Postingan

This could reduce gang fights, maybe

Because gang disputes are evil, when you remove a chunk of the evil the interests would reduce. So if you legalize gang fights, maybe create a special area like special economic tax free territories we have now, and then you inform to the gangs that you knew were in a tension with each other, you'd reduce the chances of that happening.  Maybe an increase for non deadly fights, but deadly gang battles should be able to be reduced just by the act of legalizing and organizing it. Because they were fueled by evil. If they wanted to do it without supervision anyway, then I don't know, but still my point if you organized it and legalized it, they should be less likely to want to do it. Such event should add nuances to the way of the gangs and eventually reduce the chances of "traditional" practices.

Lawful Professional Private Police v.02

As a supporter of many Libertarian ideas I anticipate that governments would face a state where the police departments would be understaffed. In such occassion the government would gather funds from the people and finance private police entities that had the professional education to be professional police forces. Then the role of the original police would be changed into becoming reviewers or overseers of the new "mercenary police forces". I mean this in the context of occassionally not permanently. This is pretty flexible in a way that we would want a stable income for the police but we also want no incentives to play any "crime farming" game. We could choose an insurance style setup where the "mercenaries" were employed by insurance companies, or just a dedicated company. We could also choose a kind of militia setup where regular people were rewarded for doing police works as long as they were disciplined in the law (because it is imperative for them to

Is charity unjust? v.11f

Before I get to other points I'd say that charity is not always unjust and so not always just. The thing is monopoly exists in this world, meaning that you could look for systems and procedures that had prevented selling below cost in the past, if such were not found then pretty likely injustice had happened in the economy, there was a mutilation (the cutting off of competitions by selling unprofitably), unless the monopolizers were angelic. The problem is that people had been cut off from being able to contribute to the economy, I blame monopolistic practices for this however I was wrong in judging all monopolies as bad, I shouldn't have said that and instead should've pointed out that some unfair competition schemes are and have been difficult to address. So in the face of injustice you'd want to make it right, using whose money? Robbing other people? even if you robbed the monopolizers, it is still an act of injustice and its going to build the momentum of injustice,

The Aim

To be honest I rather have a robot as my boss, except when I'm doing human to human work, but for a mechanical pre programmed work I rather have a robot as my boss, not an AI cause they're weird, just a plain old robots. The robot would pay me based on pre programmed assessments, no drama, no politics, just payments and performance. Yet AI would be able to do the job so I might not be able to see that future for me. So many resources, so little attribution. Why is it that the world is so big and full of energy, but for us we are poor? Actually farming is supposed to be able to be done by individuals, and not just few specialized varieties but most nutritions that we needed. We ourselves should be able to trade with the people who grew the missing nutritions, at least just within one network, not over myriad of steps like we have right now (2024). In that case having AI replacing us is fine, cause the attribution would be to us, the sole owner of the venture.  Such I meant not f

I don't know what the title is supposed to be... "Women"? v.02b

What's the most irresponsible Gender in the world? That's not fair, not all women, and I agree that's right, but that's the problem. When you're scrutinized you went spread, when you're attacking you went united, "Believe all women" really? is that really the solution? and you knew that it is wrong as well, but I think not all of you knew that the solution is the opposite of that? But hey who cares not that I'm going to be responsible for perpetuating all that, right? Harvey Weinstein for example or people like that, let's not use him in particular. People like him could've been just a regular perverted guy who started of just keeping it to himself, but because of his position lots of women, or guys, gave him plenty of sugars, and then he got addicted. I'm not a psychologist, just seeing the news and rumours that kept on being repeated about some high stakes deals in businesses. So, "Believe all women" should be "Scrutini

My Nyap Nyap video v.02b

So I made a nyap nyap video in my gaming channel where I speak random words. The purpose of this is just to make content when I'm bored or to make some kind of weird content where I could sprinkle some brand names or something. However, neurotic force in the world seems to me always want to make negative meanings of everything so, even when you're nyap nyaping and could consistently be interpreted negatively in a way, it doesn't necessarily mean that its your sayings (the derivative) it could be the encryption key, malintently made, or its just the brainstorming of negative energies around you, to make sense of them. Just, creepy people who wanted to extort people kept on trying to have something on you is an unfortunate existence in this world. Therefore, I say stop irresponsible neurotic talking where you're stealing contexts to talk about other things that is the person or the people around you. You can't be answered, you can't be corrected, and just a guaran

Transition to Merit offense mode v.05b

If an economy was sick and tired of being played like a tool and be passive about it by retardation, injustice, and evil, it can choose to went on the offense by being consciously meritocratic. It might be problematic but I recommend: 1. Reward people less per time and more per job, readyness and availability could be a job as well, but not for everybody, so per job. 2. Reward availability separately from action. Both deserve merit but both are different. 3. Proceed on abolishing severance payment so that people could diversify too not just corporate entities. 4. Print money for heroes like doctors and pay fixed income for their availabilities. Subscription merits. Again these are two different instances. 5. Implement Golden Stickers so that people could contribute to IP and also receive serotonin. But this one doesn't have to be the 5th step, implement this immidiately In the end I predict constant increase in levels of availabilities in mutual solutions. In most of my theories th