My descendants have no claim on it and can be ignored if they demand that it be destroyed and lost to science out of misplaced notions of "respect" or any superstitious reasons.
It's hard to admit when I'm not good at something- but if you've been reading this blog for a while, you've seen me admit to many things I'm not good at, or in some cases, apparently incapable of. Just know I hate admitting it.
YouTube- as much as I hate their draconian and hidden policies- has helped me do many things I didn't think I was capable of doing. Saving hundreds of dollars for me and for my parents (I have repaired more things than I can count for them- they just pay for the parts).
I have learned I'm able to do more things than I thought. Often, when I really can't do something, it's a lack of the proper tools or an inability to find the parts. It's not me!
Saturday, while I was grieving a feline friend I wasn't able to fix, my parents' car- which my sister was depending on while she got her car repaired (or not- the dealership service department is famously incompetent and is going to have to try again)-developed a problem that made it unusable.
But, with the help of Grok and YouTube, I was able to diagnose the issue and make a temporary (maybe?) fix that saved the day- or the week. And saved my parents hundreds of dollars, at least for now.
Long ago, I worked with a girl who shocked me one day when she told me she had replaced the fender on her car over the weekend, all by herself. These days, I shock myself by doing things I never imagined I could do.
I would still pay someone else to do most of these things if I had the money, but I'm glad to have options. It's nice to feel a little more competent all the time.
I've found a few people on X who consistently tell it like they see it. Consequences be damned. It's interesting, and I respect it, even if they appear (to me) to be hallucinating. Even if I'm sure they are wrong- which can make them even more interesting. At least they aren't boring.
I like it the most if I think (or suspect) they are right. Then it's really interesting. Made more interesting by observing the reactions to them. It shows me the tiger traps to avoid, if nothing else. So, no, I won't be listing examples. Nothing good lies that way.
Although, a historical example would be Philip K. Dick.
Some of them have been canceled for what they've said. Some just get a lot of hate. Either way, they are interesting.
There may be different outrages for different parts of society on different days, but it's always something.
Right now, part of society is outraged that a beautiful young "white" woman is appearing in an advertisement. I saw someone complaining that there are millions of beautiful "black" women, so it's a racist disaster that the company chose to hire a "white" woman this time. One ad. Out of millions of ads that show people of almost every description imaginable. And this is a problem? Oh, please.
I saw one guy even claiming that it's a sign we're heading for racist lynchings and genocide of "brown" people. Such drama! Over an ad.
A couple of years ago, a different segment of society was outraged that a particular man was in a different company's ads. Again, millions of ads, with all sorts of approaches, and this one ad campaign was worth getting mad over? I think not.
The most useful ads are interesting in some way. They get attention by being interesting rather than boring. Don't be boring.
Interesting is good. Find interesting people (or things) you believe will help your brand. "Interesting" doesn't have a "race" or a type. I always loved the Clydesdale beer ads, which were beautiful and interesting. To me. And this ad segment is one of my all-time favorites for reasons I can't quite explain. It hits me in the funny bone, and it's interesting to me because it cracks me up. I laugh every time I watch it. Yeah, I'm weird.
Beauty, which is subjective, is also interesting. Looking at beauty makes me feel better than some other kinds of "interesting" do. People who rail against beauty are pathetic and have bigger problems they need to address before they worry about who appears in ads.
I'm not sure how well ads work, though. I'm sitting here not drinking any beer or wearing any mall-brand clothes (unless I coincidentally picked them up in Goodwill).
Others tried to stop the evil loser... and they got stabbed, too. I'm not saying they weren't brave, but they were not capable because they were unequipped. Sometimes being brave isn't enough. You must have the proper tools on your person at all times. There's no good excuse not to.
Derrick Perry was brave and properly equipped to stop the attack without getting stabbed in the process. He stopped others from being stabbed. He didn't even have to kill the evil loser to stop the rampage- although it would have been a service to society if he had.
Thank you, Derrick Perry!
Our local Walmart, at least judging by the signage they post, changes its gun policy frequently. There's a more or less permanent note on the main signage that says "Kindly refrain from openly carrying a firearm". But about half the time, there will be a contradictory sticker on the door saying "no guns". That one comes and goes. It's not there now. Maybe it's not even a real Walmart sticker, but one some independent anti-gun bigot (or premeditating evil loser- as if there's a difference) places there.
But there are also things I get worked up over that I’m certain other people think I need to just get over.
I suppose it's a stalemate.
Who's right? Who's wrong? Which things are worth getting worked up over, and which things need to be let go?
I know my answer.
You are not bound by agreements between governments. Don't let them brainwash you into believing you are.
The height of arrogance is governments believing they can make rules that will apply on other worlds. And then expect regular people to abide by them.
I was watching this video, and any time the discussion turns to what "laws" Earth governments will impose on people on other planets, I feel a little queasy.
It's bad enough that the residents of other planets may decide to burden themselves and their posterity with government, but for Earth governments to simply assume they will still be ruling these distant lands is insane.
No matter what agreements or treaties governments adopt between themselves, they don't apply to you. Especially if you leave the planet. If you stake a claim on unowned land on Mars, the Moon, or Ceres, it's yours. No matter what any Earth ruler or "treaty" may claim.
And, if you do move offworld some day, don't be stupid and beg someone else to rule you. It's a mistake there's no need to repeat.
But, along with checking off some pointless tasks to avoid getting molested by government, I accomplished some useful things. I am glad to have them done, and I'll be even more glad when the work pays off later.
This doesn't make my body any less sore right now.
Doing useful things will often cause some discomfort. During or after.
It can be painful to reject things "everyone knows" when you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that "everyone" is wrong. It's not comfortable being on the other side of an issue. It's still the right thing to do, and it's useful. Someone has to take the correct position.
It's painful to speak out when the truth is unpopular. Someone still needs to do so.
Sometimes, doing the right thing has costs. (Everything has costs.) You'll get taken advantage of. You'll lose money. You'll be put in difficult situations. You'll lose friends (or fake friends). Do it anyway.
Physical pain is possibly less painful than the mental and emotional pain that holding the line will cause you.
It's still worth it. You'll feel better in the long run.
Tariffs can, and probably still will, cause prices to rise.
Tariffs don't cause inflation.
Inflation is creating more "money" out of nothing; backed by nothing real.
Inflation also causes prices to rise.
When political criminals tell you that tariffs won't cause inflation, they are right, in a slimy, greasy sort of way. They are counting on the public's ignorance in conflating higher prices with inflation.
Same effect.
Government is the root cause.
Or that you're "not permitted" to tell them your opinions.
Or that you can't ridicule things that seem ridiculous or self-destructive.
It just means you won't use force (including legislation) to prevent them from doing those things.
You can even say "I told you so" when it turns out exactly as you knew it would.
It helps your credibility if you'll also admit when you got it wrong and things didn't go the way you thought they would.
Self-ownership means just that. For everyone.
Centralization is fragile. Over-centralization is a disaster waiting to happen.
Any centralized system will fail. Decentralized, you'd have to have everything fail at once to really be a problem. Not impossible, but much less likely.
Centralized economies collapse. Always. It's only a matter of when, not if.
Maybe once upon a time, the best way anyone could think of to try to keep airplanes from crashing into each other was with centralized "air traffic control". If so, those days are long gone.
Now, the best way would be to give each plane the ability to autonomously coordinate with all other planes in the region to avoid collisions and update each other on conditions.
Self-driving cars will function best if they do the same.
The electric grid is vulnerable to attack and EMPs/CMEs Or the dangers of too much complexity to be stable. Better would be to have each home generate its own power instead of relying on the grid.
The same is probably true of water supplies and sewer/garbage removal. At least, have competing providers rather than one monopoly service. Decentralize as much as possible.
The more you think about it, the more ridiculous over-centralization becomes.
It's the same for government, but government is a special case, and I mean "special" in the most insulting way imaginable.
If each individual governs himself, decentralization, it's not difficult to handle those who refuse who govern themselves. A centralized government becomes the criminals they use to justify their existence.
But government has many tentacles to make it appear somewhat decentralized. This is bad for liberty.
This sort of pseudo-decentralization makes government more robust than it would otherwise be- it all needs to collapse simultaneously to remove this yoke from our necks. Just one component collapsing while the others remain makes room for another nearby component to fill the gap. As long as its victims still believe in it, nothing will stop this from happening.
Government, as a concept, is still basically one entity, though. Regardless of how each government pretends to be at odds with the others, they are all in this together, globally. They all rely on the same assumptions to continue to rule. And they can all be brought down in one way. Stop believing in their imaginary legitimacy, and stop working for them. Any of them, anywhere.
In that way, they are still over-centralized and fragile. But you have to go after this soft underbelly, not attack them head-on like they'd prefer.
Lies!
It's not helping.
Cryptocurrency doesn't need government's "help". It works best without it.
There are only two things required to make America the global leader in crypto:
In other words, a hard separation of crypto and state. So that the US feral government has nothing to do with it.
Anything less is nothing but empty words from political criminals.
That’s also what they owe us.
Without some other mutually consensual agreement, it’s all they owe us.
It's easy to pay, so you never have to go into debt.
To violate the rights of others is the only reasonable definition of actual crime. Some would call it "krime" or "archation".
You can't delegate to others a right that you don't have; which you don't have because it doesn't exist. It doesn't exist because it can't be created.
Every human being has the right (and the obligation) to govern himself. No one has the right, or the imaginary "authority", to govern another. This "right" can't be delegated to someone by a majority, because none of the individuals involved have this "right" to delegate. No majority, or document, or superstition can create such a right.
To try to govern someone else anyway is to violate the life, liberty, and/or property of those you're trying to govern. You may do it with taxation, prohibitions, mandates, or by violating the right of association and forcing your agents upon people who would prefer to be left alone by them.
In other words, to try to govern others, whether by a dictator or a democracy, is to commit a crime against all those you intend to govern. Government is criminal in design and execution, and can be nothing else.
I don't think I can make it clearer than this.
If I missed something or got something demonstrably wrong, let me know.
