From: Wilson@nowhere.invalid   
      
   On 1/31/2026 2:37 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   > On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 13:32:42 -0500, Wilson    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 1/31/2026 12:25 PM, Dude wrote:   
   >>> On 1/31/2026 8:47 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 11:36:16 -0500, Wilson    
   >>>> wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 1/30/2026 4:46 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 1/30/26 7:27 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 02:11:00 -0800, dart200   
   >>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> we finally invented a type of good that has a zero-cost to copy,   
   >>>>>>>> and we   
   >>>>>>>> still can't seem to figure out how to build a production system where   
   >>>>>>>> all the products are freely distributed, cause we're so concerned   
   >>>>>>>> about   
   >>>>>>>> getting payment upfront   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> So there you have it.  This is why commercialism always fails.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> bruh i'm talking about digital goods that are zero-cost to copy   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> real goods aren't the same,   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> tho i might suggest we break out design vs production costs requiring   
   >>>>>> that the consumer pay production price upfront ... while the design   
   >>>>>> portion can be paid back as the consumer feels warranted   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> this is moving more towards a gifting economy while dealing with the   
   >>>>>> reality that production has actual sunk costs   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> i mean in the future maybe we will have the energy availability and   
   >>>>>> labor efficiency to totally transcend markets entirely, but i don't   
   >>>>>> feel   
   >>>>>> we're ready for such a stage   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Everything must be paid for because we all must pay each other for   
   >>>>>>> what others do for us with few exceptions.  The system depends on us   
   >>>>>>> all doing that.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> this especially fucks up computing. 99.99% of the industry has devolved   
   >>>>>> into bullshit work that is not actually economically beneficial. but   
   >>>>>> people need to get paid, and markets just don't have the capability to   
   >>>>>> select for universal solutions to problems like we ought to be   
   >>>>>> implementing with computing (since they rely on competition and   
   >>>>>> therefor   
   >>>>>> competing systems/standards)   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> computing systems are far more like governing systems than real goods   
   >>>>>> production and we haven't collectively recognized that reality yet   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> The fault that devolves from that is that some of us get more pay than   
   >>>>>>> others, have more status than others, live apart from us in mansions,   
   >>>>>>> work apart from us in skyscrapers in corner offices, so we have no   
   >>>>>>> access to, never even see those people as far as we know.  These are   
   >>>>>>> the people who make the decisions in society.  Their separateness from   
   >>>>>>> us means that they are never held accountable for bad self serving   
   >>>>>>> decisions.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> When shit comes down, the blame goes to the person who enforces those   
   >>>>>>> decisions, not to the decider.  The enforcer is thrown under the bus,   
   >>>>>>> quietly goes away, is fired or moved elsewhere.  In rare cases, maybe   
   >>>>>>> even get some jail time.  But the decision stands.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> And the rest of us are powerless.  Why can't things be different?  '   
   >>>>>>> 1) because those who have the power like having power, will not allow   
   >>>>>>> things to be different.   
   >>>>>>> 2) because the rest of us like it that way too.  We are powerless, but   
   >>>>>>> we are also blameless.  The guy in the corner office at the top of a   
   >>>>>>> skyscraper did it, not us.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Too radical?  Of course it is, because this is the way things have   
   >>>>>>> always been, since humans stopped being hunter gatherers.  This is how   
   >>>>>>> we know how to be.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> it's silly and entirely anti-consumer. it doesn't cost anything to   
   >>>>>>>> grant   
   >>>>>>>> a consumer access to the digital good, let them have the   
   >>>>>>>> experience and   
   >>>>>>>> decide after if it warrants payment for the experience. and for   
   >>>>>>>> continued development by creator. this will create a better feedback   
   >>>>>>>> system where people only pay for products they value after they   
   >>>>>>>> had the   
   >>>>>>>> experience, not before...   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> will some people cheat the system??? i guess, but that already   
   >>>>>>>> happens,   
   >>>>>>>> and we end up with a worse feedback system where people have to pay   
   >>>>>>>> speculatively upfront for the experience rather than paying back   
   >>>>>>>> for an   
   >>>>>>>> experience they valued enough to voluntarily pay for   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> never mind all the DRM and platform locking bull crap that just   
   >>>>>>>> wastes   
   >>>>>>>> everyone's time with utter nonsense   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> you know what will make the rest of us not powerless noah?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>    > consolidating our voice by committed consensus making   
   >>>>>>    >   
   >>>>>>    > #god   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> something the rich are wholly incapable of doing even among themselves   
   >>>>>> since they've mostly been selected and filtered by late stage hyper   
   >>>>>> capitalism, so tbh they're powerless to set up a competing system of   
   >>>>>> consensus making. that's so far off their radar they can't even imagine   
   >>>>>> it coming ??   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> "Late stage capitalism"   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> https://i.redd.it/6pz3jus402jc1.jpeg   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "No offense but," offense.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The old deny what I am about to say before I say it trick.   
   >>>   >   
   >>> So, I told them both to invest their money, if they have any, in   
   >>> precious metals for economic stability and as a hedge against US dollar   
   >>> inflation.   
   >>>   
   >>> The economic situation is clear:   
   >>>   
   >>> The U.S. government ran a budget deficit of $1.8 trillion in fiscal 2025   
   >>> (ended Sept. 30), which sent the national debt to a record high of $38.5   
   >>> trillion.   
   >>>   
   >>> "Throughout history, governments have opted to increase money supply to   
   >>> devalue their domestic currencies in order to make challenging fiscal   
   >>> deficits easier to manage. This time probably won't be any different,   
   >>> which is why gold soared by a whopping 64% last year.   
   >>>   
   >>> Bitcoin, however, fell by 5% on the year, which puts into serious doubt   
   >>> the idea that it's a digital equivalent to the shiny yellow metal. This   
   >>> is concerning in my opinion, because the cryptocurrency isn't very   
   >>> useful in any other capacity."   
   >>>   
   >>> https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/better-buy-2026-bitcoin-or-gold-answer-   
   >>> couldnt-be-clearer   
   >>   
   >> Gold dropped this week and will likely fall more in the future,   
   >> especially when margin investors need cash to cover their losses. But   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)