Heh, very nice! Yes, it used to be the case that the computational task was too great, which lead some to throw up their hands and just get high. But as Marcus pointed out earlier in the thread, we have new tech that might stand a chance. And why shouldn't neoliberals have the chance to evolve into new perspectives where they admit that some of these new techs can help us engage in intelligent stewardship of a catallaxy?
Here's an article that might help, though I can't really vouch for it: MacDonald, Trent J., Darcy WE Allen, and Jason Potts. "Blockchains and the boundaries of self-organized economies: Predictions for the future of banking." Banking Beyond Banks and Money. Springer International Publishing, 2016. 279-296. On January 23, 2017 9:24:01 PM PST, Vladimyr Burachynsky <vbur...@shaw.ca> wrote: >It also appears that the solution time is so great that no amount of >mental/computational effort will ever yield results so therefore no >effort is recommended by the authorities. >Any such attempt will be judged as hostile. Any and all contradiction >will bring down harsh reprisals. >That seems to suggest that no self-declared Neoliberal is required to >make any effort of any kind except theatrical to earn her/his >entitlements. I hope I have interpreted this correctly. > >Careful scrutiny of such a position then leaves the key distinguishing >feature between Conservatives and Neoliberals; clearly unresolved. >Since it appears that neither faction is prepared to expend even >marginal effort. > >Really would parallel processing make even the least detectable >difference or was the term thrown in to just scare the crap out of >everyone... -- ⛧glen⛧ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
