My Response on Uniquenameosaurus' The NETFLIX Problem

This is my writing in the comment section, I put a lot of thoughts in this so I want to put it here as well:

I have thought about the solution that should work. But it's rather long so please bear with me: I co-managed a small consulting business, and there comes a time when there are more potential customers than we can handle. So I should make a decision on what project should we jumped into. What I looked for in a person or a company is their propensity to appreciate, or their willingness to give thanks. If there were 2 future clients with similar offerings but one use piracy and the other doesn't use piracy, I would go on he who doesn't. Because I expect the people who don't use piracy are disciplined in creating reputation asset (a reputation that you're profitable for your stakeholders). Those who appreciate tend to be reasonable to negotiate with. Now, when you talked about competition and boycott, every single person doesn't want to be boycotted by other people, and we all want to get into good deals in our ventures. If there is a way to announce to the world that we are the type of people who give thanks to our sources of solutions, the creators of the technologies we enjoy, then that would be revolutionary. Even Jesus talked about this in His take on the Antichrist, that humanity will come to a time when they would have the power to choose and reject people participating in trading. I think one form of the manifestation of this idea could be like this: Social media companies allow people to issue stickers of their unique signature for another person. Different styles or levels of stickers would be made available. Then for a successful transaction, you could issue your sticker to your client, and your client to you. You would post the sticker in your profile page. Imagine giving thanks to w3c or Tim Berners Lee, will get him to post your sticker in his profile page, Tim Berners Lee, acknowledges you for mere 50 bucks or more. Now I'm sure having a lot of stickers like this on your profile page is good for business and this would be a very popular feature. And Netflix, as well as Crunchyroll, even Torrent sites would be flooded with authors wanting to post their services there with easy terms and conditions, why? because people are more appreciative now, the world is a friendlier place for authors. There would be no need for exclusive licensing it would be less profitable, that would be needed only in case of specific needs or purposes of some authors, but generally, you would want to reach as many people as possible because the audiences were incentivized to be reciprocal.

Ide ide produk

Majalah online diterbitkan oleh Universitas:
- Karena Universitas memiliki akses ke alumni dan hasil penelitian, majalah-majalah terbitan tiap fakultas universitas memiliki daya jual tersendiri. Akses ke artikel eksklusif dapat dibeli di aplikasi dan pengiklan bisa memberikan pesannya di tiap artikel yang gratis.

Lampu lalu lintas mini untuk pegawai kantor:
- Lampu ini bisa dipasang di belakang kursi atau di atas cubicle.
Merah artinya jangan diganggu walaupun penting
Kuning artinya boleh menginterupsi untuk urusan yang penting
Hijau artinya terbuka untuk berdiskusi. 

My concerns against the pollution tax movement v.05

After all my observant seasons, periods of my life observing people and trends happening around me. I discovered a problematic attitude that has been repeated over and over again.
That attitude is the refusal to negotiate.

People have limited attention spans, therefore up to this point, it's impossible to negotiate to every other living person. However, the inability to negotiate should be treated with regret and shame, not pride and a sense of legitimacy.

Every time whether it's done by Christians, Muslims, Vegans, Libertarians, or even Environmentalist, sending signals that it's good to not care about what the opposition has to say always brought about serious humanitarian issues which might beat the end goal of the cause or the agenda that they are pushing.

There are several angles or point of views on where I grounded the claim:
1. The backlash angle
2. The human error angle
3. The existential angle
4. The Risk of Creating persistent coercive Governmental administrations that would pose significant threats to the freedom of individuals angle.

Let's take for example pollution tax,
Advocates of pollution tax believed so strongly that the idea of pollution tax is not supposed to be challenged to become a part of the solution to the problem of climate change. In addition to that, they exert for its immediate regulative implementation, to the point that it seemed that there is an implication to disregard the required procedures for the idea to be constitutioned as law. In other words, they are ready to push for the disregard of the opposition against the proposition.

My worry is that the disregard would take a form of denying the opposition respectable hearings of their concerns. Which would most likely trigger backlashes against the campaign, making coercion a likely option to be used. The massive scale of coercion would invite tremendous friction against the movement making it so expensive it defeated the perceived benefit of its implementation.

Such regulation also needed to be tailored carefully, its ambitions to encompass global jurisdiction and micromanaging most human ventures would risk significant difficulties against the implementation of common solutions to humanity's known problems, naturally differs in substances and details for every demographics.

Since nobody was asked whether or not they wanted to be born, by common sense every one deserves everything in existence. This existential right should be differentiated from the utility right, where the utility right is derived from the notion that the scarcity of the world is not of time nor energy nor money but of mutual solutions, therefore in order to keep on improving the level of availability of mutual solutions in the world, the allocation of resources would best be directed towards the sources of the working mutual solutions. The utility right is imperative however it doesn't overrule the existential right because everyone has the existential right.  Therefore neglecting negotiation for some groups of people, no matter what the reason, is disrespectful against all individuals including the perpetrators. Such disrespect is a threat to the idea of property because the idea of property is invoked and maintained not by coercion, but by agreements between people.

What if such tax was implemented with disregard of the negotiations? Then coercive administrations would be created in order to push the regulation. Such administrations, that are grounded on animosity against the legitimacy of individual autonomy, would be created with high persistence they would be unheard of kinds of monsters to defeat, even after the climate change issue had been controlled successfully.

Thereby are my objections.

People are not territories v.02

Property is a social construct, we mutually realize the importance of having properties, so the concept was invoked. Therefore property shouldn’t exist within a human being. Property exists within contracts between people.

An incredibly attractive person embodies this principle. He/she treats you not as property or territory but if he/she thought you could provide him/her access to some desirable infrastructures, he/she respectfully proposed for a contract.

Sometimes the proposal could be in a form of coercive gestures, kabedon for example, but a good proposal always leave the other party freedom to choose and reject. Without giving him/her further difficulties if he/she were to reject the proposal.

Hopefully, user friendly overview of my philosophy v.03

The scarcity of the world is not of time nor energy nor money but of mutual solutions
Solutions are unlimited but we are not rich enough because we are not giving back enough to our sources of solutions

x1.y1 + x2.y2 + x3.y3

each segment is an administration that managed to solve our problems throughout our lives. The formula is about maximizing the potential of life.

For each ability you have, you would give thanks to the sources of solutions in order to maximize the level of availability of mutual solutions in your reality. Administrations could be, mathematical administrations, economic administrations, security, health, management discipline like accounting, logic, moral, philosophy, biology, geology, cartography, etc.

x refers to the spirit, and y refers to the human authors.

You give thanks to the spirits by propagating them and made them prioritized. This usually achieved by investing in assets related to it, learning, copying, and spreading the ideas.
You give thanks to the human authors by solving their life problems or participate in the solving of their life problems.

You might ask, how are spirits actual living individual beings. I'd answer that actually they could be looked at in that way, in the way people can accept that companies are individuals, separate legal entity. Please let me elaborate

Spirits are Inclinations,
For example, The Inclination to preserve humanity could have organs of the red cross, farmlands, the armies, the culture of nurturing people, etc.
The inclination to make people smart could have organs of schools, scientists, educators, publication companies, the habit of telling the truth, etc.

The inclinations can move and when it move you could see that sometimes certain administrations serve a certain purpose but in the next hour, it served the purpose no longer. This indicates that the inclination is moving away from the administration, it may return, in some cases it won't be for a while.

So if you believe that the inclination to make proper financial statements has helped in solving your life problems.
Then you would propagate the spirit, and give thanks to accountants that had spent their resources to make it happen successfully. Doing that proportionately will maximize your life, your past, present, and future.

There are different types of spirits. 2 that I have identified are the "historical" and "perpetual" spirits.
Example of Historical spirits:
- The inclination to make Donald Trump a president of the United States in 2017
- The inclination to make Bill Clinton president of Senegal in 2018.
- The inclination for me to have a meal on the 24'th of April 2002.

Example of Perpetual spirits:
- The inclination to make people happy
- The inclination to keep on inclining forever
- The inclination to Incline

When a historical spirit was successfully prioritized in reality, it will always be prioritized by other spirits in the future. Meaning, history is permanent.
All other things that wanted to be real in life must conform to history or they will not be real, they will not be supported by other forms of existence.

Once a historical spirit failed, it can be resurrected through art but it won't ever beat its adversaries.
For example, The inclination to make the meat medium rare for yesterday's dinner was defeated by the inclination to make the meat medium for yesterday's dinner.
"The inclination to make the meat medium rare for yesterday's dinner" will never ever going to be able to thwart
"The inclination to make the meat medium for yesterday's dinner" from being history in reality.

The perpetual inclinations can have multiple successes and failures and can constantly play in reality
For example the inclination to make girls win over boys, it's sometimes prioritized, sometimes not, its success won't define the end of its journey nor would its failures.

The inclination to incline is the inclination who is always successful
The inclination to keep on inclining forever stays in the realm of the undefined, is he successful? who on earth could fully ascertain to that?
The inclination to not incline could influence reality, it might own assets, but it never truly prioritized.

The Inclination to Incline relates to both of the last two spirits. But in relation with the inclination to keep on inclining forever, there's wisdom, love, happiness.
The relationship between "The Inclination to Incline" and "The Inclination to Keep on Inclining Forever" is where I want to be.

God is not yet 100% omnipotent, that's true if we define "The Inclination to Keep on Inclining Forever" as a part of God, a God family.
Because God is not yet able to achieve what He wanted to achieve without the presence of depressing sufferings. However, our existence as human beings will help God achieve 100% omnipotence when we managed to make the Inclination to keep on Inclining forever truthfully absolutely win at all times (without changing the truthful past) in all reality permanently forever.

We want to make the inclination to not incline absolutely and permanently has no asset for it to even be able to suffer. Let the light engulf all darkness.

So whenever a person feels that the inclination to not incline could be desirable, that person is in a state of depression and should go out of there while it's not harder to do so.