Thursday, August 21, 2014

The Nostalgic Clacking of Coins in Vegas.

No comments:
When I was little I used to love going to Las Vegas with my parents. They had arcades, cool shows, and lots of cool things to do as a kid. The one thing that really caught my eye was the forbidden casino floor. Not because I was interested in the act of gambling, but just the sounds of clacking coins against a steel money bowl. The people walking around with plastic buckets full of quarters and dollar coins was just so appealing. We stopped going as a family in my teens and never returned until after I was out on my own.

Imagine my disappointment when I returned to find that a part of my youth, the clacking of coins and the huge arcades, were all but a memory. Electronic beeps and chimes have replaced the clacks and the people walking with huge buckets have been replaced by bland boring tickets with bar-codes. It kept me from appreciating that little world even from the sidelines. Now living here, as I roamed the casino floors and resort grounds as a nifty little way to burn some excess calories in the cool A/C and away from the blistering desert sun of Vegas I have found a piece of my childhood in the small dark corners of the adult Disneyland.

To this day I avoid gambling like the plague, but for some reason I can't help myself tossing in a few quarters when I come across the rare animal of the coin-op slot machine. Not to win money and not to lose, but just to capture the mixed feelings of happiness and sadness of a golden time.

Now I'm building a list and I'm sharing it with you if that is something that you'd be interested in. This list will grow as I find more or if more people inform me on where to find them, so keep checking back if you want in on this as well.

Slots'A'Fun



Located on the southeast corner of the Circus Circus property, is a little dingy, ratty, hell hole where you can get a Subway 5 dollar footlong for $10. It smells like a chain smoker's house who don't believe in opening a window, ever. Pool tables, a bar, and some beer pong tables it's hard to tell if this wanted to be a casino or a dive bar. Either way there's a small collection of quarter machines next to the brilliantly placed quarter operated gumball bar. Not exactly my pick of the litter, but there's some magic here.


Circus Circus



While we're here, might as well go inside the better half and check out the area for dollar coin-op slot machines. They advertise it's high pay out rates which is a bonus too.



The D



It's not cold here and you know she wants it. The D located on the Freemont Experience Downtown Vegas is a neat little spot. You can come here, have a drink, get a room, or eat at the restaurant and pay in BitCoin. However because of the state's gambling laws, you can only gamble with US currency. They have a BitCoin ATM so you can just cash in and out to gamble. Take the escalator one flight up and you are whisked away toe "Vintage Vegas" where they have an embarrassment of riches in coin op machines and a Blarney stone to kiss for good luck. Not just slots, by the way. They also have coin-op video poker and even a Sigma Derby.


This is all I have at the moment but I will keep you updated as I find more.

Monday, August 18, 2014

Stefan Molyneux: Do as I say, not as I do

No comments:
So the great opposition of intelectual property and the state and summoned the state to enforce his intellectual property as a means to bludgeon criticism.



His defenders don't know what to do to defend him but try to make the erroneous claim that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 signed into law by Bill Clinton isn't a government law but a YouTube End User Licence Agreement. Not even run of the mill Stefbots, even Larken Rose tried to make this stupid claim. 

The stupid, it burns. 

Sunday, July 6, 2014

We Have The Right To Fight LeRoux

No comments:
In an article on Voluntary Virtues, Christopher LeRoux defends the position that Christopher Cantwell made advocating the murder of police officers in line with the N.A.P.. Mike Shanklin attempted to do the same and it ended embarrassingly.


So here, I will use the same line of reasoning I will show why it would be justified under their view on the Law of Non-Aggression Principle (LONA.)
The law of non-aggression [LONA] is absolute, axiomatic, a priori, eternal and universal: No one may ever lawfully initiate aggression, coercion, or fraud under any circumstances. Yet while the LONA criminalizes all initiation of violence, it sanctions proportional defense. Thus it would not be lawful to shoot someone who merely steps across the front yard of your house but only to issue a warning. But if a trespasser refuses to desist, a greater amount of force becomes appropriate, and even deadly force could become necessary. Likewise, if your house is robbed while you are out, it is lawful to seek proportional restitution. If the criminal resists, deadly force could become appropriate.

This seems well and good so far. Let's continue.

 In our present, barbaric society, some people claim to be exempt from the LONA because they work for a fictional entity called the “state” or “government.” Every moment of our lives, we groan under the domination of these violent criminals. The extortion they call taxation and their billions of dictations oppress our existence day and night. Their aggression, coercion, and fraud are unceasing, unrepentant, and enforced with any amount of violence they deem necessary to maintain total control. However, all individuals are equal under the law of non-aggression, the only social law.

OK so the non-aggression principle is not using force or fraud and using the appropriate proportional response to prevent or stop the aggression and the state are aggressors because of their actions of taxation, police actions, war..etc. because no one is exempt from LONA. OK, Got it.

He goes on to explain in mind-numbing detail every possible scenario of interacting with a police and preventing him from aggression him and the only thing that gets established is that no matter what you do the state will always up their aggression against you no matter what. It concludes that such a conflict is unwinnable and not very smart. No, shit. So what's the solution?

If it is impractical to warn them to cease and desist or to wait for an armed attack against a fixed position, is it moral to “take the offensive” in a defensive struggle? Can we lawfully target and kill a “police officer” at home in his stolen bed for instance? Yes, it is lawful if it is necessary to reduce or abolish the crimes being committed against us. We have no duty to submit to our slavery. We may target “police” or any other “government” employee, even in their stolen homes, in the middle of the night, if we believe it will reduce the crimes being committed against us. Does this justify going on a random killing spree of “state” employees? No, proportional defense against aggressors not in the immediate act of aggressing is clearly only justified as part of an effort for restitution or overall tactic and-or strategy to reduce overall initiation of violence. Our goal must be freedom and peace, not revenge.

Because you can't stop the aggressor, it's well within the N.A.P. to kill the cops while they sleep if we feel that it will stop the aggression.  He goes on to say that now is not the time for such action because it's a fringe view and most people will not be receptive to these actions. Which roughly translates to "I'm a big fucking pussy."

You see, the reason he makes this clear that he doesn't advocate doing this even though it's justifiable in his stupid interpretation of the N.A.P. is because he's too much of a wuss to get questioned by law enforcement about his blog post and too chickenshit to do it himself when people say he should walk the walk.

So here I will make the case that Mr. LeRoux is making to prevent him causing me further harm.

Mr. LeRoux uses fossil fuels. He uses them directly via electricity generation and/or automotive transit which causes pollution and CO2 emission. He breathes out CO2. CO2 is a greenhouse gas (surely there will be DROs/PDAs that will accept this as true no matter how much you don't think it's the case.) Pollution from fossil fuels does contribute to many ill effects on health and the environment. He is also using public roadways which causes wear to the roads and demands more tax dollars to repair, maintain, and police. I could ask Mr. LeRoux to stop breathing and driving, but surely he will resist and continue to harm me and others. I could threaten him with a gun to stop but surely he will not have any of that either. He and his libertarian friends may also assist him in overbearing me with firepower. So I guess it's justifiable to shoot him in his sleep while he's pumping out CO2 from his snoring face and heating his house with fossil fuels to prevent me and the rest of the people to stop having to deal with this mess he's making of the air. It's not a good idea, not because most people aren't aware of it and need to be educated but because IT'S ASININE, IMMORAL, AND DANGEROUS.

Seriously if you really think killing cops is a justifiable action then please try so the cops will kill you and I don't have to keep saying why it's a stupid idea. They can look at your rotting corpse and come up with non-violent solutions to shrinking or eliminating the state. Also don't be a pussy about it either. If you're going to hold up heroes like Christopher Cantwell does to Justin Bourque and Paul Ciancia, then lead by example so we don't have to listen to you making asses of libertarians anymore.

"I respect the choices people like Justin Bourque and Paul Ciancia have made. They identified their aggressors, and took action to stop them from aggressing."
              ― Christopher Cantwell, a VoluntaryVirtues Friend and Regular Guest


Christopher Cantwell and the window lickers at VoluntaryVirtues are shitcocks"
                                          ― Jim Jesus, smarter than anyone at VV. 







Monday, March 17, 2014

Planned Obtuseness

2 comments:
People who often decry 'planned obsolescence' as some sort of objection to markets are not the brightest bulbs in the firehouse. So I have to clarify everything upfront or I will get the shit storm of people "disagreeing" with me when we actually agree.

When I use the term "planned obsolescence" I'm talking about one type specifically. That is that manufacturers deliberately limit the lifespan of a good for the explicit purpose of getting more repeat business. I'm not talking about the other forms.

So what sorts of 'planned obsolescence' are real? Let's say you're a technology manufacturer, and you find that your customers like to upgrade on average every 2 years to the latest product. So you design your product with parts that can wear out in about 5. You do this for legitimate reasons. Why waste time, energy, and money on resources that will give a phone a 100 year lifespan have to be recycled into something else or thrown out in 2-5 years? A lot can change technology-wise in 100 years, even in 10 years. Imagine how much of a fool you would have been to buy a pager in 1997 that costs 300 dollars more because it will last a lifetime when no one uses them 10 years later. Who knows what the future will be in cell phones in 10 years from now or 10 years after that. How would you feel if you bought an iPhone 1, G1, or a Blackberry at 4 times the cost so it would last 90 years. You would have already had it recycled. (BTW, if you're not recycling your phone, you're an asshole and you're also breaking the law. Your cellphone provider will tell you so.) This is perceived obsolescence. The technology will be phased out even if the hardware is up to the task so manufacturers cut costs for you so you're not overpaying for something you won't even use. I see this as beneficial for all parties involved. This is not what we will be debating.

The argument I will be debating is that companies, with malicious intent, rig devices and goods to die out so you'll come back. First of all it fails on purely logical grounds. Let's say you're Company X and you make a widget designed to fail in 2 years and there's no real reason to do so besides increasing sales. This would mean that if Company Y made a widget without this time-bomb, they would gain market share because they could advertise that their product lasts longer at the same price. Take a light bulb. You have a choice between 2 light bulbs with identical light outputs but one lasts 1 year because of an intentional design flaw, and the other lasts 2 or more years. Word gets around that Company X's light bulb doesn't last as long as Company Y's and X will lose market share.

On the other side of the coin you will have consumer advocacy groups like Consumer Reports that will announce the faulty products and recommend Y over X and market share is lost. The other problem is those fucking geeks. The lifehackers, the reverse engineers, and the other geeks who like to see how things work will identify faults and publicly expose them. If they find something that seems deliberate, lawyers will find these consumers who were defrauded and file a class action against Company X. Company X now will use the extra money it gained fighting a legal battle and paying restitution. Not a smart move.

Ah ha, Jim! Didn't you see the Pyramids of Waste/Light Bulb Conspiracy?! There was a cartel who limited the span of light bulbs! Haven't you heard of the Centennial Light Bulb?! It's been on for over 100 years! Debunk that!
Oh, I will. First let's talk about the Centennial Light Bulb because it's not related to the cartel or planned obsolescence. I made a video about that and I suggest you watch it and then we'll talk about Phoebus.


The Phoebus Cartel was an interesting topic, but it's often over simplified for ideological reasons. The cartel didn't have a hold of every light bulb market. There were Nordic companies who did make longer lasting lamps but they did not sell over the shorter lifespan bulbs. Why was this? Because the longer lifespan bulbs used more electricity and put off more heat than light than the shorter lifespan bulbs. People found it more advantageous to buy bulbs more often, pay less for electricity, and get more light. It's also why we transitioned to tungsten bulbs not long after with an even lower life span than the Phoebus cartel's regulations. Tungsten lamps burned cooler and brighter.

I made the point in the above video and I think I should stress this point here. If you think that companies intentionally retard products for repeat business, how do you explain light bulb manufacturers introduction of CFL lamps which have almost 10x the life span? All the while they were developing and refining the LED lamps to last even longer. Why didn't the light bulb companies lobby the government to ban CFLs on environmental grounds to protect their planned obsolescence model of incandescents? "Those CFLs will get mercury into our water and farms!"

Now this is not to say it's possible or even that this can exist. There are cases where you have a walled garden system where you'd need to buy their refills for their products but they are typically on the fringe or for hobbies. Tamagotchi Pets come to mind, but even those had to cave to reusable models after backlash.

Anyways, love to hear what you guys think. For now I have to go to the store and replace these apples that are overripe because of Mother Nature's planned obsolescence. Curses! 

Thursday, March 6, 2014

I'M SO POOR, GIVE ME MONEY SO I CAN PARTY WITH DEAR LEADER

No comments:

OMG, LIFE IS SO BAD FOR ME RIGHT NOW, PLEASE GIVE ME MONEY SO I CAN GO SEE MY FAVORITE CULT OF PERSONALITY. I KNOW I SHOULD BE HOME WITH MY KIDS AND TRYING TO GAIN JOB SKILLS AND MOVE UP IN THE WORLD. I MEAN I'M 38 AND I ONLY JUST STARTED WORKING AT MCDONALDS A YEAR AGO BECAUSE I WAS TOO BUSY FUCKING AROUND ON THE INTERNET. I KNOW I GOT A HUGE WATER BILL BUT THAT'S ALL PART OF THE BOURGEOIS SYSTEM KEEPING ME DOWN AND AWAY FROM HANGING OUT WITH DEAR LEADER. I AM A VICTIM SO GIVE ME MONEY PLEASE GIVE ME ALL YOUR MONEYS.
(Don't really give me money, this is sarcasm)

Friday, February 28, 2014

The Events in Ukraine

No comments:
The majority of my readers are from the US and Ukrainian readers come in a close second. I would like people chime in on their thoughts on what's going on in (the) Ukraine in the comments below, but especially Ukrainians.

Be safe, guys.