Carl B. Latro

This is an interesting read...

https://slate.com/technology/2018/03/why-did-fans-leave-livejournal-and-where-will-they-go-after-tumblr.html

It reinforces the point that migrations won't happen without somewhere better to migrate to.

At least look at DW every day.

But posting? I don't know... :(

It looks like Patreon is taking aim at it's foot...

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/8/16752670/patreon-defends-new-pricing-after-user-uproar

I liked Patreon because you could support a lot of creators with small amounts, as apposed to a few with larger amounts. (Everyone can only spend the amount of disposable income they have, regardless of how they spread it around.) They're stuffing this up though.

Incidentally, I've had my doubts about Patreon ever since its creator made this post...

https://patreonhq.com/membership-is-the-future-for-creators-fc2902b8c16d

Possibly the most amateurish business announcement ever? Yes, quite possibly. And some of the comments there suggest others possibly agree with me.

Anyway, this looks like a good list of the alternatives...

https://wiki.snowdrift.coop/market-research/other-crowdfunding

For regular payments, I think https://liberapay.com/ seems the best approach, and I like that they fund themselves using Liberapay itself.

I can't find a similar site offering a pay-per-release option though. Any suggestions?

This is an interesting read...

https://theredgreenpen.com/2017/08/07/the-ubi-and-our-quest-for-meaning/

And they say something I've long suspected: "Because the reality is that many people that I see in a crisis, suicidal and despairing of life, don’t really need specialist psychiatric support. They need a house. They need a job. They’re worried that their benefit is going to be cut off next week, if they can feed themselves or their kids, if they can afford the GP, or whether they should go without their medication to pay the rent."

It's a New Zealand blog, hence a few of the comments are NZ-related.

[Edit: July 15, 2024] I noticed the above link is no longer working, but I see it can now be found here...
https://toddwilliamsmith.substack.com/p/the-ubi-and-our-quest-for-meaning

This is an interesting read...

https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/29/16060344/btce-bitcoin-exchange-takedown-mt-gox-theft-law-enforcement

It suggests Mt. Gox collapsed due to criminals taking advantage of not very good vaults at Mt. Gox, as apposed Mt. Gox itself running off with near a half a billion dollars in bitcoin.

It also suggests a way to distinguish between what could be considered main-stream bitcoin exchanges and the rest - namely whether they're registered with FinCEN or not.

News around bitcoin seems to wax and wain with fluctuations in its exchange rate. While that's the case, it doesn't have much real value beyond something to speculate with, or perhaps a safe place to put some of your money when you think maybe the banks are about to go bust or your country's printing too much new money.

It would be useful as internet pocket-money, or for transactions with people you trust so neither has to pay a middle-man fees for the transaction. Or with people you don't trust so they can't ask the middle-man to reverse the transaction sometime after it was made. All of which require a trusted exchange one way or the other.

This article, titled "My father-in-law won't become a coder, no matter what economists say", makes its case but doesn't offer any solutions to the supposed coming high rates of unemployment.

The argument against becoming a coder can best be compared to reading and writing, which we mostly all can do, after a fashion. If all our other needs were met, we could spend our days reading and writing. Say, six days a week reading and one day a week writing. Assuming it took a year for each of us to write something of substance at that rate, we'd all have x billions of new writings to choose from each year. Which is quite an abundance of substantive writings. All for the cost of each of us spending a day a week 'working' at writing. At half a day's work a week we might then only have about a billion new writings to choose from, or half a billion if we only work two hours a week.

Programming's not writing, but as with writing, only a few of us would be a good fit for doing anything of substance with such a skill. Hack coders are probably of some use now, but they'd be the easiest to be replaced by software. (Written by good coders.)

The usual question asked about jobs being replaced by automation is who will have any money to buy the goods produced by all that automation? A better question is what will the few high-paid workers (and business owners) buy with their money?

One resource that isn't increasing is land, so they'll be buying that every chance they get. (Such as when the homes of the over-extended who've lost their jobs to automation become available.) Which leaves goods and services. Assuming goods are mostly produced by automation, (arty stuff aside), that leaves services. Or, as they were called in days gone by, servants. People to pamper them. Robots might suffice for some, but I'm sure most will still prefer people.

So, a full-circle most of those who've lost their jobs probably won't much like.

I don't really believe we'll reach very high rates of unemployment, mainly because it wouldn't be acceptable in democratic countries. But I think the above scenario is plausible if a managed response to the stresses of mass automation isn't worked out.

Are you in the black or in the white? There's a very clear graph here...

http://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualizing-jobs-lost-automation/

The difference between the machines of old and the computer is the computer's a universal machine. And robots are, potentially, universal machines too. So the first to sign up for the jobs of the future will most likely be the machines that create them.

It's odd teachers aren't seen as being at risk. Perhaps because they're doubling as babysitters while their students' parents are at work? But if there's less work for the parents, couldn't they be at home monitoring their kids' study - be it online or via an in-home robot?

What will those with a decent income want that can't be provided by machines?

Apparently they didn't quite get the payload to orbit though, according to TV news.

The last time I was here I got sidetracked and so didn't read all my friends-list and so I'm now a week behind...

In France, their presidential election has been whittled down to two candidates, neither of who come from mainstream parties. Which once again suggests voters in the West have had enough of the status-quo.

Democracy isn't a method for electing good governments, but a method for getting rid of unpopular ones. People would never have forced their rulers to submit to democracy if they were happy with how they were running the country. So it's in essence a negative method of choosing governments. You keep throwing your rulers out until you happen to select ones you're actually happy with, at which point you stick with them until they go bad.

All that being said, it would be good if your democracy was designed to give you a reasonable choice of alternatives to whoever's in power. This was demonstratively not the case in the American presidential election, where the choice was between an unpopular candidate representing the status-quo and just the one other, who was equally unpopular. (To all intents and purposes - I know there were a few others running.) So American democracy fails (in the presidential elections at least) at producing a good choice of alternatives to an unpopular administration. Maybe, (if you must have a president), the French method of selection is better than the US one?

Anyway, whether you're electing a president or a ruling party (or coalition), a system that produces a good mix of choices to whoever's in power would seem to be a desirable system to have.