what validates the existence of the thing, so this would be like saying one thing has two existences. So substance dualism says that the human person is composed of two distinct things, body and soul, and this is why the soul can persist as a thing even without the body. It is usually argued that Aristotle's system is not consistent with substance dualism.

    You're really just turning things around, saying that there is one thing (person) with two substances mind and body. This allows you to say that the one thing, person, has two properties, body and mind. The proper understanding of substance dualism would be more like two things, body and soul, each with properties. Each of these would be an individual substance.

    If you check Aristotle's "Categories" Ch. 5, "Substance in the truest and primary and most definite sense of the word, is that which is neither predicable of a subject nor present in a subject; for instance the individual man or horse." In no way can primary substance be a property, this is what is explicitly excluded from the definition. "Substance" refers to the individual thing itself, not a property of the thing.
    Metaphysician Undercover
    Excellent exposition. I would add that this view of substance is inescapable for Aristotelians and even Cartesians, however substance can also be seen, as per the Schopenhaurian understanding of it, as the inner meaning of things - that is their substance, as opposed to their appearance. So in this Kantian/Schopenhaurian framework, what is substantial is defined as opposed to what merely appears. The Will is substance (or conatus as Spinoza calls it) - the phenomenal world is appearance.
  • Transubstantiation
    The one telling the truth?Hanover
    Sure, but isn't "skin in the game" one of the criteria you will use to determine the truth ceteris paribus?
  • Transubstantiation
    Your original question makes no sense to me in this context, if I interpreted it correctly. When you asked me what I would see, I took that literally, as in, asking what it is that I would observe. I would observe no difference in the bread and wine.

    The purported difference is that the substance has changed, and that the elements of the Eucharist which were formerly bread and wine are now the body and blood of Christ. But that isn't something I'd expect to see, and I don't know how I could know that to be the case.

    And I didn't say that I had no internal criticism. I do. The internal criticism is epistemological: how can we know this? Even under the assumption that it is true, that question remains. What I did was emphasise the distinction between external and internal criticism, because the absence of that distinction seemed to be the cause of some confusion.
    Sapientia
    Right, so no wonder you haven't adequately judged the matter if you don't know the criterion of truth in this case. I suggested that the criterion of truth, in this case, is experiential. You have to experience it, and it is that internal change that is the substantial change mentioned. So bread and water remain physically bread and water, but their meaning has changed for the believer. So, by all means, this is a mystical experience, that is open to those who take part in the Eucharist.

    I disagree, but I think that this is semantic. I'd call that a miracle, as would countless others. In fact, I think that if you put it to the general public in the form of a survey, then the vast majority would agree that it's a miracle. So you're just not speaking the same language as the rest of us.Sapientia
    A miracle it might be, so long as you understand that the traditional definition of a miracle as something that "breaks the laws of nature" is silly.

    I wouldn't be willing to die for most of what I'd testify to having witnessed, but that doesn't discount my testimony.Sapientia
    Yes, it actually does discount your testimony in comparison to someone who is willing to die for what they've witnessed. If you have no skin in the game, it's easy to testify for anything. And don't be silly now - if you were a judge and a man risked his life to testify something, while the other didn't risk anything, who would you believe?

    No, I can't add metaphysics to the list. That's far too vague and unexplained. And if you think that you've got a solid case, then you must have much lower evidential standards than me - at least when it comes to what we're talking about here. Elsewhere you raise the standards, creating a double standard. The stuff that we're talking about here gets special treatment, because it's your religion. But that isn't a reasonable, objective stance to take, and you should admit that.Sapientia
    That's not true from my perspective at least. I apply the same standard to all claims in intellectual matters.

    How much testimony? What if it was a central tenet of your religion? What if people reported mystical experiences which they attributed to the sea lion? These were not rhetorical questions.Sapientia
    Sure, I can absolutely imagine a world - not our world though - where the sea lion produced mystical experiences, and everything around the universe revolved around it. Sure, nothing ridiculous in that. Just a different world from ours. In ours, as we know it today, that would indeed be ridiculous.
  • Cryptocurrency
    The question is, will it be issued by government(s) or will it live outside government?fishfry
    I think governments may very well convert the USD or their currencies to a blockchain technology based on the distributed ledger.

    Miners are being arrested in Venuzuela for "terrorism," the theory being that since bitcoin can be used for terrorism, if you mine bitcoin you're aiding and abetting terrorism. It's nonsense but that's how politicians work. They don't subscribe to notions of sound argument. They subscribe to notions of raw power. They're the government and whatever it is that's new and revolutionary, they'll control it.fishfry
    Well yeah, that's not surprising, governments and those in power always seek control.

    But governments the world over take a dim view of people trying to replace government-controlled money, and that's where they'll bring down the hammer.fishfry
    Yeah they do. The only question is if they can manage to control something like Bitcoin without incurring serious losses themselves. That they want to control it is one thing, whether this will be possible is another. The example of Venezuela and other North-Korean-like countries, don't carry much weight here. The question is if the big and powerful nations can do anything. For example, if America bans mining, won't Russia and China promote it, and earn billions of dollars for themselves out of it, while America is losing? So yes, maintaining control is important for politicians, but maintaining power is even more important. If they lose power for control, their nation will become much like North Korea is today - lots of control, but very weak.

    So those two goals, power and control, often pull in different directions.

    Mining and exchanges are the two points of contact where the blockchain meets the real world. That's how the government will move to suppress and control cryptos. It's already happening. The IRS got a court ruling that Coinbase has to give up the names and info of 14,000 of its largest customers. The SEC has ruled that some ICOs are securities. Venezuela's going after the miners.fishfry
    Right, of course the governments will obtain information that they need to assess taxes, etc. These are relatively unimportant though. The real question is if they can control the actual technology itself.
  • Cryptocurrency
    May I ask, who are these Indians?fishfry
    >:O oh dear... She's referring to her sons I think, though I don't know why she calls them Indians :-O . I guess Tiff will have to explain this herself.
  • What is the meaning of life?
    Alan WattsJustSomeGuy
    Alan Watts is a great introduction to philosophical questions for someone who never got his feet wet before. But after some time, it gets tiring - he says the same thing over and over in different ways, and that's that. He has great breadth, but little depth.

    One great book of his that I very much enjoyed (though I've found the same ideas better expressed and in much greater detail) is Behold The Spirit - his thesis on mystical Christianity.
  • Do people need an ideology?
    You might want to PM him for some private stoic-talk, or ask him to join the discussion. How to find him? Click on MEMBERS at the top of the page and then select "names" for listing the members. The 'C's are not too deep down, so it won't take you long to find him.Bitter Crank
    Oh man BC! Back in the stone ages, aren't we? X-) The way to do this is you go to the search box that you see at the top, and you type there 'Cicero', and then he just pops out just like this:

    cc.png
  • Cryptocurrency
    Agustino, I am watching what my two Indians are doing with BitCoin and Ethereum how the systems will work with a little skin in the game. My eldest Indian has invested $100.00 in BitCoin while my younger Indian has been mining and nothing but "mining" in Ethereum.ArguingWAristotleTiff
    Yeah, I have skipped over profiting by buying it and trading it, but that seems more of a "consumer" approach. In becoming a miner or creating your own digital currency, you take a "producer" approach and are liable to access much higher profits if you were successful. You also retain much more control. Only that with something like this technology - apart from starting your own currency or becoming a miner for an existing one - I don't see many alternatives, at least as of yet. But it may be possible that it's just because I'm not sufficiently technically literate in the surrounding matters.

    How is the mining of Ethereum going? I've heard there are people who have really big "farms" to mine for these currencies, so how is it possible for anyone to compete with them?



    As an interesting sidenote, they say they make 20 BTC/day, meaning approximately 7200/year. At current prices that translates to :-O - $135 MILLION per year! I think they must have huge profit margins too, since it's a computer business not a people business (people are very expensive).

    In the last month we have gotten two calls from our younger Indian telling his older brother to sell and sell now. But before days end, he called and said if he didn't sell tell him to hold off. That sounds more like a day trader who has the time and desire, to closely monitor the movements. I keep giving the sage advice my parents did of taking out your original investment and only work the profit, never the initial investment.ArguingWAristotleTiff
    I would agree with that advice, or at the very least I would say to keep everything invested, but not in just one asset/trade. I've done a bit of stock trading with small sums of money while in University, but that didn't go as well as - *gasp* - sports betting >:O I remember that I struggled to even keep up with inflation and avoid losing with my stocks. Sports betting went much better for me - I guess it was because I also happened to have the right mentors around for the betting.

    All this happening while NicK who does IT for a living is kicking himself for not buying into BitCoin when it first beganArguingWAristotleTiff
    Many people are doing that, but what's the point? Nobody knew back in 2010 that Bitcoin would grow so much. And until recently, even my own knowledge about it came more from hearsay than anything solid - I've only started reading into it and understanding all the factors at play much more recently. So without being intimately familiar with the technology back then it's almost impossible that you could have rationally made the decision to invest a sizeable sum of money in it.

    I think it is quite appropriate and it appeals to the Wild West attitude in me, when they call those who want to only invest their time and energy for a little piece of the gold, miners.ArguingWAristotleTiff
    It's not their "energy", it's the computer's X-)
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    https://projecteuler.net/problem=67

    So I was trying to solve that last night. I had solved the previous one which involved a smaller triangle awhile ago through an evolutionary algorithm - see below (all are written and run in the Processing java-based language).

    The evolutionary algorithm works by making a "first guess" at the solution, which is a greedy algorithm, which chooses the best path to take down the triangle at each juncture, without any looking into the future. It records this path as 0s and 1s, with 0 = take a left, and 1 = take a right. Then it takes this first guess at a path, creates copies of it, mutates them (with certain probabilities), and then tests which one from that generation is the best. It selects it, and returns to the beginning by re-creating copies of it, modifying them, testing, etc.

    String triangle = "59 73 41 52 40 09 26 53 06 34 10 51 87 86 81 61 95 66 57 25 68 90 81 80 38 92 67 73 30 28 51 76 81 18 75 44 84 14 95 87 62 81 17 78 58 21 46 71 58 02 79 62 39 31 09 56 34 35 53 78 31 81 18 90 93 15 78 53 04 21 84 93 32 13 97 11 37 51 45 03 81 79 05 18 78 86 13 30 63 99 95 39 87 96 28 03 38 42 17 82 87 58 07 22 57 06 17 51 17 07 93 09 07 75 97 95 78 87 08 53 67 66 59 60 88 99 94 65 55 77 55 34 27 53 78 28 76 40 41 04 87 16 09 42 75 69 23 97 30 60 10 79 87 12 10 44 26 21 36 32 84 98 60 13 12 36 16 63 31 91 35 70 39 06 05 55 27 38 48 28 22 34 35 62 62 15 14 94 89 86 66 56 68 84 96 21 34 34 34 81 62 40 65 54 62 05 98 03 02 60 38 89 46 37 99 54 34 53 36 14 70 26 02 90 45 13 31 61 83 73 47 36 10 63 96 60 49 41 05 37 42 14 58 84 93 96 17 09 43 05 43 06 59 66 57 87 57 61 28 37 51 84 73 79 15 39 95 88 87 43 39 11 86 77 74 18 54 42 05 79 30 49 99 73 46 37 50 02 45 09 54 52 27 95 27 65 19 45 26 45 71 39 17 78 76 29 52 90 18 99 78 19 35 62 71 19 23 65 93 85 49 33 75 09 02 33 24 47 61 60 55 32 88 57 55 91 54 46 57 07 77 98 52 80 99 24 25 46 78 79 05 92 09 13 55 10 67 26 78 76 82 63 49 51 31 24 68 05 57 07 54 69 21 67 43 17 63 12 24 59 06 08 98 74 66 26 61 60 13 03 09 09 24 30 71 08 88 70 72 70 29 90 11 82 41 34 66 82 67 04 36 60 92 77 91 85 62 49 59 61 30 90 29 94 26 41 89 04 53 22 83 41 09 74 90 48 28 26 37 28 52 77 26 51 32 18 98 79 36 62 13 17 08 19 54 89 29 73 68 42 14 08 16 70 37 37 60 69 70 72 71 09 59 13 60 38 13 57 36 09 30 43 89 30 39 15 02 44 73 05 73 26 63 56 86 12 55 55 85 50 62 99 84 77 28 85 03 21 27 22 19 26 82 69 54 04 13 07 85 14 01 15 70 59 89 95 10 19 04 09 31 92 91 38 92 86 98 75 21 05 64 42 62 84 36 20 73 42 21 23 22 51 51 79 25 45 85 53 03 43 22 75 63 02 49 14 12 89 14 60 78 92 16 44 82 38 30 72 11 46 52 90 27 08 65 78 03 85 41 57 79 39 52 33 48 78 27 56 56 39 13 19 43 86 72 58 95 39 07 04 34 21 98 39 15 39 84 89 69 84 46 37 57 59 35 59 50 26 15 93 42 89 36 27 78 91 24 11 17 41 05 94 07 69 51 96 03 96 47 90 90 45 91 20 50 56 10 32 36 49 04 53 85 92 25 65 52 09 61 30 61 97 66 21 96 92 98 90 06 34 96 60 32 69 68 33 75 84 18 31 71 50 84 63 03 03 19 11 28 42 75 45 45 61 31 61 68 96 34 49 39 05 71 76 59 62 67 06 47 96 99 34 21 32 47 52 07 71 60 42 72 94 56 82 83 84 40 94 87 82 46 01 20 60 14 17 38 26 78 66 81 45 95 18 51 98 81 48 16 53 88 37 52 69 95 72 93 22 34 98 20 54 27 73 61 56 63 60 34 63 93 42 94 83 47 61 27 51 79 79 45 01 44 73 31 70 83 42 88 25 53 51 30 15 65 94 80 44 61 84 12 77 02 62 02 65 94 42 14 94 32 73 09 67 68 29 74 98 10 19 85 48 38 31 85 67 53 93 93 77 47 67 39 72 94 53 18 43 77 40 78 32 29 59 24 06 02 83 50 60 66 32 01 44 30 16 51 15 81 98 15 10 62 86 79 50 62 45 60 70 38 31 85 65 61 64 06 69 84 14 22 56 43 09 48 66 69 83 91 60 40 36 61 92 48 22 99 15 95 64 43 01 16 94 02 99 19 17 69 11 58 97 56 89 31 77 45 67 96 12 73 08 20 36 47 81 44 50 64 68 85 40 81 85 52 09 91 35 92 45 32 84 62 15 19 64 21 66 06 01 52 80 62 59 12 25 88 28 91 50 40 16 22 99 92 79 87 51 21 77 74 77 07 42 38 42 74 83 02 05 46 19 77 66 24 18 05 32 02 84 31 99 92 58 96 72 91 36 62 99 55 29 53 42 12 37 26 58 89 50 66 19 82 75 12 48 24 87 91 85 02 07 03 76 86 99 98 84 93 07 17 33 61 92 20 66 60 24 66 40 30 67 05 37 29 24 96 03 27 70 62 13 04 45 47 59 88 43 20 66 15 46 92 30 04 71 66 78 70 53 99 67 60 38 06 88 04 17 72 10 99 71 07 42 25 54 05 26 64 91 50 45 71 06 30 67 48 69 82 08 56 80 67 18 46 66 63 01 20 08 80 47 07 91 16 03 79 87 18 54 78 49 80 48 77 40 68 23 60 88 58 80 33 57 11 69 55 53 64 02 94 49 60 92 16 35 81 21 82 96 25 24 96 18 02 05 49 03 50 77 06 32 84 27 18 38 68 01 50 04 03 21 42 94 53 24 89 05 92 26 52 36 68 11 85 01 04 42 02 45 15 06 50 04 53 73 25 74 81 88 98 21 67 84 79 97 99 20 95 04 40 46 02 58 87 94 10 02 78 88 52 21 03 88 60 06 53 49 71 20 91 12 65 07 49 21 22 11 41 58 99 36 16 09 48 17 24 52 36 23 15 72 16 84 56 02 99 43 76 81 71 29 39 49 17 64 39 59 84 86 16 17 66 03 09 43 06 64 18 63 29 68 06 23 07 87 14 26 35 17 12 98 41 53 64 78 18 98 27 28 84 80 67 75 62 10 11 76 90 54 10 05 54 41 39 66 43 83 18 37 32 31 52 29 95 47 08 76 35 11 04 53 35 43 34 10 52 57 12 36 20 39 40 55 78 44 07 31 38 26 08 15 56 88 86 01 52 62 10 24 32 05 60 65 53 28 57 99 03 50 03 52 07 73 49 92 66 80 01 46 08 67 25 36 73 93 07 42 25 53 13 96 76 83 87 90 54 89 78 22 78 91 73 51 69 09 79 94 83 53 09 40 69 62 10 79 49 47 03 81 30 71 54 73 33 51 76 59 54 79 37 56 45 84 17 62 21 98 69 41 95 65 24 39 37 62 03 24 48 54 64 46 82 71 78 33 67 09 16 96 68 52 74 79 68 32 21 13 78 96 60 09 69 20 36 73 26 21 44 46 38 17 83 65 98 07 23 52 46 61 97 33 13 60 31 70 15 36 77 31 58 56 93 75 68 21 36 69 53 90 75 25 82 39 50 65 94 29 30 11 33 11 13 96 02 56 47 07 49 02 76 46 73 30 10 20 60 70 14 56 34 26 37 39 48 24 55 76 84 91 39 86 95 61 50 14 53 93 64 67 37 31 10 84 42 70 48 20 10 72 60 61 84 79 69 65 99 73 89 25 85 48 92 56 97 16 03 14 80 27 22 30 44 27 67 75 79 32 51 54 81 29 65 14 19 04 13 82 04 91 43 40 12 52 29 99 07 76 60 25 01 07 61 71 37 92 40 47 99 66 57 01 43 44 22 40 53 53 09 69 26 81 07 49 80 56 90 93 87 47 13 75 28 87 23 72 79 32 18 27 20 28 10 37 59 21 18 70 04 79 96 03 31 45 71 81 06 14 18 17 05 31 50 92 79 23 47 09 39 47 91 43 54 69 47 42 95 62 46 32 85 37 18 62 85 87 28 64 05 77 51 47 26 30 65 05 70 65 75 59 80 42 52 25 20 44 10 92 17 71 95 52 14 77 13 24 55 11 65 26 91 01 30 63 15 49 48 41 17 67 47 03 68 20 90 98 32 04 40 68 90 51 58 60 06 55 23 68 05 19 76 94 82 36 96 43 38 90 87 28 33 83 05 17 70 83 96 93 06 04 78 47 80 06 23 84 75 23 87 72 99 14 50 98 92 38 90 64 61 58 76 94 36 66 87 80 51 35 61 38 57 95 64 06 53 36 82 51 40 33 47 14 07 98 78 65 39 58 53 06 50 53 04 69 40 68 36 69 75 78 75 60 03 32 39 24 74 47 26 90 13 40 44 71 90 76 51 24 36 50 25 45 70 80 61 80 61 43 90 64 11 18 29 86 56 68 42 79 10 42 44 30 12 96 18 23 18 52 59 02 99 67 46 60 86 43 38 55 17 44 93 42 21 55 14 47 34 55 16 49 24 23 29 96 51 55 10 46 53 27 92 27 46 63 57 30 65 43 27 21 20 24 83 81 72 93 19 69 52 48 01 13 83 92 69 20 48 69 59 20 62 05 42 28 89 90 99 32 72 84 17 08 87 36 03 60 31 36 36 81 26 97 36 48 54 56 56 27 16 91 08 23 11 87 99 33 47 02 14 44 73 70 99 43 35 33 90 56 61 86 56 12 70 59 63 32 01 15 81 47 71 76 95 32 65 80 54 70 34 51 40 45 33 04 64 55 78 68 88 47 31 47 68 87 03 84 23 44 89 72 35 08 31 76 63 26 90 85 96 67 65 91 19 14 17 86 04 71 32 95 37 13 04 22 64 37 37 28 56 62 86 33 07 37 10 44 52 82 52 06 19 52 57 75 90 26 91 24 06 21 14 67 76 30 46 14 35 89 89 41 03 64 56 97 87 63 22 34 03 79 17 45 11 53 25 56 96 61 23 18 63 31 37 37 47 77 23 26 70 72 76 77 04 28 64 71 69 14 85 96 54 95 48 06 62 99 83 86 77 97 75 71 66 30 19 57 90 33 01 60 61 14 12 90 99 32 77 56 41 18 14 87 49 10 14 90 64 18 50 21 74 14 16 88 05 45 73 82 47 74 44 22 97 41 13 34 31 54 61 56 94 03 24 59 27 98 77 04 09 37 40 12 26 87 09 71 70 07 18 64 57 80 21 12 71 83 94 60 39 73 79 73 19 97 32 64 29 41 07 48 84 85 67 12 74 95 20 24 52 41 67 56 61 29 93 35 72 69 72 23 63 66 01 11 07 30 52 56 95 16 65 26 83 90 50 74 60 18 16 48 43 77 37 11 99 98 30 94 91 26 62 73 45 12 87 73 47 27 01 88 66 99 21 41 95 80 02 53 23 32 61 48 32 43 43 83 14 66 95 91 19 81 80 67 25 88 08 62 32 18 92 14 83 71 37 96 11 83 39 99 05 16 23 27 10 67 02 25 44 11 55 31 46 64 41 56 44 74 26 81 51 31 45 85 87 09 81 95 22 28 76 69 46 48 64 87 67 76 27 89 31 11 74 16 62 03 60 94 42 47 09 34 94 93 72 56 18 90 18 42 17 42 32 14 86 06 53 33 95 99 35 29 15 44 20 49 59 25 54 34 59 84 21 23 54 35 90 78 16 93 13 37 88 54 19 86 67 68 55 66 84 65 42 98 37 87 56 33 28 58 38 28 38 66 27 52 21 81 15 08 22 97 32 85 27 91 53 40 28 13 34 91 25 01 63 50 37 22 49 71 58 32 28 30 18 68 94 23 83 63 62 94 76 80 41 90 22 82 52 29 12 18 56 10 08 35 14 37 57 23 65 67 40 72 39 93 39 70 89 40 34 07 46 94 22 20 05 53 64 56 30 05 56 61 88 27 23 95 11 12 37 69 68 24 66 10 87 70 43 50 75 07 62 41 83 58 95 93 89 79 45 39 02 22 05 22 95 43 62 11 68 29 17 40 26 44 25 71 87 16 70 85 19 25 59 94 90 41 41 80 61 70 55 60 84 33 95 76 42 63 15 09 03 40 38 12 03 32 09 84 56 80 61 55 85 97 16 94 82 94 98 57 84 30 84 48 93 90 71 05 95 90 73 17 30 98 40 64 65 89 07 79 09 19 56 36 42 30 23 69 73 72 07 05 27 61 24 31 43 48 71 84 21 28 26 65 65 59 65 74 77 20 10 81 61 84 95 08 52 23 70 47 81 28 09 98 51 67 64 35 51 59 36 92 82 77 65 80 24 72 53 22 07 27 10 21 28 30 22 48 82 80 48 56 20 14 43 18 25 50 95 90 31 77 08 09 48 44 80 90 22 93 45 82 17 13 96 25 26 08 73 34 99 06 49 24 06 83 51 40 14 15 10 25 01 54 25 10 81 30 64 24 74 75 80 36 75 82 60 22 69 72 91 45 67 03 62 79 54 89 74 44 83 64 96 66 73 44 30 74 50 37 05 09 97 70 01 60 46 37 91 39 75 75 18 58 52 72 78 51 81 86 52 08 97 01 46 43 66 98 62 81 18 70 93 73 08 32 46 34 96 80 82 07 59 71 92 53 19 20 88 66 03 26 26 10 24 27 50 82 94 73 63 08 51 33 22 45 19 13 58 33 90 15 22 50 36 13 55 06 35 47 82 52 33 61 36 27 28 46 98 14 73 20 73 32 16 26 80 53 47 66 76 38 94 45 02 01 22 52 47 96 64 58 52 39 88 46 23 39 74 63 81 64 20 90 33 33 76 55 58 26 10 46 42 26 74 74 12 83 32 43 09 02 73 55 86 54 85 34 28 23 29 79 91 62 47 41 82 87 99 22 48 90 20 05 96 75 95 04 43 28 81 39 81 01 28 42 78 25 39 77 90 57 58 98 17 36 73 22 63 74 51 29 39 74 94 95 78 64 24 38 86 63 87 93 06 70 92 22 16 80 64 29 52 20 27 23 50 14 13 87 15 72 96 81 22 08 49 72 30 70 24 79 31 16 64 59 21 89 34 96 91 48 76 43 53 88 01 57 80 23 81 90 79 58 01 80 87 17 99 86 90 72 63 32 69 14 28 88 69 37 17 71 95 56 93 71 35 43 45 04 98 92 94 84 96 11 30 31 27 31 60 92 03 48 05 98 91 86 94 35 90 90 08 48 19 33 28 68 37 59 26 65 96 50 68 22 07 09 49 34 31 77 49 43 06 75 17 81 87 61 79 52 26 27 72 29 50 07 98 86 01 17 10 46 64 24 18 56 51 30 25 94 88 85 79 91 40 33 63 84 49 67 98 92 15 26 75 19 82 05 18 78 65 93 61 48 91 43 59 41 70 51 22 15 92 81 67 91 46 98 11 11 65 31 66 10 98 65 83 21 05 56 05 98 73 67 46 74 69 34 08 30 05 52 07 98 32 95 30 94 65 50 24 63 28 81 99 57 19 23 61 36 09 89 71 98 65 17 30 29 89 26 79 74 94 11 44 48 97 54 81 55 39 66 69 45 28 47 13 86 15 76 74 70 84 32 36 33 79 20 78 14 41 47 89 28 81 05 99 66 81 86 38 26 06 25 13 60 54 55 23 53 27 05 89 25 23 11 13 54 59 54 56 34 16 24 53 44 06 13 40 57 72 21 15 60 08 04 19 11 98 34 45 09 97 86 71 03 15 56 19 15 44 97 31 90 04 87 87 76 08 12 30 24 62 84 28 12 85 82 53 99 52 13 94 06 65 97 86 09 50 94 68 69 74 30 67 87 94 63 07 78 27 80 36 69 41 06 92 32 78 37 82 30 05 18 87 99 72 19 99 44 20 55 77 69 91 27 31 28 81 80 27 02 07 97 23 95 98 12 25 75 29 47 71 07 47 78 39 41 59 27 76 13 15 66 61 68 35 69 86 16 53 67 63 99 85 41 56 08 28 33 40 94 76 90 85 31 70 24 65 84 65 99 82 19 25 54 37 21 46 33 02 52 99 51 33 26 04 87 02 08 18 96 54 42 61 45 91 06 64 79 80 82 32 16 83 63 42 49 19 78 65 97 40 42 14 61 49 34 04 18 25 98 59 30 82 72 26 88 54 36 21 75 03 88 99 53 46 51 55 78 22 94 34 40 68 87 84 25 30 76 25 08 92 84 42 61 40 38 09 99 40 23 29 39 46 55 10 90 35 84 56 70 63 23 91 39 52 92 03 71 89 07 09 37 68 66 58 20 44 92 51 56 13 71 79 99 26 37 02 06 16 67 36 52 58 16 79 73 56 60 59 27 44 77 94 82 20 50 98 33 09 87 94 37 40 83 64 83 58 85 17 76 53 02 83 52 22 27 39 20 48 92 45 21 09 42 24 23 12 37 52 28 50 78 79 20 86 62 73 20 59 54 96 80 15 91 90 99 70 10 09 58 90 93 50 81 99 54 38 36 10 30 11 35 84 16 45 82 18 11 97 36 43 96 79 97 65 40 48 23 19 17 31 64 52 65 65 37 32 65 76 99 79 34 65 79 27 55 33 03 01 33 27 61 28 66 08 04 70 49 46 48 83 01 45 19 96 13 81 14 21 31 79 93 85 50 05 92 92 48 84 59 98 31 53 23 27 15 22 79 95 24 76 05 79 16 93 97 89 38 89 42 83 02 88 94 95 82 21 01 97 48 39 31 78 09 65 50 56 97 61 01 07 65 27 21 23 14 15 80 97 44 78 49 35 33 45 81 74 34 05 31 57 09 38 94 07 69 54 69 32 65 68 46 68 78 90 24 28 49 51 45 86 35 41 63 89 76 87 31 86 09 46 14 87 82 22 29 47 16 13 10 70 72 82 95 48 64 58 43 13 75 42 69 21 12 67 13 64 85 58 23 98 09 37 76 05 22 31 12 66 50 29 99 86 72 45 25 10 28 19 06 90 43 29 31 67 79 46 25 74 14 97 35 76 37 65 46 23 82 06 22 30 76 93 66 94 17 96 13 20 72 63 40 78 08 52 09 90 41 70 28 36 14 46 44 85 96 24 52 58 15 87 37 05 98 99 39 13 61 76 38 44 99 83 74 90 22 53 80 56 98 30 51 63 39 44 30 91 91 04 22 27 73 17 35 53 18 35 45 54 56 27 78 48 13 69 36 44 38 71 25 30 56 15 22 73 43 32 69 59 25 93 83 45 11 34 94 44 39 92 12 36 56 88 13 96 16 12 55 54 11 47 19 78 17 17 68 81 77 51 42 55 99 85 66 27 81 79 93 42 65 61 69 74 14 01 18 56 12 01 58 37 91 22 42 66 83 25 19 04 96 41 25 45 18 69 96 88 36 93 10 12 98 32 44 83 83 04 72 91 04 27 73 07 34 37 71 60 59 31 01 54 54 44 96 93 83 36 04 45 30 18 22 20 42 96 65 79 17 41 55 69 94 81 29 80 91 31 85 25 47 26 43 49 02 99 34 67 99 76 16 14 15 93 08 32 99 44 61 77 67 50 43 55 87 55 53 72 17 46 62 25 50 99 73 05 93 48 17 31 70 80 59 09 44 59 45 13 74 66 58 94 87 73 16 14 85 38 74 99 64 23 79 28 71 42 20 37 82 31 23 51 96 39 65 46 71 56 13 29 68 53 86 45 33 51 49 12 91 21 21 76 85 02 17 98 15 46 12 60 21 88 30 92 83 44 59 42 50 27 88 46 86 94 73 45 54 23 24 14 10 94 21 20 34 23 51 04 83 99 75 90 63 60 16 22 33 83 70 11 32 10 50 29 30 83 46 11 05 31 17 86 42 49 01 44 63 28 60 07 78 95 40 44 61 89 59 04 49 51 27 69 71 46 76 44 04 09 34 56 39 15 06 94 91 75 90 65 27 56 23 74 06 23 33 36 69 14 39 05 34 35 57 33 22 76 46 56 10 61 65 98 09 16 69 04 62 65 18 99 76 49 18 72 66 73 83 82 40 76 31 89 91 27 88 17 35 41 35 32 51 32 67 52 68 74 85 80 57 07 11 62 66 47 22 67 65 37 19 97 26 17 16 24 24 17 50 37 64 82 24 36 32 11 68 34 69 31 32 89 79 93 96 68 49 90 14 23 04 04 67 99 81 74 70 74 36 96 68 09 64 39 88 35 54 89 96 58 66 27 88 97 32 14 06 35 78 20 71 06 85 66 57 02 58 91 72 05 29 56 73 48 86 52 09 93 22 57 79 42 12 01 31 68 17 59 63 76 07 77 73 81 14 13 17 20 11 09 01 83 08 85 91 70 84 63 62 77 37 07 47 01 59 95 39 69 39 21 99 09 87 02 97 16 92 36 74 71 90 66 33 73 73 75 52 91 11 12 26 53 05 26 26 48 61 50 90 65 01 87 42 47 74 35 22 73 24 26 56 70 52 05 48 41 31 18 83 27 21 39 80 85 26 08 44 02 71 07 63 22 05 52 19 08 20 17 25 21 11 72 93 33 49 64 23 53 82 03 13 91 65 85 02 40 05 42 31 77 42 05 36 06 54 04 58 07 76 87 83 25 57 66 12 74 33 85 37 74 32 20 69 03 97 91 68 82 44 19 14 89 28 85 85 80 53 34 87 58 98 88 78 48 65 98 40 11 57 10 67 70 81 60 79 74 72 97 59 79 47 30 20 54 80 89 91 14 05 33 36 79 39 60 85 59 39 60 07 57 76 77 92 06 35 15 72 23 41 45 52 95 18 64 79 86 53 56 31 69 11 91 31 84 50 44 82 22 81 41 40 30 42 30 91 48 94 74 76 64 58 74 25 96 57 14 19 03 99 28 83 15 75 99 01 89 85 79 50 03 95 32 67 44 08 07 41 62 64 29 20 14 76 26 55 48 71 69 66 19 72 44 25 14 01 48 74 12 98 07 64 66 84 24 18 16 27 48 20 14 47 69 30 86 48 40 23 16 61 21 51 50 26 47 35 33 91 28 78 64 43 68 04 79 51 08 19 60 52 95 06 68 46 86 35 97 27 58 04 65 30 58 99 12 12 75 91 39 50 31 42 64 70 04 46 07 98 73 98 93 37 89 77 91 64 71 64 65 66 21 78 62 81 74 42 20 83 70 73 95 78 45 92 27 34 53 71 15 30 11 85 31 34 71 13 48 05 14 44 03 19 67 23 73 19 57 06 90 94 72 57 69 81 62 59 68 88 57 55 69 49 13 07 87 97 80 89 05 71 05 05 26 38 40 16 62 45 99 18 38 98 24 21 26 62 74 69 04 85 57 77 35 58 67 91 79 79 57 86 28 66 34 72 51 76 78 36 95 63 90 08 78 47 63 45 31 22 70 52 48 79 94 15 77 61 67 68 23 33 44 81 80 92 93 75 94 88 23 61 39 76 22 03 28 94 32 06 49 65 41 34 18 23 08 47 62 60 03 63 33 13 80 52 31 54 73 43 70 26 16 69 57 87 83 31 03 93 70 81 47 95 77 44 29 68 39 51 56 59 63 07 25 70 07 77 43 53 64 03 94 42 95 39 18 01 66 21 16 97 20 50 90 16 70 10 95 69 29 06 25 61 41 26 15 59 63 35";
    String triangle2 = "75 95 64 17 47 82 18 35 87 10 20 04 82 47 65 19 01 23 75 03 34 88 02 77 73 07 63 67 99 65 04 28 06 16 70 92 41 41 26 56 83 40 80 70 33 41 48 72 33 47 32 37 16 94 29 53 71 44 65 25 43 91 52 97 51 14 70 11 33 28 77 73 17 78 39 68 17 57 91 71 52 38 17 14 91 43 58 50 27 29 48 63 66 04 68 89 53 67 30 73 16 69 87 40 31 04 62 98 27 23 09 70 98 73 93 38 53 60 04 23";
    // triangle = active one, problem 67 now. triangle2 = inactive one, problem 18.
    String[] total = split(triangle, " ");
    int size = 200;
    int probability_switch = 200; // reads 1 out of 200
    int probability_scramble = 15; // 1 out of 15
    int probability_inversion = 100; // 1 out of 100
    
    int[] path_genome(int[] nums) {
      int rows = (-1+int(sqrt(1+8*total.length)))/2;;
      int[] moves = new int[rows];
      int pos = 0;
      for(int i=1; i<=rows; i++) {
        if(i<rows) {
        if(nums[i+pos]>nums[i+pos+1]) {
          pos += i;
          moves[i] = 0;
        } else {
          pos += i+1;
          moves[i] = 1;
        }
        }
      }
      return moves;
    }
    
    int getFitness(int[] path, int[]triangles) {
      int pos = 0;
      int fitness = triangles[pos];
      for(int i=1; i<path.length; i++) {
        pos += i+path[i];
        fitness += triangles[pos];
      }
      return fitness;
    }
    
    int[] doMutation(int[] path) {
      //FLIP Mutation
      for (int i = 1; i < path.length; i++) {
         if(floor(random(probability_switch))==1){
           if(path[i]==1) {
            path[i] = 0; 
           } else {
             path[i] = 1;
           }
         }
         
          //SCRAMBLE MUTATION
       if(floor(random(probability_scramble))==1) {
       int start_position = floor(random(path.length));
       int end_position = floor(random(path.length));
       if (start_position > end_position) {
        int temp = start_position;
        start_position = end_position;
        end_position = temp;
       }
       for (i = start_position; i < end_position; i++) {
         int pick = floor(random(start_position, end_position+1));
         int temp = path[i];
         path[i] = path[pick];
         path[pick] = temp;
         }
       }
       
       //INVERSION MUTATION
       if(floor(random(probability_inversion))==1) {
       int start_position = floor(random(path.length));
       int end_position = floor(random(path.length));
       if (start_position > end_position) {
        int temp = start_position;
        start_position = end_position;
        end_position = temp;
       }
       int n =0;
       for (i = start_position; i < ceil((end_position+start_position)/2); i++) {
         int pick = end_position-n;
         int temp = path[i];
         path[i] = path[pick];
         path[pick] = temp;
         n++;
         }
       }
       }
       return path;
    }
    
    int[][] getGenePool(int[] path) {
      int[][] pool = new int[size][path.length];
      for (int i=0; i<size; i++) {
        pool[i] = makeArrayCopy(path);
      }
      return pool;
    }
    
    int[] makeArrayCopy(int[] old) {
      int[] copy = new int[old.length];
      for(int i = 0; i<old.length; i++){
            copy[i] = old[i];
        }
        return copy;
    }
    
    int getFittest(int[][] pool, int[] nums) {
      int fittest_loc = 0;
      int fitness_new = 0;
      int fitness = 0;
      for(int i=0; i<size; i++) {
        fitness_new = getFitness(pool[i], nums);
        if(fitness_new > fitness) {
          fitness = fitness_new;
          fittest_loc = i;
        }
      }
      return fittest_loc;
    }
    
    void setup() {
      int[] nums = int(split(triangle, " "));
      int[] path = path_genome(nums);
      int fitness_loc = 0;
      int numGens = 0;
      while(numGens<1000000) {
      numGens++;
      int[][] pool = getGenePool(path);
      for(int i=1; i<size; i++) {
        pool[i]=doMutation(pool[i]);
      }
      fitness_loc = getFittest(pool, nums);
      path = pool[fitness_loc];
      if(numGens%5000==0) {
        println(getFitness(path, nums));
      }
      }
      println(getFitness(path, nums));
    }
    

    Now, this evolutionary algorithm doesn't manage to solve Problem 67 (although I expected it to, that's why I chose to use it for the first problem, instead of trying brute force), though it gets very close to the answer - gets to around ~7200 and the answer is 7273.

    Here's a dynamic programming way to solve it, also written in Processing. Basically, it solves each "small" triangle starting at the very bottom, and then records that answer on the row above.

    Note - to run this one, you must download the .txt file from the first link and then save it in the same folder as the program.

    void setup() {
      int[][] triangle = readInput("triangle.txt");
      int lines = triangle.length;
      for(int i = lines-2; i>=0; i--) {
       for(int j = 0; j < i+1; j++) {
         if(triangle[i+1][j]>triangle[i+1][j+1]) {
           triangle[i][j] += triangle[i+1][j];
         } else {
         triangle[i][j] += triangle[i+1][j+1];
         }
       }
      }
      println(triangle[0][0]);
    }
    
    int[][] readInput(String filename) {
      String line;
      String[] linePieces;
      int lines = 0;
      BufferedReader reader;
      BufferedReader reader2;
      reader = createReader(filename);
      reader2 = createReader(filename);
      
      try {
        while ((line = reader.readLine()) != null) {
          lines++;
        }
        reader.close();
      } catch (IOException e) {
        e.printStackTrace();
      }
      
       int[][] inputTriangle = new int[lines][lines];
       
      try {
        int j = 0;
        while ((line = reader2.readLine()) != null) {
          linePieces = split(line, " ");
        for (int i = 0; i < linePieces.length; i++) {
                inputTriangle[j][i] = int(linePieces[i]);
            }
            j++;
        }
        reader2.close();
      } catch (IOException e) {
        e.printStackTrace();
      }
      
      return inputTriangle;
    }
    
    Altering the probabilities of the evolutionary one, the limit of numGens (number of generations tested) in the while loop, and size (the size of the gene pool), can alter the results obtained. Does anyone have a way to make the evolutionary one more efficient to reach the answer?
  • Dogma or Existentialism or Relativism?
    There is an abundance of leaves and twigs.Wayfarer
    Sure, but not everyone has the skill to make them into a raft, even if it's a 'bad' raft. The raft represent the teachings - the teachings may now be useless to you now that you are enlightened, but send them down the river, someone who isn't enlightened may find them, and they will be of use to him/her. The problem isn't only keeping something that is no longer useful to you, the problem is keeping something that isn't useful to you and could be useful to others. I think the Buddhist parable misses this aspect and it doesn't surprise me, given Buddhism's somewhat "selfish" focus on personal salvation (this is only relative to other faiths, not absolute).
  • Dogma or Existentialism or Relativism?
    She takes one very general logical truth (we are all rationally self-interested)Inter Alia
    That's not a logical truth.
  • Dogma or Existentialism or Relativism?
    Fair enough. I would interpret it as follows.

    First, it is a Sutta, meaning it is said to be something the Buddha really taught. In the Alagaddupama Sutta the Buddha gives two similes which explain how the dhamma that he teaches to the monks ought to be understood, one of which is the parable of the raft.

    The parable of the raft starts with the simile of 'a great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other.' The 'near shore' and the crossing itself, symbolise 'samsara' or worldly existence, with all of the hazards and dangers that it poses. The 'far sure' represents Nirvāṇa, freedom from all worldly anxiety and suffering.

    So the man says 'What if I were to gather grass, twigs, branches, & leaves and, having bound them together to make a raft, were to cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft, making an effort with my hands & feet?'

    The 'raft' symbolises the vessel which is used to 'cross the expanse of water' - that is, the very teaching of the Buddha about 'the cause of suffering’ and its end.

    I was struck by the simile of the raft being makeshift - twigs and the like 'being bound together' - so that it doesn't present 'the vessel' as being something of fine manufacture, you might say. In a way it's quite self-deprecating.

    Then having 'crossed the river', the Buddha says, '"Having crossed over to the further shore, he might think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having hoisted it on my head or carrying it on my back, go wherever I like?' What do you think, monks: Would the man, in doing that, be doing what should be done with the raft?"

    "No, lord."

    So the message is, once the raft has served its purpose, it is discarded. The simile ends with this admonition:

    'Understanding the Dhamma as taught compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-Dhammas.'
    Wayfarer
    I never liked this parable of the raft. Largely because of the ending of "leaving the raft behind" instead of sending it back down the stream so that others may find it and use it to cross the river. An opportunity lost.
  • Can anyone speak any languages other than English/What are the best ways to learn a second language?
    Ohhhhh >:) so you finally decided to emerge from the basement? O:) X-)
  • Cryptocurrency
    The evil banksters who have run the world since the beginning of civilization will continue to do so. I tend to agree with that side of the question.fishfry
    How will they manage that? The only way they'll succeed is if they become the miners. Or in collaboration with the government, they change the USD to a blockchain system of their own making. Either way, I think the blockchain technology will win.

    In the beginning, we traded goods for goods - you gave me your tomatoes, and I gave you my potatoes. Then to make trade easier, we introduced gold coins - and their worth was given by their weight in gold. But as trade expanded, gold coins became too heavy to carry around. So we introduced paper currency backed by gold. For every dollar out there, there was gold to back it up - that was its intrinsic value. Then in order to expand trade even further, we realised that currency doesn't actually need an intrinsic value, so we ditched the gold standard, and we arrived at the fiat currencies we have today, which are just a means of exchanging value. Money still maintained a physical aspect though, in order to prevent double-spend. The blockchain technology is just the next evolution from that - now we ditch the physical aspect completely, since money is a fictive commodity anyway, merely useful to facilitate exchanges and trade. And with the blockchain technology, we can avoid double-spend too and automate all other aspects of trade that we couldn't until today. Because trade no longer requires trust, it can massively expand once again.

    The government can't outlaw that. Programs are speech in the sense of the first amendment. I believe [not really up on this] that there have been court rulings to that effect.fishfry
    I think the government can absolutely outlaw blockchain technologies. Not that this would do anything, because not all governments will outlaw it.

    Of course governments can bust the miners and the exchanges. Those are the weak points in the system where the cryptos meet the real world.fishfry
    Why do you think they're weak? I don't think they're weak at all. If China bans miners, US miners will take over, and so on. Because power is distributed through the whole network, and does not rely on any one person or group to keep it going. So to really bust them, there must be a coalition of governments looking to do that. And I don't think that if some governments seek to do that, others won't seek to do the opposite.

    Try Coinbase again. If they finally let me in perhaps they have their technical problems fixed.fishfry
    It's not available for my region ;)

    And anyway, I heard some bad things about Coinbase. They limit people's ability to buy and sell, etc. Kraken seems really good, if it wasn't DDoS'd all the time. Bitstamp is very good for those in the EU.

    What I'm not sure on yet, is how one can profit from blockchain technologies - it obviously will be able to help you in your own particular industry (through smart contracts, etc. etc.), but how do you profit from the technology itself, apart from becoming a miner, or opening your own currency?
  • Cryptocurrency
    Coinbase, Gemini, Cex, Kraken haven't worked for me. I do have an acc with Bitstamp (and an external wallet) though I haven't bought yet. I might invest some after the fall.

    And don't forget that nation states and governments have had the monopoly on legal tender for quite a while now. And then there is the interest the tax office has on any kind of transactions. Hence if you would have a widely accepted "cryptocurrency", then likely it's watered down so that it's easy for the authorities to check the transfers. Because what will regulators see with cryptocurrencies? Money laundering and tax evasion.ssu
    Identities are always revealed when trying to exchange crypto for any standard currency. To mask the identity, you'd need to purchase directly with crypto for the most part (and also receive your payments in crypto, not in USD you convert later to crypto).

    The thing is, I don't see anything that nations can do to stop crypto. To begin with, politicians are too dumb to even understand what is really happening. And even if they did, it quickly turns into a game theory situation. Those nations which don't outlaw crypto will have a significant advantage in the form of cost-reduction based on the blockchain technology. By automating all transactions that previously were based on some form of human input, billions will be saved.

    The other thing is that crypto isn't centralised at all. There is no "one player" who you can take down, and down goes the crypto. It's much like guerrilla warfare - the enemy is everywhere. It's the kind of technology that once started nobody can really control.

    I think it's a clear fact already that digital currency of the crypto kind is superior to our paper fiat currency though. It does make all transactions easier and significantly cheaper. So perhaps in the future, we'll be approaching a situation where everything is exchanged in crypto, not in fiat currencies - so this exchange of Bitcoin/USD becomes irrelevant.

    And anyway, likely bitcoin Tulip-mania level bubble bursting will decrease the hype around cryptocurrencies.ssu
    I do think Bitcoin will collapse in value, but the underlying blockchain technology will very likely revolutionise the way we do business. This paper was very interesting.
  • Cryptocurrency
    Yes, I was reading about it a bit. Basically eliminates the need for trust in transactions, since everything is automated by what is essentially software. Trust is no longer needed to make the system work.
  • Transubstantiation
    I recommend you stop being so rude.unenlightened
    Okay.

    My apologies.

    Can you explain what all the fuss was about when Luther rejected the sacraments or should he also go back to smoking weed?charleton
    Luther didn't reject all the sacraments, he just disagreed with the Aristotelian interpretation of transubstantiation which was common in his day. Not to mention that there were times in Luther's life when he agreed with the doctrine of transubstantiation as well.