Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (170641)	4/17/2021 9:27:29 PM
From: sense	Respond to of 219195

No, I'm disagreeing with you... pointing out that the "lack of utility" arguments for gold or bitcoin are a canard. Another way to present that... would be to note that parallel purpose in my own history, from 25 years ago... trying to be the first to use computers to do innovative things in finance, using computers to bring change in the same way computers were doing to every other sphere of human endeavor. Disintermediation... is only a part of it. Disintermediation enables avoiding intermediaries when the value they contribute is negative... not an addition of value... but the taking of a tax and a toll... which they can make to be whatever they want. When transactions don't need an intermediary... they can't tax you or impose tolls on transactions that avoid the toll booths. Another part of it... is that automating trading means vast improvements in speed, quality, and quantity of trades that can be executed... with each costing vastly less to execute. There is a real improvement in efficiency in result of adopting computers in banking and stock trading... instead of using pencils and ledger books, or paper share certificates being shuffled around. Obviously, the same is true of all other transactions... cash is less efficient than digital proxies of cash.... which doesn't make cash less useful at all... just because we can increase its efficiency by adopting a digital proxy for the physical items... We do that already with dollars. I hardly ever use cash. I use digital dollars. My stock trades are digitial ledger entries, not based on moving paper share certificates from one folder to another... What I'm saying is that the impact of the transition to digital technology... is transparent to the "underlying value"... whatever it is. That's the laughable part of the sudden "realization" recently that that is true enough... that ANYTHING can be similarly represented... so the NFT craze, as a narrow new part of the idea of tokenization, is only the recognitition that as... "hey, that's true... anything can have a digital representation"... and gain the same increase in efficiency that comes paired with the new paradign. That is no less true of dollars, gold, silver, bitcoin, real estate, stocks, stars, planets, pork bellies, electricity, Teslas, mining companies, real or crypto. The only thing it is NOT true of... is those things that are prohibited from such by law... including sex, babies, drugs, illicit weapons, etc., which WAS also the problem I ran into... because they made what i was trying to do illegal, by rule...not because it was bad... but only to cheat to avoid surrendering a competitive advantage to me ? Does that explanation work for you ? What it says is that in the degree it remains true that gold and bitcoin are remain somehow disadvantaged by progress in digital exchange... the reason for that is not "technical"... but "competitive"... which is not intending to use that in the free market sense ? Why does it make sense that you can buy a tokenized grey pixel as an articistc statement... but you can't buy difital gold that way... when you CAN buy prepaid dollars on a debit card, or prepaid telephone service that way ? A free market is one in which there is no fraud (thus, trust), no monopoly, and no obstacles to participation. That I encounterd obstacles to participation in plans... delayed progess for a quarter of a century... at untold cost to the world's populatoin... given 25 years of forced inefficiency... and only more tied to the purpose in the forced inefficiency... intended to funciton in maintaining frauds and monopolies that worked in throttling participation to limit the benefits available to only a small number ?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (170641)	4/17/2021 10:01:44 PM
From: sense	1 Recommendation Recommended By Cogito Ergo Sum Respond to of 219195

That's the laughable part of the sudden "realization" recently that that is true enough... that ANYTHING can be similarly represented... so the NFT craze, as a narrow new part of the idea of tokenization, is only the recognitition that as... I should also point out that at about the same time as my participation in the digital IPO project was going down in flames... I was also a participant on the "team" working at preparing to enable Steve Jobs to return ot Apple to "fix" it... after it had fallen apart when he left it.. Apple back then about $2... I pitched the idea that the return required some real innovation to shake things up... and, given my prior experience in the music industry, explained .how and why "music" was broken, and how and why digital technology could "fix" it... That became the IPod and ITunes... But, I didn't want to fix "music" just to make Apple enough money to save it... I intended that the right way to do that... while making Apple money... was to also liberate the artists from the (far more then) oppression of the industry control by monopolies... generating a flowering of the arts that, in being enabled, would grow the market dramatically... Freedom is a better investment than oppression... which constrains growth... as a theme you should be noting in minr ? So what i pitched to Jobs was essentially both breaking apart industry standard packaging AND tokenizing songs while digitizing music and delivering it over the internet... disintermediating the music business... while making Apple the go to conduit for the revolution... which would then proceed to disintermediate... pretty much everything else. Joibs understood the part of breaking an album or CD up into single songs... so consumers could buy the ones they wanted... not the ones they didn't. That mostly a pricing argument in resistance points... $1 is below the resistance threshold... $12 or $18 is not... so you'd make way more money selling for $1 than for $12... and that proved true. IPod and ITunes changed the music world. But, Jobs didn't like the idea of liberating artists... He wanted instead to use the power success would bring... to replace the oppression of artists by the industry... with the oppression of artists by Apple. He want to capture and preserve the monopoly. So, Apple could have been tokenizaing digital art... when ITunes first hit the market... And instead, Apple is today failing to innovate...being billed "the next Nokia" for reason... because Jobs lack of vision is imposed in the DNA that survives in the drones still there running things.