Apparently, Linus Torvalds is a globohomo now.
https://www.weforum.org/people/linus-torvalds

@ryo Now? Has been for a long time, that just makes it official. He pushed the shots too, like Richard Stallman. Hell, even from the fact that he's rich, that can be assumed. If someone makes over a million a year, their chance of being a decent person drops down to almost zero, if not actually zero. Hell, it's almost zero even making over 100k.

By the way, if Stallman saw this, he would seethe about how he's not the one there and how it doesn't say GNU/Linux. Those would be his only problems with it.

@TerminalAutism Oh fuck, I make millions of yen (which is like a tens of thousands in US dollars), so I'm no longer decent it seems...

@ryo Again, making more money just severely reduces the changes. Undeniable when almost everyone making 100k a year it working for a corporation, doing evil work after succeeding in jumping through evil hoops in an evil system. All of that with the goal of ripping people off and mind-raping them for profit and power. Hell, being motivated by greed in general is a bad sign, because unlike what the capitalist drones would say, yes, greed is a bad thing.

@TerminalAutism Capitalism in itself isn't evil, it's the centralization of corpoes, investors taking over everything, and them soycializing their losses that makes it all evil.

A healthy capitalist society consists of just small businesses, freelancers, and independent entrepreneurs, all competing for customers, so they have to make good products or services and improve them to win customers over.

But what if ultra wealthy investors with ties to multinational governments start buying them all up?
Now all of the sudden customers no longer matter, because whether they fail or succeed, investors/government has their backs regardless.

Make too many losses? Tax the cattle harder!
About to go bankrupt? CEO ejacuates his golden parachute, and it's no longer his problem.
"We profit so we keep it all" and "we're making too little sales, it's everybody else's problem" is not capitalism, it's soycialism.

This is the problem we need to fix.
Meanwhile, ancoms just concentrate themselves on the edges of a proxy of a problem rather than the problem itself, while ancaps go like "fuck it, we'll go parallel then, the problem is no longer fixable", in which they're right.

@ryo The problem is that in that system, the greediest and most ruthless will rise to the top and then wipe out their competition, and then back to this system you are. Which is exactly what has happened in reality. Capitalism rewards and incentivizes evil.

Also, those arguments could be used to defend communism. "Communism itself isn't evil, it's the centralization of government, investors taking over everything (which has happened)", and so on. You could argue that the system wasn't the problem, it was just the execution and that the centrality was unnecessary.

That's not my point, I don't care about these retarded ideologies, but I do think that the solution is a system that limits the amount of power and wealth that people can accumulate. Pretty sure that capitalists would say that's not capitalism, because they like the idea, the delusion that they may be on top one day and may get to be the ones abusing others. They get off on the idea of being a Rockefeller or a Bill Gates, or an Elon Musk, so they have to defend that system regardless, even if they are themselves exploited, and near the bottom.

The problem isn't with systems, it's with people, and with them accepting the unacceptable, and with objectively immoral things (like greed, and taking advantage of other people, and hoarding massive amounts of resources that you don't need) being not just accepted, but glorified. People in the past didn't call money a literal demon for nothing. That's what it is, it's a demonic force that has fucking destroyed this world and this species, possibly beyond repair.

Also, deport the Jews to Israel, build a dome around it so they can't get out and make them pay for it, and make usury a sin again.

@TerminalAutism @ryo
@TerminalAutism, tbh I think the *ideologies supporters just envy of the elites and want to replace them with themselves, a controlled opposition, or they don't realize what their own roles are. A obvious sign is that they always avoid talking about the fundamentals such as power, but insist on throwing bunch of complicated and fancy system to cover their real intentions.

@udon @ryo I legitimately think that it's impossible for ideologies to even be used for good, at least in the long term. People get attached to the labels, and then someone else shows up and slowly changes their meaning over time and it's all fucked again. I have repeated this a lot in the past, but people have to understand the difference between concepts and words, and start thinking in concepts. Words can be corrupted, they can be changed from meaning one thing to meaning another, but concepts can never be corrupted. So, I am against putting a name on sets of ideas, it's a terrible idea. Concepts are constants, words are variables that contain pointers to concepts, and those can be overwritten.

@TerminalAutism @udon As I said, humans tend to be pre-programmed to go along with ideologies, whether we like it or not.
Even if you'd set up a "FUCK ALL IDEOLOGIES!!" movement, that too soon becomes an ideology the moment more people start repeating the same lines, and they will.
This is also why religion exists; these too are ideologies.
This is also why civilizations always tend to have an expiration date stamped on them from the very beginning.

@ryo @udon Fair enough, it might be unavoidable. But if that's the case, it's unavoidable for the masses, not for the people here. Anyway, there are lines that people should repeat, and one of them is "there is no religion but truth". Comes from theosophy, but it's probably one of the best statements ever made.

Hell, maybe you can have a good ideology if it's that sentence and explicitly nothing but that and no exceptions. I just call it having a functioning mind, though. The truth is the only system that you need, and the only things that you need to do are the ones that lead to positive outcomes. And when they don't work, you stop and try something else instead of stubbornly sticking with it because of some belief system.

I just had a strong sense of deja vu. Am I in the Endless Eight? Have I made this exact post before? Is my life becoming this video https://yewtu.be/watch?v=3TwwfTjHmQE ? Kyon-kun denwa?

@TerminalAutism @udon
> And when they don't work, you stop and try something else instead of stubbornly sticking with it because of some belief system.

Which is why I no longer consider myself an ancap, and considered myself a fork of it using my own custom ideas.
And then I discovered CryptAn, which is almost identical to my ideas, made by the same Satoshi Nakamoto who invented Bitcoin, and exists since the mid 1980s.
What the fuck!?

@ryo @TerminalAutism @udon Crypto-anarchism is more of a strategy than an ideology. It's just a means to end the state, just like Agorism. Where Agorism seeks to end the state via parallel economies, crypto-anarchism seeks to end the state via technology like 3D printers, darknets, sneakernets, P2P file-sharing, cryptocurrencies, etc. Any anarchist whether it's an ancap, ancom, mutualist, syndicalist, egoist, individualist, left-market, maybe not anprim can be a crypto-anarchist.

I don't think Satoshi came up with the idea for crypto-anarchism. The ideology existed before crypto-currencies. Samuel Konkin III, the man who came up with the idea of Agorism, hoped that technology would lead to more black and gray markets and he correctly predicted cryptocurrencies, darknets, and 3D printers. Anarchists were also the first to embrace the Internet and even before that, dial-up BBSes. So it's a pretty old concept.