How to Avoid Common Mistakes with Mining Actions (Part 4 ...
How to Avoid Common Mistakes with Mining Actions (Part 4 ...
visual capitalist silver and gold in bc feat - MINING.COM
All the World’s Metals and Minerals in One Visualization ...
Visual Capitalist LinkedIn
Mining Archives - Visual Capitalist
Small reviews of (I think) all incremental games I've ever played on Android
I don't know if this will be useful to anyone. So I write a line or two about every game I play, and decided to find all the incremental in my game journal and post them here. It starts with the latest games I've played and I think goes back to several years back. One thing I've realized is I have such a love-hate-hate relationship with this genre since I think I've hated 90% of the games and 100% of myself after each incremental phase. I usually angrily stop playing them for a while and restart them again, so this is more or less a journal of addiction, I suppose. THE BEST GAMES I'VE PLAYED ARE THESE (no order):
Honorable Mention: Eggs, Inc The rest: more or less hated it Additional comment if you decide to scan through it, I complain a lot, so it is perfectly reasonable and normal to think, "why the fuck are you even playing these games, idiot??". ------ Time Idle RPG This game was confusing. It tells me the game's resources is time, where you get 1 of it every second, but that's not really something as unique as I assumed. It would have been cool if time as resources meant you used it to deal with something related to time. Maybe time travel? Maybe slowing and speeding time? Instead time as resource buys you stuff like a library. And then you buy a camp or something. Honestly, I wasn't really feeling it. 2 Path of Idling The biggest cardinal sin for me when it comes to incremental is when a game has a lot of features and it just completely throws them all at you instantly. The joy of a great incremental is how things slowly open up and each new achievement feels progress. The game is a RPG game and these are the things that opened up for me in the first few hours. Combat which includes normal fighting, dungeon, raid, boss, PVP (locked, but it just needs an ascend, which I haven't done) Skills Hero upgrades which include Passive (strength, defence, stamina, intelligence), Train, and a huge Tree Town which you can buy workers who get you various things like gold, orbs, knowledge, etc. You can upgrade stuff here. Quest that also includes Perks and Skill quests. Gear which 5 equipment slots, plus craft plus trade plus smelt Also gear for your Pet, which is also another tab! Now, here is the thing. Because I have all of this pretty much instantly, I don't really know which ones are helping me go past a well. How is adding 10 points in strength helping me? Should I have added five in strength instead and five in defence? I have already bought 20 or so upgrades in the Tree, but I have no idea if I am made the optimal choice. There is no real excitement with getting new gear. And so on. The dev has added a lot of features, now it's time to rework the game, and have the features take their time. 2 Idle Slayer The game is like a super simple platformer. Your character is running and any enemy it hits, it automatically slays it. There is no HP, and all enemies die in one shot. Your only active play is jumping occasionally to grab coins or hit the flying enemies. Also, you have a run skill that has a cool down. With the coins, we get new weapons that give us more coins. Enemies give us souls which is used for the prestige system that provides us with an interesting skill tree which provides a lot of choices on the path you want to do in terms of upgrades. So far excellent, however, the game has an extremely serious issue of pacing. The game initially progresses so fast that in the first hour or so, you get almost all the weapons aside from the last two, which then grinds down to a snail pace. You can upgrade your past weapons, but they never really get into play again. Reaching high levels of past weapons sometimes gave me upgrades of that weapon of 10,000% but they still did nothing to my overall coin per second. I think the pacing needs to be fully reworked. It would have been nice to get new weapons after certain prestige cycles, so that every new weapon feels like we have passed a significant wall. The best part of an incremental game for me is to face a wall, and when I finally break it, I feel powerful again for a while. This game feels like this though, powerful powerful powerful powerful WALL........break it....WALL. And so on. I'm still playing it as I want to get some of the skills, but I feel like it could have been so much better. 4 Exponential Idle A very back to the foundation kind of incremental. The premise is that you are a student and working on a formula. There is a neat story where as you progress in the game, your character progresses through university. Each upgrade gives you more and more automation until I reached a stage where I would check back once every 2 or 3 days, click a 2nd layer prestige reset, and close it. Meaning the game was something like 5 seconds of game player every 2 days. I just opened it for this review and realized I had reached the end game. The story wraps up and it tells me "You can take a rest. Travel a bit. Go outside!" NO, DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO GAME. 3 Factoid Factoid & Spark should have the same review as they are almost the same game with only small differences. The games are the most basic kind of incremental, where you buy something with resources, until you get the next thing which gives you more of the resources. Both give you upgrades to speed things up, and finally prestige and it's own prestige upgrades. That's it. It's nice little change of pace from all the recent incremental that sometimes do too much, but obviously due to the very simple nature of it, it does eventually feel pointless, specially after you more or less open up everything and the prestige upgrades just keep repeating. 3 Spark Factoid & Spark should have the same review as they are almost the same game with only small differences. The games are the most basic kind of incremental, where you buy something with resources, until you get the next thing which gives you more of the resources. Both give you upgrades to speed things up, and finally prestige and it's own prestige upgrades. That's it. It's nice little change of pace from all the recent incremental that sometimes do too much, but obviously due to the very simple nature of it, it does eventually feel pointless, specially after you more or less open up everything and the prestige upgrades just keep repeating. 3 Antimatter Dimensions Easily top 5 incremental on mobile. Does everything perfectly. You progress nicely, and when new features open it, not only is it rewarding but more importantly, it keeps adding new dimensions (lol) to the game. I'd at the end game as I write this, and I realize that there was no point in the game where it felt stale. Each new prestige layer made the game feel fresh and almost like a new incremental game. 5 Melvor Idle It seems this game was mainly aimed at Runescape players, which is probably why it didn't click for me. It also run extremely slow on my phone which also played a part in me not really getting into. 2 A Girl Adrift The animation is really pretty and is a nice change of pace for incrementals, but I didn't really like the too much active play. Really had to keep going back and forth to different areas to do the fishing which got too repetitive for me. You travel to different areas of the map to catch fish, which you get points and then you upgrade stuff, but I didn't really find any real excitement about the upgrades because I kept having to go back to previous areas to fish similar creatures. 3 Archer: Danger Phone I'm really annoyed how terrible of a game this was. Two things I like, the TV show "Archer" and incremental games, and it's done in the most lazy manner. The game is the worst aspect of idle games where it's just a straight path of clicking the next upgrade with absolutely zero decision making. Every once in a while there is a mini game where Archer gets to shoot others but it's done in the most basic form of early 2000s flash games, where the animation budget is probably 3 dollars. Same static background and both enemies and Archer have just two animation frames. The absolute laziness of it is almost insulting to the player, because it feels like we aren't even worth the effort. There is an Archer story in the game which develops really fast, which is the only positive part, but no voice acting is again another evidence that the creators of the game weren't given any budget for this. 1 Home Quest This game is way too slow. You have to collect materials to build your settlement but everything takes time, so you click for a few seconds, and then you have to leave the game. Which I'm fine with, but the problem isn't the idle part of it, it's how the idle part of it combines with constant checking of the game which annoys me. I like an idle game where you forget to start the game for a day, you come up to a lot of resources, but this is a game which needs you to check back in every 30 minutes or an hour to really get anywhere. I felt that the micromanagement was getting worse as I progressed (without any actual thing to do when I am active in the game) that made me give up. 2 Idle Industry This is probably an interesting game, but I gave up because the one thing I really disliked was the amount of resources and manufacturing that very quickly opens to you. You can buy raw materials, and you can either sell these raw materials or turn them into finished goods and sell them either. And each of these has several upgrade options (increase selling price, increase production, etc). Without even really getting too deep into the game, I have around 20 raw materials and around 30 finished products. A satisfying part of this genre is to have things slow open up for you, which gives me a decent feeling of satisfaction. But the money I got would quickly open up new products, so I would just jump ahead and purchase more expensive ones, and after a while I had a lot of materials and products at zero, and was instead focusing on latter ones. 2 Masters of Madness Somewhat neat atmosphere and visuals, but too much active clicking. Click, upgrade to get more per clicks, get minions to get you some points without clicking, typical clicker, but with the added benefit of almost no idling. I like idling incrementals but clickers is a hard no from me. 1 Soda Dungeon 2 Basically similar to the first one, as far as I could tell. I did "finish" it but maybe I shouldn't have, since it really is the same thing from early on, specially once you get all the heroes and you kind of sort out which characters work best, then it's just the same. But because it was somewhat short and no real wall, it was at least easy to stick to it to the end. 2 Bacterial Takeover Played for a decent amount and was actually more interesting that I thought, given the buttload of ad incentives. You create and upgrade bacteria, attack planets, and eventually go into a blackhole to prestige. Most of the game was good, but the part that killed it for me was the prestige system. Once you prestige, planets get super easy to attack, which becomes a lot of active play. I realized that each prestige was taking me at least 30 minutes to get to where I was, and it was just meaningless clicking. It got to a point where I was putting off prestige because it seemed like it would be a hassle so I stopped. 2 LogRogue Cute graphics. The hero sort of hopping to hit the tiny monsters is cute to look at, but how long can you look at it and do nothing before you realize that it's boring? I suppose this is a game where it's just not for me. I don't like to have my phone open on a game and just watch it like a crazy person and do nothing. My rule is simple for incrementals. While the app is open, be active, if there isn't any choices to make, close the app while resources build up or whatever. I don't like it being open while I do nothing. 3 A Kittens Game Incremental games are so strange. I get in and out of the phases. I loved this for so long and so obsessively that I wanted to only play incremental games. And then, just like that, I was wondering why the fuck I was wasting my time with this. Has happened countless times before. But still probably the best incremental ever. 5 A Dark Room An incremental cult classic of sorts but I don't find it really matches the genre. There is a bit of incremental at the beginning with people huts and stuff but then its just a ascii exploring game, which wasn't interesting to me. 2 Little Healer Saw it mentioned in the Reddit incremental forum in one of the posts and thought it was a healer themed incremental which sounded neat. But it's like being a healer in a raid in World of Warcraft without any if the extras. Just a couple of bars representing your team mates and you healing them while they fight the boss. I didn't even like playing the healer in WoW so no way would I play this game. 1 Clickie Zoo Started playing for a few days until I realized there a beta released with the dev reworking the game completely from scratch and releasing it as "Idle Zoo Tycoon". So, played that instead but this seemed like a game I would enjoy anyway. 4 Idling to Rule the Gods The UI and one drawing if your character is really ugly enough to be distracting to me. The game, seemed interesting and I eventually was into it, but seems like a game that has been constantly being updated, which is not always a good thing, because features are obviously updated regularly to it, making the whole thing a bit bloaty. I guess, this is the problem with this game for me, it's too fat. Also, one main part of the game is that your character creates Shadow Clones up to a maximum limit. Which is fine except the clones can't be made in offline mode. This might not be a big deal in its original web browser game but that doesn't work as well in a mobile format. 2 Realm Grinder This is one of the really popular incremental and it's fanbase seems to love it for it's depth, but to be honest, I don't play these games for the depth, I play it for the simple dopamine rush of doing the same thing over and over again. It relaxes. Although, I didn't even get to the depth part because I dislike games where it rushes in the beginning. I constantly bought buildings, got spells, and got upgrades without even looking at the description. Apparently, later on, we can get complicated race upgades, which seems not what I'm looking for in such a genre. 2 Spaceplan A short (!!) incremental with an actual story (!!!). That's two cool points for it but unfortunately, the game mechanics of increment genre isn't so good. It's a space game with nice visuals and a great ending (cool music set to cool graphics) but the game itself wasn't really that fun. This same exact game would have been better in a different genre (maybe something like "Out There"?) 3 Zombidle Felt like idle games again and this is the kind of examples that kept me away. Too much clicking and seems like advancement will start to get irritating since it relies on IAPs 2 Eggs, Inc While I was playing it, Eggs, Inc was probably my favorite Android game I had ever played. But like most incremental games, there comes a moment when I suddenly stop and think, what am I doing? Because there is something fascinating about Incrementals. Their addictiveness is in a way the whole point. An incremental is less of a game and more an act of electronic addictiveness. What's the point? Eggs, Inc is a very well made and fun incremental but even the best in its genre is still pointless. 4 Castle Clicker Supposedly a mix of incremental and city building but didn't really find out since the clickings were way to much. I know this is supposed to be the genre but I like the incremental part more than the tapping part. This seemed to be a good way to hurt your fingers. 2 Endless Era This RPG clicker game is like other such games but with horrible GUI and animations. Tap tap tap. It's my fault for downloading such games. Why would I ever think this would be fun??? 1 Idle Quote An incremental game with a unique twist. This time we get to make up quotes! The first negative about the game and this irritates me a lot is most of the quotes are fake. A quick search on Google and this proves it. Quotes are generally attributed to Buddha or Ghandi or shit like that and it's usually fake like most quotes on the internet. This kills the major possible advantage of the game because I thought coming up with arbitrary words would at least give me some quotes to learn. Aside from the this, the game isn't fun either because it slows down very quickly meaning you combine words very slowly at a certain stage of the game and then it becomes a boring grind. 2 Monster Miser An incremental game with almost no graphics. We just see character portraits of monsters which we buy and then upgrade until we buy the next monster. Eventually we prestige which gives us multipliers. The only game choice is choosing between two monsters with each new monster with unique benefits. Annoyingly there is a max limit which I wish didn't exist because I wanted to prestige so much that I would be over powerful in upgrading like that "Idle Oil Tycoon". Still, pointless but reasonably fun. 3 Pocket Politics An incremental take on politics sounds fun but it's so generic that it could have been about anything. A Capitalist idle game or a cooking idle game, it wouldn't matter. IAP was also the usual shitty kind. 1 Time Clickers A shooter incremental sounds like a cool twist but it's not a FPS like I imagined it would be. I'm just stuck in a room and I was shooting blocks. Upgrades didn't give me any enjoyment since I was shooting fucking blocks. 1 Tap Tap Fish - Abyssrium I thought this was going to be relaxing incremental but the ridiculous and generic IAPs and all the social integeration spoil it. Too much time is spent in them asking you to buy or share or tweet or post or give them a blowjob. And there is nothing relaxing about that. 2 Cartoon 999 Incremental game about comic book writers, but not the marvel DC kind, it seemed to be the webcomic one and I think it's a Korean developer so all the characters and injokes made no sense to me. The whole thing was just targeted to a very specific audience. 2 Dungeon Manager Incremental games need to be simple but this is beyond simple, it's just upgrade a fighter to level 5, go to next dungeon character, do the same, and just continue without any of the delicious balancing of upgrades like other idle games. 2 Final Fortress Incremental games are already pointless but when it's super heavy on IAP than its also annoying, but when it always has bugs that doesn't register my offline earnings, then it just needs a uninstall in its face. The zombie skin was also crappy. 1 Mana Maker Here is how I know this clicker isn't very good. It doesn't make me hate all clickers and my life and mobile gaming in general for being so addictive and pointless. So fail, sorry. 2 Infinity Dungeon The usual incremental RPG that I should probably never play again. Starts simple enough and then gets more or a chore as you play. 1 Another incremental game which I had promised myself not to play anymore because they are so pointless and repetitive and endless. Well, this wasn't infinite and had a goal at 999 level so I thought it was good but while the humor was cute, the game did become very repetitive. Every 10 levels the slimes changed but after every 100 levels the whole thing restarted and while the monsters got stronger, I seemed to get even stronger. So the game became easier as I progressed and there was no more challenge. By level 800, I gave up. 2 Tap Dungeon RPG Okay, I'm running out of ways to complain about those incremental RPG games that all have similar problems. It starts off reasonably fast and fun but soon it seems like I am in a data entry job. Doing the same thing over and over again with little changes. 1 Dungeon 999 F: Secret of Slime Dungeon Another incremental game which I had promised myself not to play anymore because they are so pointless and repetitive and endless. Well, this wasn't infinite and had a goal at 999 level so I thought it was good but while the humor was cute, the game did become very repetitive. Every 10 levels the slimes changed but after every 100 levels the whole thing restarted and while the monsters got stronger, I seemed to get even stronger. So the game became easier as I progressed and there was no more challenge. By level 800, I gave up. 2 Tap Dungeon RPG Okay, I'm running out of ways to complain about those incremental RPG games that all have similar problems. It starts off reasonably fast and fun but soon it seems like I am in a data entry job. Doing the same thing over and over again with little changes. 1 Tower of Hero You start on the first floor of the tower and keep fighting your way up by summoning your heroes (by clicking) and recruiting other fighters, get upgrades, level up, and then, ugh, here is the typical incremental RPG part, restart, get items, and do it ALL over again. There is something fun about restarting and getting slowly stronger each time but it also feels so pointless after a while. Such a pointless genre now that I have played a billion of such titles, heh. 3 Pageboy Yet another incremental RPG which I have no idea why I downloaded because I'm sick of the genre. I played a pageboy to a knight who does the fighting while I collect the lot. I collect the loot, buy stuff for the knight, and eventually I restart to do the same thing again and get better items but this game I didn't even RESTART! Because fuck it! Fuck it! 2 Idle Warriors The story is cute. Human population is regressing while monster population is on the rise. So the humans start enslaving monsters to mine for them! The brave warriors beat the crap out of monsters, kidnap the bosses, and enslave them. The animation of monsters slaving away while speech balloons above them talk about their wife and children is funny. But the game itself is another RPG incremental which I should start staying away from. These games are like a chore for me nowadays because I'm doing the same crap again and again. The blame is probably on me because it seems like a reasonably solid game. But hey, fuck it, I PERSONALLY didn't enjoy it. 2 Tap! Tap! Faraway! Any game that is remotely like Tap Titan scares me. They are addictive at first and very fast moving but after every restart gets more and more annoying. It soon turns into a time eating activity with the player having to redo the initial levels to get relics to get better items to progress further to restart to get relics to and so on until the player realizes how much time he is putting in the game for a repetitive activity. 2 Auto RPG Now that is a title the game developers didn't spend too much time on. RPG battles are automatic but I can help out by clicking like a mad man. I started with one hero but would get additional members in my party as the story progressed. Party members receive skills as as they level up and while all the skill usage is automatic, it did give me a sense of progression which is extremely important in a RPG and which I think is usually lacking in incremental games. It usually starts feeling useless but in this game at least there are new maps, new members, and an actual end sight! There is an infinity stage once the last boss is defeated but I am glad the infinity stage happens AFTER the end and it's not the game itself. 4 Merchant Hire a hero and send on to battle. The battles is done automatically and takes time, starts with something short like 10 seconds with each battle taking longer. The loot is raw materials which can be used to craft equipment which also takes real life time with better items taking longer. The crafted items can either be sold or equipped to the hero to make him be able to fight stronger monsters. I was worried I would hate the longer crafting and fighting times because I hate games which I have to watch for a task to finish but even though the durations for longer, I had more to do. However, I don't know what would have happened in the end game because I gave up on it. New maps were exactly like the first map just with different heroes but the progression was similar in each level which felt that I was doing the exact same thing all over again but with longer task times. 2 Idle Oil Tycoon This is the best idle game I played. It's graphics aren't just minor, they are none existent. It's just numbers, so basic that my sister thought I was on a stock market app. It's such a simple concept. Invest, get oil, upgrade then like other idlers restart to get a bonus and do the full thing all over again. When I finished the game, I played the unlimited mode which I played until the unlimited mode couldn't handle the numbers anymore. 5 Soda Dungeon This kind-of Idle Dungeon was great. I started with weak ass fighters who would fight on my behalf while I collected the loot. I then got to use the lot to upgrade the sofa bar to recruit more adventurers. Not sure why it was a sofa bar. Maybe they wanted to make it a family game and not have alcohol? Sounds weird but the sofa element in a RPG game sounds weirder. The game only hit a brick for me when, like most other incremental games, there is no real closure. Once I thought I bet the big bad guy, it just goes on, harder but similar enough with no end in sight. Eventually, we have to stop playing right, but it always feels a bit like a let down when I don't feel like I have finished the game. 4 10 Billion Wives Kept Man Life The two games from this company, 10 Billion Wives and Kept Man Life, have similar strengths and weaknesses. I liked the silly premises from both. In 10BM, I had to get married as much as I could, using the loves I collect to marry more expensive wives! In KML, I'm a boyfriend who doesn't work and I have to please my career gf so she would take care of me. Both start reasonably fast and I was willing to grind through difficult parts but the end game is like a brick wall. Passing through it to get all the achievements is pretty much impossible unless one puts in way too many hours. And it's a shame because I really wanted to get all the achievements to see all the tiny little extra stuff. 3 Adventure Capitalist One of the better incremental games, but now that I am out of the short lived incremental fan phase, I realized how dumb the genre is. Tap, tap, tap, upgrade, do this a million times, reset, and do it all over again like a moron. The game does deserve credits for me acting like a moron and playing it for so long but I also cheated and got free cash and then if occupying became even more pointless. 3 The Monolith A combination of an incremental and a civilization building game seemed like an excellent idea and in some ways, it was, specially how we get to upgrade through the ages from cavemen to futuristic. But no offline feature means that the resets aren't enticing. 2 USSR Simulator An incremental game that has a great theme (USSR!) but absolutely horrible to enjoy, even though I did stick to it. After a certain upgrades, the game just turned into me popping in the game, clicking an upgrade and then forgetting about the game for a few days. 2 RPG Clicker They should call these games tappers not clickers. We are not clicking anything on a touchscreen device. Anyway, tap tap tap level up buy weapons tap tap and uninstall. 1 Logging Quest Logging Quest 2 [Review is for the original and its sequel] There is not much of a difference between the game. I actually played them both at the same time because the actual game is offline. You choose your hero, send them to a dungeon, and then come back to the game after a while to see how well they did. I thought an offline RPG like this might be interesting but then, if you don't really play a game, how much fun can it be? 1 Another pointless incremental. I was in an incremental phase and got so many incremental games that I know realize were absolutely pointless. Hit a tree, buy upgrades, get a new hero, and continue hitting a tree. Not much offline it seems which is what I like about incrementals. 1 Galaxy Clicker A space incremental that should have been a lot of fun. You get to upgrade your spaceship and buy new ones and explorer new planets. But first of all, the interface is so ugly that it makes playing the game less enjoyable. And a lot of things I didn't really get no matter how much I would play like the full exploring planets. The spaceships were nice, so it could have been fun. 2 Megatramp A pretty pointless incremental kind of game. You are a tramp and then you can collect money to buy upgrades to make more money, with no strategy needed, nor any effort needs to be made to hurt your brain cells. 1 Inflation RPG It supposed to be some kind of incremental RPG, I think, which has you resetting and getting more powerful and then fighting monsters to get insane levels. It is very unique but I couldn't get into it. 2 Widget RPG Are you fucking with me? This is button bashing rpg in the most extreme manner. You get a widget, so you don't even have to open the game and distract yourself from the button bushing. Just click the button and the game plays behind the scenes and gets you experience, loot, and kills. It's a ridiculous idea that is fun for a few minutes to see what they come up with but there is only so much button bashing you can do. 2 Capitalist Tycoon I downloaded this game because I was in an incremental/idle game phase and really enjoyed AdVenture Capitalist. But this game is nothing like that. On the surface, it seems similar, buy small investments, make money, buy bigger investments, and so on. But with this game, there is no offline mode, and you keep having to wake up managers, AND the goal is to see how much you make in one year. Bah. I prefer the incremental approach which makes you build and build and build, not try to rush it in just a year. 2 Clicking Bad An incremental clicking game that is themed after Breaking Bad. It is a fun idea it's a very simple game with little to do aside from the obvious of upgrading and upgrading. The only twist might be to balance out making lots of money selling drugs and not attracting the law but even that is only a small challenge at the start. Eventually, you will get enough upgrades to bring the law risk so down that it makes no impact on the game play. 2 Zombie Tapper A super basic incremental clicker game with a zombie team. Click click click to eat brains, use brains (?) to buy zombies to do the brain eating for you and then buy upgrades for your zombies, and buy new zombies and it all feels very pointless. 1 Bitcoin Billionaire I started to enjoy incremental games, but it needs to have a good offline mode, because I don’t want to just play a game where I keep tapping. But that doesn’t mean I didn’t play. I played it, and I played a lot of it, because I could reset the game (like most incremental games) and it gives you a small benefit where you could finish the full game a bit faster (it gives you bonus income). So, I kept finishing and resetting, and each time the start to finish would shorten, so I thought I would reach a stage where I could finish each start-to-finish in an instant! It didn’t happen. I got bored first. 3 Tap Titan An addictive tapping game. Just tap on the creatures, level up, get new skills, hire heroes, and then reset and to it all over again to progress further. It’s an incremental game where it depends on resets to progress, but no real offline bonus, so you have to be playing online. Which got boring, so I installed an app that does the tapping for me, which is actually a stupid way to play the game, but this isn’t an attempt to prove to anyone my intelligence. Anyway, thankfully something went wrong and my progress got deleted, WHICH WAS A GOOD THING, because the game was extremely addictive. 4 God Squad I’ve realized most incremental games are stupid. Tap on monsters to kill, collect gold, buy Roman Gods, level them up, fight other monsters, and then get bored. 1
Lots of text, would be grateful if someone helped typing me
Well thats an absolute unit of a text, so I hope at least some will read it. I understood some things just by writing it down, anyway haha If you have curiosity, like typing people and reading it right now, then thank you in advance! Hope it will be entertaining for you. Lets jump into it. Describe yourself in as much elaborate detail as possible (that still renders you anonymous, or to a level of acceptable comfort) 22yo M. I feel that I am a mix of contradictory traits (as any human being I think haha). I have scientific background, yet I spend all my time learning art. I am disciplined, determined and ambitious but I don’t feel that I relate to common perception of power and success. I feel lots of emotions, but often suppress them and can’t display normally. I think world is chatic and amorphous, but think that by gazing it and spotting patterns we can tame the chaos. I hate to be weak and imperfect, still I know that perfection is objective and depersonalized and my flaws make my identity, which I want to understand better never lose the grasp of. I try to understand different perspectives but have blunt black and white worldview and morals. I use to jump from one extreme to another when forming my opinion on something and have troubles with half tones. I like symbolism of lightning and violet color because of that, both exist only when two strong opposing forces mix: +- with electricity and violet being mix of red and blue whict stand on opposing sides of visible spectrum. I would describe myself like melancholic-choleric and lean more towards introversion. I am moody and hot headed sometimes, not as hot headed as some pure cholerics I know, but still. I am often stunned by beauty, but I hate when others see me in that state. People see me as drama queen sometimes, I’m afraid they are not wrong :D I like conflicts and clashing of ideas and feelings, until they become toxic and trivial. I think it’s great to go after your feelings sometimes and jump right into “battle”. Still people seem to drain me quite a lot, and I need to stay alone for long time. I’m not a great planner to be honest, and suck at strategy games. Not only I don’t really think strategically most of the time an hate acting by optimized strategies, I also often go with decisions that make more aesthetic sense to me. I also often don’t think what to say in advance and understand lots of things while actually saying them, like on the run. I’m not sure about introversion though. Socialization drains me and I have some social enxiety but I learned how to communicate and may handle it, it just not natural to me. I used to get acquainted with some random girls I liked, but it was quite a challenge. I also like sharing ideas, experience and feelings with others and can’t keep something I’m exited about inside. If I like something I cant help but talk about it until exhaustion. Talking about exhaustion I tend to work until it, and have troubles having normal rest doing nothing. I’m afraid to lose time and not experience everything life has to offer or not acquire all the skill and knowledge I could. So I end up constantly dong something, still I struggle to define what is my end goal except “become as full and potent human as possible”. I also like seeing past details and distractions. It gives me pride and joy when I spot things, patterns, truth. Seeing true colors, form, movements, hearing sounds precisely, seeing past words and masks people wear, seeing past my own bias, etc. I just like gazing the world, both phisical and mental/spiritual if you will. I’m afraid I also seem to be self-absorbed and often have hard times empathising and feeling other people. It’s as if my identity had really strong gravity: its hard for me to lose grasp of it, still I can’t live it to experience what other people feel and I don’t. I am sensitive and easily offended or distressed, so I am good at not causing other people to feel the same. People with similar experience like my company and we often have this empathy moments of understanding. Other than that? I don’t really like weakness and inconsistency in myself and other people. I may act cold and aloof or even aggressive if I see the display of these traits. Sometimes I like competition, but I hate toxic competition, because toxicity is the sign of weakness. I often have this burning desire to become better, but I use to set unrealistic goals and feel bad when I don’t meet them. I like ambition for the sake of ambition and the process of becoming stronger and chase for high goals brings me joy. I’m not a leader though, cause I hate to delegate tasks. I want to accomplish everything by myself. It may be irrational and unproductive, but I can’t overcome this, at least for now. Why are you interested in knowing your type? I want to have better touch with my true identity and better define my role in the story of humanity. Learning about different types can help. Also, other people may better see some traits that I may dismiss, so it’s important to compare your own self-perception to how others see you. Do you go to work and/or you in school? If so, what field/occupation/subjects? Well, that’s a mess. I work as data engineer (IT programmer-esque job) and have IT bachelor. After job I learn sculpture and drawing at my local workshop, and it is my main passion for now. Before the decision to gain art education, I played double bass, learned jazz and then classical composition, mostly by myself. My first passion was biology, I thought to gain biology bachelor in high school but in the last moment was persuaded to gain IT major because I had basically no plan for career as biologist. I had no plan for IT education either, but it is much easier in my country. Anyway, I hate to identify with my job. I don’t hate the job itself really, it gives me money for learning art, but I can’t identify with craft that I'm not passionate about. Visual art now and music (in past at least) on the other hand are both arts/crafts that make me feel alive and burning with feelings. While I was at IT faculty I used to spend all my free credits on philosophy disciplines from humanities faculty, because I felt out of my place and wanted to compensate it. Best things I learned in my UNI was math, AI and machine learning, philosophy, culturology and renaissance music ensemble. Although I felt myself out of place I never considered dropping out like some my counterparts because it seemed to me that I will show weakness if I would not get till the end of uni (this logics are flawed AF but that’s how my mind used to work worked back then). Funny thing that after gaining bachelor I decided that going for master degree would be a sign of weakness, because I understood that IT is not my true passion, so I did not do it. Describe your upbringing. Did it have any kind of religious or structured influence? How did you respond to it? I was teached to respect people and be honest, which I took to extreme and became a little bit obsessed with honor at the early school (and rest of life possibly). In terms of religion my family is not religious at all, I wasn't even baptized. I developed an interest for religion as a teenager, but it turned out that I was enchanted by aestetics and art, rather than faith. Anyway, I feel that I have faith, just don’t really understand it for now. I was not the popular kid, but most classmates seemed to like me. I was bullied often and had lots of fights, still lost them all. I feel like was on some kind of moral crusade at school, but as all crusades it was a lost one haha When I reached middle school my upbringing became stricter. I had lots of conflicts with parents, sometimes violent-esque. Nature of conflicts looked more like blitzkrieg than cold war. Fast, loud, but we often had piece after like 15-60 minutes. My upbringing helped me to develop will, ambition and passion for life. Do you need logical consistency in your life? Yes, but I don’t know if it can be called logical. I want my life, and life of humans to be as straight and logical story/system as possible. For everyone to represent their unique role in given environment. For pieces not to overlap. It's hard to explain, but I wish the world was like a huge mechanism full of cogs that all act in perfect harmony an consonance, beautiful symphony if you will. I would say that it must sound like perfect 4th interval for some reason. It's funny cause it seems that while I have this subjective worldview, I am drawn to the light of objectivity like a moth. How curious are you? Do you have more ideas then you can execute? What are your curiosities about? What are your ideas about? I am pretty curious. I don’t know if I have lots of ideas, but often there are few at a time of 1-3 mouth span that I think of and try to boil down or connect with each other. I usually see something in the world or something like a character from fiction that strike my feelings somehow and then start carving ideas out of it, if they seem complimentary to me. Like I think I spent 3 month extracting and analyzing what symbols lie under Sauron and his place in Silmarillion and ended up discovering loads of symbolism and beauty in such common things as tower, ring, metal, eye, orb etc. If money was not an issue, what careejob would you have? I think an artisan of some sort? Maybe a researcher, but as a researcher you are disconnected from your identity, and I want the things I do to contain part of my will and exist in physical world. I would think composer, sculptor, anything that needs finesse, skill and may be considered an art/craft form, maybe fencing master lmao. I'm not really good at performance and showing emotions like at all, so not a stage musician definitely. Something like fencing, sculpture or music composition doesn’t require you to show emotions, all your personality becomes encapsulated in your actions and product of them, that’s important to me. Not sure about fencing though, since it's not very personal, but I like things that require you to master tools. Are you a free spirit or do you play by the rules? If so, why? I play by rules mostly. Maybe, because of my upbringing. I think generally it would be better if people followed simple rules LIKE COMING IN TIME FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST. I also hate cheating and have a need to accomplish everything honestly, even if I will get worse results. So yeah, it's not the question of rules, but rather honor and need for overcoming my imperfections. If I cheat - I lose experience, if I lose experience - I become weaker by not becoming stronger. So, rules as artificial restrictions act as challenges for me to overcome and gain power. When I play games I follow the rules religiously. Even if game logics are flowed and let you break them, I will still act as if rules worked correctly. I also feel very uncomfortable if I didn’t consume everything the location has to offer, e.g. quests, dialogs, secret rooms, etc, dialogs especially. I hope I live life in the same manner. If I asked you to take a shot with a football how would that make you feel? Would you be able to do it well? Would you enjoy it? Nah, I hate football and team sport. No team sport for me please. I don’t enjoy it at all, because people become toxic and dependent on me. I hate how people act when playing team competitive games and don’t want to have anything common with them, and surely don’t want to be dependent on them. If I asked you to write me an essay, would you enjoy it? What would it be about? How would it make you feel? I would love to. Not sure if I would be good at it, but anyway. I'm planning to write an essay on how visual art and math make you better at seeing the truth in both physical and spiritual realms. Is it okay to crack a few eggs? If it makes an omelette? Do the ends justify the means? It's better to act honorably then win, because being honorable is the true win. If your ultimate goal is an honorable one, then it may justify the means. But it hugely depend on context though. Generally, I would stick to my values even if it makes me lose. It's not objective like at all so I mostly act as I feel. Do you put things back in their proper place? Yes, mostly always. I rarely lose things because of that. I also tend to be pretty vigilant and perceptive, and often find things other people have lost, or just memorize the position where I last saw them. Somehow, I always scan my environment for things that people may need, and thus can point them to ones. If I don’t remember the thing I’m still good at spotting it: I once found a jewelry in darkness in grass at night when my friend lost it and keys in the football field. I have this strange talent of finding things. How do you behave around strangers, acquaintances and friends? Strangers - polite and aloof, but sometimes I start conversations to sharpen my social skills and challenge my anxiety. Acquantances - polite and slightly less aloof. Friends - not aloof, always try to provoke interesting and meaningful discussions and share latest feeling and ideas I experienced. I often act blunt and rude, because finally I don’t need to wear any masks, and if they don’t like me without my masks then they are not friends. People tell me that I am often cold and distant, especially in the past, but generally they seem to like my company for some reason, and comparing to other humans I seem to resemble at least some charisma. Do you have exquisite tastes that you would expend effort or money for? I spend lots of money on artbooks. I like holding a book with good art prints, beautiful design and typography, nice cover. I can buy a book just because I liked the cover and then actually have good impression from the text itself because of it. I also used to play trading card game, which sometimes has good-looking arts on cards and used to buy beautiful ones and put them in my decks just to look at them, even if they put me in disadvantage. How do you act when others request your help to do something (anything)? If you would decide to help them, why would you do so? Depends. I usually help if I see that help is truly needed. I don’t help if I see that my help will harm. For example, If someone asks my homework, to copy it, I will either reject the request or will feel that I’m doing a wrong thing by giving my homework. How long do you take to make an important decision? How would you go about it? And do you change your mind once you've made it? Sometimes I just feel the right decision, than it takes no time. If I have no gut feeling then I try to use logics and it may take lots of time. I only abandon my decisions if I see the other one that is much better. Like with music and art, I decided to go for art because I have seen lots of mistakes on the way I used to learn music and felt that I would progress much faster in art, which turned to be true. If I asked you to design a plan of action, would it be easier to work alone or in a group? Do you ask for others opinion? or stick to your own guns? I usually do the things alone, but I like gathering information and validating it by sharing with other humans. Same thing, I often have a gut feeling, I try to crashtest it by looking how would other people react to it and then, depending on observation, I make something. A weekend best spent looks like ...? Either by sleeping as intensely as I’m capable of or by doing something meaningful/observing the world. I don’t remember when I last had a normal weekend because I spend them in my workshop now and practicing music back then. My biggest fears are ... That’s a tough one. I think my main fear is discovering that some people are destined to be weak and cannot rise above their imperfections and I am one of them. Having no impact on the world and people. Becoming dishonorable, miserable and abject. Loosing grasp of my values and identity, thus loosing, myself and essentially spiritually dying. How much do you express yourself and what mediums do you do that through? Art? Writing? Talking? I tried communication with talking, but my ideas and feeling tend to be either too irrational, abstract or bizarre for my talking skills to handle. I rarely can explain myself and often become misinterpreted and things go terribly wrong. I often feel pushed out and misunderstood because of this. So, at some point of my life, I decided that my deeds and, which is similar to be honest, my art will speak for myself much better than words. When trying to explain something I try to use associations to invoke same feelings in ones I talk to. Generally where do you lean politically? Is it every man for himself? Should people be pragmatic? Does the government need to step in and help people? I tend to think that politics is generally a parasitic idea, so I deliberately try to avoid it. As stated earlier, my deeds will influence people, not votes, declared views, parties or political parasites I am forced to support and choose out of. Anyway, I still can’t have no political views and completely ignore it. In past I used to be more right oriented, now I don’t know on whish side of the spectrum I am. I hate capitalistic values and materialistic obsession. I also don’t believe that capitalism can produce anything truly beautiful, at least as long as its measuring everything by profit metrics. However, I am no radical left either. I hate to associate myself with any political movement and tend to live by mine individual values. Does it matter if something is factually correct for you to believe in it? I think that people are a little bit obsessed about rationalizing their views nowadays. Many things can’t be factually correct but are still there. Beauty, faith, honor all these things exist but are too irrational to be described in words and proved factually. I just feel some things and fail to explain them, so people often can’t understand me or share my enthusiasm about something. On the other hand, something rationally and “factually” proved can often be misleading. Great lesson I learned from art. We know that trees have green lives and, but leaves are often not green. It’s the thing impressionists started doing. Leaves are yellow on sunlight, blue in the shadow and sometimes green. We, as humans, often miss it because we substitute our perception with mind. This stops us from seeing the truth of the world that looks as it is. Other wonderful example is Homers Wine-dark Sea. Sea is rarely blue, still we know it as such. Are emotions/feelings an important aspect of your life? If so, then why? It’s a mess too haha. Feelings are super present in my life, I’m not good at controlling them oftentimes. I get absolutely annihilated by music, completely dissolving and loosing myself in it. I often cry from it. Same goes for art in general, but to lesser extent. As I mentioned earlier its funny that I’m constantly exploring my identity and stand on subjective positions but like to dissolve in absolute beauty loosing touch with everything that I am. On the other hand, I have troubles showing emotions. I just can’t cry in front of other people. It developed to such extend in my life that at some point in past people started viewing me as cold emotionless person, which pissed me off. Now they usually tend to see me as some sort of choleric or moody person. How attached are you to reality? I like observing and experiencing it, it fuels my imagination and visa versa. I often awere of my surroundings and rarely bump into people, fall down, get into dangerous situations. Still I sometimes daydream and spend some time in my head, waking on autopilot, which, as I mentioned, seems to be very good. How thick skinned are you? Are you sensitive to criticism? Not thick skinned at all, I often get offended. I like criticism from people that are my mentors, otherwise I feel that it may be flawed. If I see that critics are good I always listen to them, otherwise I get angry/upset.
For the liberals and conservatives who still refuse to acknowledge the real enemy of the working class, the ruling class, this post has sources regarding the growing wealth inequality of India and other capitalist nations.
The top 10% of the Indian population holds 77% of the total national wealth. 73% of the wealth generated in 2017 went to the richest 1%, while 67 million Indians who comprise the poorest half of the population saw only a 1% increase in their wealth.
There are 119 billionaires in India. Their number has increased from only 9 in 2000 to 101 in 2017. Between 2018 and 2022, India is estimated to produce 70 new millionaires every day.
Billionaires' fortunes increased by almost 10 times over a decade and their total wealth is higher than the entire Union budget of India for the fiscal year 2018-19, which was at INR 24422 billion.
Many ordinary Indians are not able to access the health care they need. 63 million of them are pushed into poverty because of healthcare costs every year - almost two people every second.
It would take 941 years for a minimum wage worker in rural India to earn what the top paid executive at a leading Indian garment company earns in a year.
The following is a transcription of a lecture given by Narges Murray in the Spring of 2046. Everyone. Everyone. We're starting. [The conversing class quiets.] Today's lecture is the third and final lecture in our discussion of capital. You'll recall the definitions of capital provided by the previous two lectures. Loosely summarizing, we tend to think of capital as financial assets, manufacturing plants, employees, things like this. This is not an entirely formal way of defining capital, however. These are more like categories that bound common, known types of capital. For the scope of this lecture, we're going to discuss a formal definition of capital, and the directions capitalism hypothetically travels in. Both of these things are going to be quite abstract, so we'll spend some time bringing it all back to reality. Now, the definition we use for this lecture going to stem from Marx. Get your sighs out of the way now, if you have them. Put your personal biases about Marx aside and consider the notions on their own merits. So. Capital. Marx thought of capital as a social relation. More specifically, he gave capital a recursive definition. You can kind of think of it as money which is used to acquire more money, but capital extends beyond the realm of currency. Formally, capital is defined as the present potential for future capital. As it turns out, that's not very helpful. But there's a good reason. We don't know what all forms of capital are - we haven't invented all technologies or discovered all markets. We also aren't very good judges of the capital we do have. Stock speculation, barter systems, all of these arise from imprecise measures of potential value. Some even argue that any trade can be seen as an imprecision in value-assessment, but that deviates from today's purpose. So, we end up with this recursive definition. Capital is what gets you more capital. Not great for specificity, but it's enough to start. Let's create a hypothetical society. A capitalist society. In this hypothetical society, there are some number of individuals. The success of each individual is governed by how much capital they have - in other words, how much potential for future capital they have. Each individual is motivated to succeed along this metric, and this metric alone. Notions of humanity, empathy, art - all of it is subject to whether or not something is capitalistically viable. Any guesses about what makes an action viable? [Murray gestures to a raised hand.]
Any action that raises your capital?
Right. A good action raises your potential. So, capital is anything that holds the potential for more capital, and the actions we want are actions that increase our capital. There's a "glitch" with this definition, though. It's going to take some work to outline, but it's pretty intuitive once you see it. Back to our hypothetical society. Let's draw a quick diagram. [Murray uncaps a marker and draws a large circle on the whiteboard behind her.] Let's call this circle the "universe of capital." This is all capital that exists. It could be finite, it could be infinite, countable or otherwise. [She draws a smaller circle entirely within the first.] This is the capital in our hypothetical society's control. Tractors, mines, money - this represents the things the individuals in our society have their hands on that can be used to get more. Who can tell me what the best outcome for anybody in this society is? Think along the definition of "optimal" we discussed earlier in the quarter. [She gestures to a student in the front row.]
Oh, uh. I think it would be, like... making a lot of money?
Okay, acquiring lot of capital, sure. And what's the optimal version of that?
Making all of the money - er, capital?
Okay. So, as an individual in our hypothetical capital-focused society, your goal is to get all of the capital. All of which, though? [She gestures to the concentric circles.]
The inner circle?
No, we want the universe of capital. A true capitalist wants all of the capital that can be acquired - they want to control all of the potential for growth. Not just what's in the society's present control, but what might one day be acquired. Things yet to be invented or harvested. So, let's revisit our definition of a positive action. Anything that acquires more capital. There's two ways we can do that. First, we can expand into the realm of uncaptured capital. [She draws outward-pointing arrows along the circumference of the inner circle.] Second, we can take the capital of other individuals in our society. [She draws a cyclical arrow within the circle.] For the sake of the lecture, we'll say that these actions are mutually exclusive. You do an action of one kind followed by the other kind, but a single action can't be both. Is this all making sense? Do we follow so far? [She surveys her students.] Okay. Thinking about the best-case for an individual, then. An individual wants all the capital in the universe. We've reached the first example of our definition's glitch. Anyone have any guesses? [She pauses again to survey. The hall is silent.] If capital is anything that carries the potential for more capital... [She pauses again. Finally, a hand is raised. She points to it.]
Once you get it all, you can't get anymore. There's no more potential. So there's like, no more capital, not even what you already have.
And because there's no more to be gotten, you're left with none! All of the potential goes away. So the individual, assuming they acquire all capital, now has no capital, since what they have cannot be used to get any more. That's a big question mark. Now, I called it a "glitch," but that might not be the best word. This could very well be a feature of capitalism - a motivator. [Murray turns to the board and draws two non-negative axes. She labels the horizontal axis "time," and the vertical axis "capital."] Let's start with a line that represents what happens when there is finite capital. Where's our first point? [She waits several seconds until an impatient student calls out.]
Zero capital at the far right!
[She plots the point.] Sure. This is the endpoint, when we run out of capital to get and our potential hits zero. Now, what might the curve look like? How do we get to this? Let's assume we start over here. [She plots another point just above the left end of the axis.] We initialize this best-worst-case individual with some positive amount of capital, so they can get capital. Let's say they're a perfect player, and at each step, they acquire the maximum amount of capital available to them given the amount they presently possess. [She plots the exponential growth, then stops.] But wait. We've just passed the critical point. Should our curve keep going up? We know we need to end down at zero. [There's a murmur of rejection in the hall.] Of course not! Our potential needs to decrease now, since the area of capital available to us is now smaller than what we have. [She draws a curve that droops down to zero.] That can't be right. If we want all the capital, we get no capital. But if we want the most capital, we stop right here in the center, at the moment of maximum potential. [She turns and notices a raised hand.] Go ahead.
But if we stop at the maximum and don't acquire any more, then... like, don't we basically have zero there, too? Since we don't get any more capital, and it decreases? I don't get it. How is it that we lose capital the more capital we gain? Shouldn't the maximum be negative capital? Since from then on, you can only lose potential.
That's a very good insight - what was your name again?
Travis. Well, you have just noted a very important symptom of something, combined with our recursive definition - which I should disclaim, is up for debate. The glitch, as I said. [Murray writes "FINITE CAPITAL" beside the hill-like curve.] There's that something. Assuming we can reach the bounds of the universe of capital, we encounter this problem. But if we have infinite capital... [She draws an exponentially growing curve that vanishes upwards.] We don't have to stop. An individual can keep growing their capital forever. Their potential never decreases. Question. [She points at a student in the back of the class.]
Shouldn't potential capital doesn't include what we already have?
That depends. It's unclear whether this conception - our potential for future capital - already includes what we have. Some say that the idea that the capital we have is or is not included in what we will have reflects the imperfect measurements of capital we use in reality and our inability to perfectly capture potential.
What about if we like, shift everyone's capital? So you always get "new" capital at each iteration, but it's just recycled in the system.
I would argue that this is technically sub-optimal, since the "best" version of capital cycling within your proposed system is a flat line, or perhaps some sort of oscillation. It also depends on how we define new - is it universally new, or only new relative to the previous cycle? [She draws a level line on her diagram.] But, if we continually get the same potential at each frame, and we do consider it valid within our definition of capital, it's better than zero, but worse than infinity.
But capital is still... Wait, yeah, doesn't capital still depend on trade? So if there's only one person there's no capital, since nobody's around to buy anything? And therefore like, no capital.
Perhaps. Some argue that the measurement of capital depends on a concept of trade, with others arguing that capital itself is trade. But trade can be anything, and between anything - you can make a deal with your future self, for instance. Are you therefore multiple capitalists, or just one? For the "measurement" idea, the conclusion is that capital can exist without any trade at all. You can grow into new capital territories, even if you're the only capitalist in the system. For the latter "trade itself" definition, which Marx leaned towards, capital is an aspect of social relationship. This point is visited thoroughly in last week's reading. [She taps the concentric circles.] But, getting back to it. At any given moment, this smaller circle's area is necessarily finite, assuming potential is also finite. And, if we have more than one capitalist, we cut it into smaller, finite slices representing each individual's finite capital. Anyone remember those two types of positive capital actions from earlier? [She pauses to incentivize an answer.]
Capturing capital that isn't in anyone else's control, and capturing capital that is.
Correct, either expanding our capital pie's total area, or capturing pieces of other slices. But if a capitalist only captures other slices and never expands the circle, they can never have the ideal, infinite capital curve. Does that make sense? [She pauses for expressed confusion.]
I don't follow.
Watch. [Murray slices the smaller circle into several equal triangles. She reconsiders, then makes one slice slightly larger.] Everyone in this society is only going to try and take someone else's capital. None of them are going to capture universally "new" capital. Eventually, because the circle doesn't grow... [She erases the slices.] Our winner ends up with everything in the circle. But they don't grow the circle, so their potential, assuming we don't reach a stable cycle like we talked about and instead reach a "winner," we hit zero again.
So capital is kind of like the derivative of wealth? Like, it's the change in wealth.
[Murray taps the market against her chin.] Not quite. It's potential. You can have a perfect operator who always manifests their entire potential, but that is not guaranteed in reality. The delta might be a good approximation in this hypothetical framework, but I wouldn't stick to it.
But if you get your entire potential at every frame, wouldn't your potential never change? Does potential reflect future potentials?
For our visualizations, we assume that potential is bounded by what can be captured by the next frame. So, even if you are guaranteed to eventually capture all capital, your potential at a given moment is limited by what you can acquire by the next step.
But wouldn't those graphs be invalid then? Since a time constraint means we're at least kind of sub-optimal?
Very good point, but no. We did not define the time it takes to acquire capital as a requirement for optimality. This process could take a thousand years at each step, or a microsecond. Of course this isn't so in the real world, but in our hypothetical world, there is no rush.
What if time was a factor?
We enter the real-world side of things. Quarterly earnings reports, day trading, inflation, all of these represent checkpoints in how we estimate capital on regular intervals. But we are getting a little too ingrained in reality for the scope of this lecture. Moving forwards. What happens when each capitalist only acquires new capital that nobody else has? [She redraws the slices then erases the perimeter of the circle. She expands the lines that delineate slices until they reach the perimeter of the larger universe of capital.] Assuming the universe is infinite, each capitalist still gets infinite capital. They do not however get the whole universe. If the universe is finite, then they each stagnate at we're back to where we were before, only now our "captured capital" and "all capital" are the same. Marx loosely believed that, ideally, the barriers that delineated individual capitalists would dissolve until all individuals were equal owners. But, in this lens we are currently using to view capital, Marx's commune is very similar to an apex capitalist - the only difference is solipsism. Does it matter if it is one discrete agent that captures the universe, or a functionally homogeneous collection of many agents? Remember, capital is our end-all. Morality and humanism is outranked by capital. Reality. Let's get back to it. The initial human society from a capitalist lens probably looked like this. [She erases the delineating lines and draws a small circle within the universe of capital.] We had very little control of the world's capital. A few plants and animals and tracts of land that were minimally harvested by small, unintelligent collections of early humans. Then we discovered irrigation and agriculture. [She redraws the circumference to be somewhat larger.] One, two, skip a few, industrial revolution... [She redraws the circle again, this time much larger.] We have the present day. Nuclear energy, metallurgy, genetics, information. Lots of capital relative to our early ancestors. But today, we have appreciable reasons to think that very the rate at which new forms of capital are captured has stagnated, even decreased, in the recent decades. Our potential may be shrinking, even though we produce and spend more each year. In fact, there is serious concern that human society has reached a sort of capital asymptote. We haven't begun developing extraterrestrial colonies, we haven't continued making breakthroughs in physics, there have been no major border redrawings, the global standard of living has not increased. It would appear that our capitalist agents - generally forms of "metacapitalists," like corporations and countries - have begun compete in greater quantity for the capital that is already under control, due to the difficulty and expense in expanding the circumference of this inner circle. This week, I've assigned an article about how homogeneity of what's within the captured capital bounds relates to the ability of for new capital to be captured. But, anyways, these "metacapitalists" are at the end of the day made up of humans. And whumans are fallible. We've talked a lot about capital in the real world, and you should remember from our readings that we are profoundly poor judges of it. With our flawed understandings, it would seem we are approaching the sub-optimal, or worse, the anti-optimal. A capitalist rises that captures all known territories of capital, but never expands it. The potential for new capital drops, the "winner" is reduced to the same value as anyone else - zero. [She pauses and waits for questions. None come.] Okay, that about covers it for today. Does anyone need a picture of the board? [She steps aside as a few students take photographs with their phones. After the phones are put back away, she erases the board, then turns to face the class.] For your assignment due Friday after this one, I strongly recommend you grapple with the implications that today's definitions and analyses have. Do the reading. Disagree with it, agree with it. Get creative. You could talk about how time factors in, how capital is measured, what happens with infinite capitalists in a system or perhaps only one. You'll note in the sample essay, a student last year wrote about how the material covered in the last three lectures pertains to something called the Fermi paradox, and a version of it called "The Great Filter." If you have questions, I'll be around after class. Office hours tomorrow at 4:00 in BSOE 422 for me, and Lisa will send out an email with information for hers. Have a good day, I'll see you Thursday.
Hey buds ! I have been involved in mbti for a couple of years now and mbti has introduced me to enneagram recently and a friend of mine also tried to introduce me to enneagram. I did some tests online (I'll say the results I've often been typed as at the end so your typing is not swayed, same as for my mbti type) but I want to be sure of my type and I don't want to go past the type I could truly be. If you could point out my instincts and give me ideas about my tritype, that would be amazing ! Thx :) • How old are you? What's your gender? Give us a general description of yourself. I'm 21 yrs old. I was born as a male, but I start to consider if I may be non-binary. I'm currently a literature student in univesity. I love reading, writing, listening to music, taking walks in nature, drinking craft beer and chilling with friends. I am somewhat philosophical and very introspective, dreamy yet terribly cynical and pessimistic. I'm an aspiring writer, I'm concerned about social and political issues and I enjoy having deep discussions with my friends about life. I would describe myself as a non-conformist. I love the idea of sailing my own course, to live a life not according to society standards. It really feels like the life that the casual person lives is not meaningful when I want to live life fully, letting something when I die to be remembered. I enjoy having my own opinions and my own tastes. • Is there a medical diagnosis that may impact your mental stability somehow? I have been diagnosed depression when I was 18, but I am past this now. I also suspect I may have ADD but I was never diagnosed so take it as it is. • Describe your upbringing. Did it have any kind of religious or structured influence? How did you respond to it? It wasn't very religious. I did have my confirmation as a christian but I couldn't believe less in christiannism. Spiritually speaking, I'm between pantheism and agnosticism. I would say I had a strict upbringing, especially at school. My dad was very demanding towards academic excellence (especially in more scientific classes) and pressured me really hard to get good grades. During all high school, I was told to excel in class so I crammed intensively during it to get good grades to finally get to Cegep (see it as some transition between university and high school, school system where I live is different) to see that I just did it parrot like, not understanding anything truly. I really hated it and took a year off. When I came back to school, I couldn't care less about grades, as long as I have decent grades. I often feel like I can't be myself at 100% with my parents, sometimes having to lie to them cause I know they will react very badly to some revelations I may tell them. Since I became a young adult, I started to become more assertive, relation with my parents became better but I can't say I'm close to my family :( • What do you do as a job or as a career (if you have one)? Do you like it? Why or why not? I'm student in literature at university but I work part time as a gas station attendant. I don't like it as I feel my qualities aren't valued here but my boss is nice and sometimes joking with clients or coworkers is nice too. It's also pretty slow paced so I can end up reading or facebooking when things go real quiet. • If you had to spend an entire weekend by yourself, how would you feel? Would you feel lonely or refreshed? Refreshed absolutely. I enjoy hanging out with friends, but I really need time alone to read, write, discover new music and all that kind of stuff. • What kinds of activities do you prefer? Do you like, and are you good at sports? Do you enjoy any other outdoor or indoor activities? I love reading, writing, listening to music, drinking caft beer and hanging out with friends. I'm very shitty at sports but I do bike from time to time and take walks too. I enjoy reading outside or getting lost in my thoughts and my feelings when walking in nature but I don't have a veru active lifestyle sadly :/ • How curious are you? Do you have more ideas then you can execute? What are your curiosities about? What are your ideas about - is it environmental or conceptual, and can you please elaborate? I think I'm fairly curious though not so much too. I have my own interests (like anyone I think ?) but I can't say that I like learning for learning's sake. I love learning about counter-cultures, such as the beatniks or the hippies, and about arts in general :D. I love discovering new styles and all that stuff. I also enjoy learning a bit about politics as all the societies we live in is a result of politics in some point. It offers me a sense of what other worlds I could live in as I am deeply unsatisfied with the western society. I'm particularly interested in far-left politics. I also enjoy history to a lower extent and philosophy too but not that much. If the knowledge I acquire doesn't help me to become more me, to make the world a better place or to help me with my creative endeavours, I don't really see the point. Craving knowledge for knowledge's sake doesn't fill me with any sense of fullfillement :/ • Would you enjoy taking on a leadership position? Do you think you would be good at it? What would your leadership style be? I would hate it and probably be terrible at it. I would immediatly leave the position to replace it with a more democratic/self-governing thing as I strongly believe that a governing position should never be occupied by a single individual. • Are you coordinated? Why do you feel as if you are or are not? Do you enjoy working with your hands in some form? Describe your activity? I'm not well coordinated. I bike sometimes but that's it. I'm pretty clumsy. • Are you artistic? If yes, describe your art? If you are not particular artistic but can appreciate art please likewise describe what forums of art you enjoy. Please explain your answer. Like I already said, I'm an aspiring writer :). I wrote mostly poetry for the last two years but am starting slowly to write a novel. My style is very dark and depressive. I talk about sad themes such as suicide, drugs, alienation and despair. I often write with lots of images to express myself and use a lot of metaphors. I can also be pretty trash in my writing as I am not afraid at all to indulge in sadness, melancholy and rage to create and often creates violent images to express how desesperate I can be. I often write about how depressing our world is, how alienating our capitalist society feels and often romanticize melancholy, despair and drugs as way to escape our world. I would describe my style as emotional, dark, sad, full of imagery yet violent or psychedelic and mixing more "literary" language with more blunt/casual language. :P I really enjoy reading, like I said very often... it feels repetitive, music and visuals arts too. Arts offer me a way to indulge in emotional complexity, something that I deeply crave. I also love artsworks that challenge the status quo and that are strikingly original. I love artworks that invite to introspection. Musically speaking, I am particularly fond of alternative/indie stuff, especially shoegazing (a subgenre of indie rock). Without Arts, my life would feel empty :( • What's your opinion about the past, present, and future? How do you deal with them? Looking in our past can help us to become more like who we are deep inside and to learn from our mistakes too, but I don't like to indulge too much in the past. I do like from times to times remembering a good time I had. Present is cool and very fun. I love hanging out with friends, having a good time and all that stuff, but being too focused on present can be harmful too as we may skip occasions to become who we want to be :( Future, well I often look to it as I am really concerned with who I want to be. I need to take decisions according to what I want to be. I am an aspiring writer and often look to what I need to do to accomplish my dreams :) I would say I take things as they come. I don't plan things, I just have some vague ideas about what I should do sometimes but I act as things arrive. I would say I am part present and part future focused. • How do you act when others request your help to do something (anything)? If you would decide to help them, why would you do so? I help ! I really like helping people and I can feel very happy doing so. I am a good listener and am good helping people with their issues as I can act as some confidant. I am very empathetic. I love helping the helpless and feel very good doing so :). I really belive that if people helped each other more, the world would be a better place. However, I don't live to serve people. Also if someone just asks me something that they could easily do but just don't want to, just like I am their servant, I have no difficulty saying no -_-. • Do you need logical consistency in your life? Not really. I don't value logic nor like it. I understand that it is important on a societal level, but I prefer letting the logic-focused tasks to others as it feels very unnatural to me to do so. I am not very concerned with being logical but more by doing what is right. But if someone tells me that something I do or think is illogical, then I won't continue doing it unless I have a very good reason to do so but I am not really concerned with logic and it feels like a foreing kingdom to me... • How important is efficiency and productivity to you? I don't value efficiency nor productivity, but I should be a bit more productive... I am very prone to procrastination and can easily end up at the end of the day like "Wait, weren't you supposed to do homework ?" and I have done nothing... I don't like feeling like my day has been wasted, but to me, a day spent reading, writing or listening to music is a day well spent. If I spend my day doing something that helps me becoming more me, then I feel fulfilled at the end of the day :) • Do you control others, even if indirectly? How and why do you do that? I don't think I do honestly. I may but I think I don't. • What are your hobbies? Why do you like them? I love reading as I love a beatifully written phrase or poem. I love when a writer expresses his deepest feelings. I love when I live a different life. I really have fun doing so :) I love listening to music as I love experiencing a song within all its emotional complexity with its aesthetic and all. I love discovering new underground indie rock bands :) I love writing as I love expressing deep personal feelings. I love creating my style, I love using creativity to express myself, I love creating imagery in my poems/writings, I love creating characters that struggle and exploring their emotional states. :D I enjoy walking in nature as it allows me to be alone with my thoughts and feelings and fills my imagination. I enjoy biking with the wind in my face, exploring new areas to be alone with my thoughts and feelings. I really enjoy hanging out with my friends and telling silly jokes :) • What is your learning style? What kind of learning environments do you struggle with most? Why do you like/struggle with these learning styles? Do you prefer classes involving memorization, logic, creativity, or your physical senses? If a class is very heavy theory, I really struggle staying focused, even if the topic interests me unless it is well explained in a language that isn't too technical. I enjoy however learning about new artforms and styles, how literature may influence society and how it is influenced by society, how writers express themselves, how different aesthetics exist and emerge and to experience them. I love discovering new forms of how artists express themselves. I am not sure about how I would describe my learning style really... I am okay listening or reading about something but human interaction is something very important to my learning process. Classes that allow me to use creativity are by far my favorites. I crave creative writing classes but I also really enjoyed photography and arts too. I am however pretty shitty at playing instruments sadly... Like I already said, I enjoy learning things only if it helps me becoming more me, helps me with my creative endeavours (such as classes about literary movements, art history, etc) or helping me to attempt to make the world a better place. • How good are you at strategizing? Do you easily break up projects into manageable tasks? Or do you have a tendency to wing projects and improvise as you go? I'm terrible at any organizational task. I could qualify for the olympics of disorganisation. I mostly improvise and do things as they go. • What are your aspirations in life, professionally and personally? To become an influential counter-culture writer that gets noticed for his creativity, originality, the beauty of his writing and the vision of life he depicts. I dream of starting a new literary anti-conformist movement that has influence not only in arts but in society as a whole too. I would like to make history in arts. Professionally, I may be a literature teacher as it is a quite good money intake to then be free to write books as I don't want to be a commercial writer (Though they are commercially viable artists that are more artistically authentic, I don't deny it). I would also like to find someone special in my life, or at least have more of a sexual life and really good and close friends. • What are your fears? What makes you uncomfortable? What do you hate? Why? I deeply fear being just another normal human being, living an unmeaningful life, getting trapped in the commuting, work and consume lifestyle. To have a conventional lifestyle as it feels terribly shallow to me. To live and not let anything to be remembered. To live a life that isn't me. To quote my favorite movie that itself quotes Thoreau : "I went to the woods because I wanted to live deliberately. I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life. To put to rout all that was not life; and not, when I had come to die, discover that I had not lived." I am very uncomfortable having to submit to values of my society and having to toss out my values and moral convictions to make it in. I avoid it as much as I can but it is inevitable to some point... I hate the society I live and feels like it is rotten in so many ways. I hate consumer society and anything that feels shallow and superficial. • What do the "highs" in your life look like? Being original, funny, writing a lot, admiring Art, having fun, introspecting to be more on the way of becoming more me, feeling happy, feeling like I can change things in the world for the better. :) • What do the "lows" in your life look like? Feeling depressed and pessimistic to the point that everything and any effort feel worthless. Withdrawing from friends to indulge more in sadness and melancholy. Not being able to appreciate simple pleasures. • How attached are you to reality? Do you daydream often, or do you pay attention to what's around you? If you do daydream, are you aware of your surroundings while you do so? I daydream all the time. I am not very grounded as a person and often indulge in fantasies and all. I am constantly in my thougths unless I'm in a party. I am not very aware of my surroundings honestly. • Imagine you are alone in a blank, empty room. There is nothing for you to do and no one to talk to. What do you think about? Well, I guess I would daydream and entertain myself with my imagination. I would think about what I would do when I go out or about multiple ways to punch in the face of the person who put me in this as it is very mean >:( • How long do you take to make an important decision? And do you change your mind once you've made it? I am sooooo indecisive, I can take so much time picking a decision as simple as "Where do you want to eat ? What do I want to read ?" etc. Important decisions are even worse, I have a tendency to push them back... I feel very uncomfortable knowing that I cannot change my decision once it is taken as I like to be able to change my mind. • How long do you take to process your emotions? How important are emotions in your life? Processing emotions can be pretty long in my case. However, I really take time to process all my emotions in their complexity. My emotions are very important in my life, one of the most important things in my life alongside my creativity. They serve me as a guide to what I want in life, how I want to live my life and all that. I seek to experience emotions in life and my sensitivity is really something I enjoy :) • Do you ever catch yourself agreeing with others just to appease them and keep the conversation going? How often? Why? No, unless it's becoming really tedious, in which case I just want to escape discussion. I highly value authenticity and if I don't agree with you, I'm not gonna lie, even if you don't like it. If I have to say something hard to hear, I will try my best to say what I feel or think with all the diplomacy and tact I can do and I expect others to do the same to me... I prefer people to be sincere to me, even if I may not like to hear it :/ • Do you break rules often? Do you think authority should be challenged, or that they know better? If you do break rules, why? Social norms should ALWAYS be challenged and questionned imo. I don't feel guilt breaking a rule if it doesn't feel immoral. Rules are mostly there to keep the status quo, not justice imo. I like the "Everything is legal if you can't get caught" mentality. However, I'm no crime genius so I often end up respecting rules if they are too hard to break, even if I find them completely immoral... So for my precedent typings... I'm an INFP and am sure of my mbti type. For enneagram tests, I often tested as 4w5 and as type 7 too (7w8 mostly, I know it's not common for INFPs). I'm not sure of my instinctual variants though. I would really appreciate you to type me and don't be shy to ask me questions in comments that would help you to type me :)
Sibling Power Struggles - help me feel like what i'm doing is worthwhile
This is a long one. There are four of us in two pairs - D (he/him), K (they/them), me (E, she/her), and my youngest sister, A (she/her). D and K are respectively 13 and 11 years older than me and are from our father's first marriage; A and I are five years apart. I am in my early 20s and A just graduated high school. There has been a recurring pattern within our family that, when it comes up, just makes me feel so down in the dumps. Our parents (our father and my and A's mother, D + K's stepmom) are extreme narcissists, have intense intellectual and political pride, and a lot of issues that are too much to unpack here. None of us siblings are remotely close to our parents (as in, not on speaking terms) -- with the exception that I am trying to repair my relationship with my mother. However, the four of us have become close recently, in large part because we often unpack our parental trauma together. There is a pattern that has surfaced between the four of us in which, in the lens of the intellectualist framework that we grew up in, out of each pair of siblings, the older is overshadowed by the younger in... every way. K went to two Ivy Leagues and school in Japan, whereas D dropped out of college for culinary school; A is starring in a feature film and starred in her internationally-known high school musical theater program, represents social justice orgs and unions left and right, has a GREAT paying political job with no degree, concerto pianist and violinist, volunteering in prison rehabilitation programs, and is a freaking delegate for the DNC (I'm not at all exaggerating about all of that, she really is doing each of those things/has been within the past two years) while I, also a college dropout, am living on the remainder of my college funds as a folk/classical musician, teacher, and artist and just trying to put some pieces together as far as figuring out what I love and seeing where the wind takes me. I have spent a lot of time in my life looking around, panicked, wide eyed and blinded, and highly fraught with tension and anxiety which I have put enormous energy to release in the past few years. I feel resentment towards my sister, because she has always seemed extremely assertive in her decision making and is able to make enormous waves and get deeply involved in major important issues while also operating at a professional level artistically (I am not kidding.) These are all things that I very much admire and respect, and wish I were more involved in myself. She seems to be able to do just about everything that I invest myself in at a higher level and made leaps and bounds over me including in areas of my own profession, and she somehow has 50 hours in the day to do it all and still play video games, make music videos, and call her senators; and she is at a level of intellectual intelligence that is greater than mine, and she compartmentalizes her emotional energy very efficiently, whereas I lean in to unblocking and listening to my emotions, which means I spend a lot of time feeling giddy or crying. You can imagine that she was our mother's favorite growing up, which also has something to do with it I'm sure. I wholeheartedly want to cheer her on because she is doing incredible work and I absolutely want nothing but the best for her. However, it makes it hard to feel proud of my own life and career choices (or non-choices - my work has always basically fallen into my lap, which just within the past few months I am feeling the self-esteem to begin assertively making choices about the ways I'd like to make money). When I'm not thinking about her, I deeply feel the value and love the work that I do. I am a creativity teacher, psychological visual artist, working on becoming a yoga teacher, and my musician brand is centered on songs that dig into real issues having to do with mental wellness and social justice; I also deeply value the time that I take to go on intense nature travels, which is also not seen as particularly "productive" in this extremely capitalist lens that I have been conditioned to adopt. All of these careers have come about just within the past 5 years (some just in the past year or less) and are all things that I would have laughed at or deemed nonconstructive (time+energy:identity+profit ratio) from my father's Harvard lens, but now I feel they are wildly important and fulfilling; and I feel that I have the potential to develop these skills to provide real value to my community, but I'm not there yet and it is easy for my completed projects to feel petty and small in comparison. These 5 years have also been consumed by overcoming the trauma and ego/identity-hit after spending most of my life preparing for, and then dropping out of, one of the most competitive classical music schools in the world. D has basically checked out recently as he lives in an area that is deeply affected by BLM protests and police militias, and is using his bandwidth there, which I completely admire and respect; I don't want to talk to K about it, because I feel that they seem to have a similar relationship to D as A does to me. In addition, because K is older, when I talk to K about anything, it's a lot of fear-based advice giving (which is reminiscent of our father, and a mindset I have vigorously moved away from) and it makes me feel patronized, like I am being perceived by them as a lost little kid or like I'm being insensible, "head in the clouds," and not being seen - ESPECIALLY when it's in front of our youngest sister, who has everything figured out. I AM AN EXTREMELY THOUGHTFUL PERSON!! I HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT IT BEFORE AND I HAVE VERY CLEAR REASONS!! DESPITE HOW IT LOOKS I AM DOING WELL AND HAVE BEEN DOING GREAT AT EMOTIONAL REGULATION!! I'm very frustrated. I recognize that I need to draw that boundary with K, to only give advice when it is explicitly asked for. I feel so strongly that the emotional work that I have done, to become a brave, emotionally healthy, true-hearted expressive person who chooses to carve out a creative and adventurous life - I feel that this work is as valuable and valid as it is recent - and I know that for some people, to trust, explore, and pursue an inner calling is common sense, but for me it has been an absolutely exhaustive, yearslong endeavor - especially as mine do not appear to be in alignment with what is valued in mainstream society, my family, or my psychological socialization. I feel that I am finally doing well by my own metric for the first time, but the external representation of my metric is very abstract to others and is still very young in taking traction. I feel that so much of the emotional work that went into realizing this has gone unseen (and I even get it, it is SO abstract, but I'm telling you that my state of happiness is night and day and i KNOW that's valuable); and I would really appreciate to just feel that my journey is validated by my siblings, or to feel (and i KNOW "comparison is the thief of joy") that my journey is recognized as equally valuable as each of the journeys of each of my other siblings, and some proof (not pity-support or patronization) that I'm not just bumming along. Thanks for listening, Feels Worthwhile but Only In My Own World / Metrics Don't Align / Healing Inferiority Complex / E
The amount gold/silver/platinum needed be in be in the top 1% (and beyond)
Some time ago, I watched a Belangp video where he did an interesting calculation: he used the 2018 Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report to determine the amount of gold needed to put you in the top 0.8%, where the gold was proportional to the amount of wealth held by the top 0.8%. The math went like this:
Based on Credit Suisse, the top 0.8% of adults in the world have more than $1M in assets and total global wealth stood at $317 trillion
As reported by belangp, there are 5.7 billion oz of gold mined throughout history
5.7B oz x $1M/$317T ~ 18oz
Anyway, I thought it would be interesting to redo this using the 2019 Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report, expand the analysis to gold, silver, and platinum, and use numbers that I thought were a bit more accurate for gold. First, let's state our assumptions based on the 2019 Global Wealth report from Credit Suisse:
The top 0.9% of adults (representing 47 million people) have wealth exceeding $1 million
Based on the above, being in the top 47 million adults means your share of global wealth exceeds $1M/$360.5T
Now let's bring in numbers for worldwide gold, silver, and platinum. The numbers for silver are debatable - but I'll link assumptions, and if you don't like my numbers, replace them with your own.
GOLD: USGS claims 187,000 metric tons of gold - they report 244,000 metric tons discovered but 57,000 tons still in the ground and I only want above-ground gold. Converting to ounces, we get 187,000 ton x 32,150oz/ton = 6.012 billion ounces ~ 6B oz.
SILVER: USGS says that there are 1,740,000 metric tons of silver discovered to date. Before I continue, yes I know silver is an industrial metal and yes I've seen the arguments that less silver exists above ground than gold because the silver has been "consumed". I'm not going to get into any of that here and just refer to how much total has been pulled out of the ground, regardless of whether it is now inaccessible in a landfill or in a solar panel on your neighbor's roof. 1,740,000 metric tons x 32,150oz = 55.9 billion ~ 56B oz.
PLATINUM: I couldn't find an equivalent estimate from USGS, but Visual Capitalist estimated 9,400 metric tons of Platinum. Similar to silver, all sorts of arguments can be made regarding Platinum's consumption. SD Bullion has a long blog on this that argues there is only 8 million oz of Platinum bullion available. But I'm going to stick with the same approach as before and just use total Platinum pulled out of the ground to date, giving us 9,400 x 32,150 oz = 302.2 million ~ 300M oz.
Ok, we can now do our calculations. If you want an equivalent gold, silver, or platinum holding that allows you to control the same above-ground ounces of each metal as the minimum amount of global wealth controlled by someone in the top 0.9%, you would need:
GOLD: 6B oz x $1M/$360.5T = 16.64oz ~ 16.6oz
SILVER: 56B oz x $1M/$360.5T = 155.3 ~ 155oz
PLATINUM: 300M oz x $1M/$360.5T = 0.832 ~ 0.83oz
We can go further. Belangp also looked at the very top tier and how that split between the somewhat wealthy and the ultra wealthy. His goal was to determine what 100oz of gold represented if converted from fraction of world gold to fraction of world wealth; based on his 2018 wealth data, he determined that holding 100oz was proportional to controlling $5M in wealth. I've uploaded the top of the pyramid for 2019 and will do slightly different math. Credit Suisse's pyramid has a total of 5,090M adults and says that there are 168K adults that each control $50M or more in wealth. These 168,000 adults are in the top 168K/5090M = 0.0033% of the population (1 out of 30,000 adults falls in this group). Each of these elites controls more than $50M in wealth, or $50M/$360.5T. We can multiply all the numbers above by 50 to determine the minimum Gold, Silver, and Platinum holdings needed to control an equivalent fraction of metal:
It is time for Germany to host its first free and fair election in over 4 years. As Germany recoils from the sting of the DVLP and the revelations of the CNS, the people seem adamant that liberal reformism return to the nation. For the first time, however, women and the youth will be joining Germany's electorate for the first time. The hasty elections gave only around one month for the newly unsuppressed parties to campaign and find people to run, but by election day all the major parties had filled out their lists and had established large campaign efforts. Due to the effects of the DVLP and the Röhm Coup, the influence of Germany's right-wing has severely diminished. Tarnished by the DVLP and participating in the military coup of Röhm, the Centre Party and Deutsche Zentrumspartei decided to merge into a new, big tent right wing party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU). To distance themselves from the largely Protestant CDU, Catholic right-wingers in Bavaria formed the Christian Social Union (CSU) to compete in Bavaria's local elections, though they have a tacit agreement to support the SDU in national list voting.
Following the liberalization of Germany's political system, the left has also reformed itself, with the SPD, FVP, and NLP all taking prominent positions in the political sphere. Devoid of the far-left and far-right, Germany's new democracy will be a moderate one, ever wary of those who would try to claim the mantle of the DVLP and forge a new dictatorship. Most figures of the CNS have stayed out of the election, with both von Richtofen and von Göring being made Privy Councilors to prevent them from running, while von Schleicher, von Ribbentrop, von Hindenburg, and von Heydrich all stayed in their spheres of government. Only Franz von Papen, Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck, and Konrad von Adenauer have stood for election, with von Adenauer and von Papen running in the CDU, while Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck stands with the NLP.
Given the current situation, with the German economy on an unsure trajectory, war with France, and possible war with the OFN looming, as well as the revelation of the Treaty of Philadelphia and the loss of German East Asia, the election is largely focused on foreign affairs and the internal economy of Germany. All the parties have similar political liberalization in mind, as established by the CNS. As voters head to the polling booths, four parties have a fair shot at winning the election, with only time to tell who comes out on top. As a new day dawns for Germany, many awake to hear who their next chancellor shall be.
The Democratic Socialist wing of the SPD has distinguished itself from the moderates by being much less supportive of the Emperor, more idealist, and less anti-3I. Comprised of various radical and democratic socialists, the SPD-DS has espoused pacifist views and supports heavy-handed implementation of market socialism into Germany. While staying away from outright Marxist or Syndicalist policy positions, they are still about as far-left as one could go without being overtly banned by the German establishment. Calling for full nationalization of the energy, healthcare, banking, and mining sectors, the SPD-DS also wishes to massively overhaul the current welfare state, implement measures that give workers a share of ownership in companies they work in, and remove all restrictions on union activity. The SPD-DS also calls for a ceasefire and armistice with the 3I, a very unpopular measure. Many in the SPD-SD have decried their Democratic Socialist brethren, but for the now the SPD remains united.
The more mainstream, moderate factions of the SPD, the SPD-SD is anti-Syndicalist and supportive of the monarchy. Seeking to reform Germany to be a more fair nation, the SPD-SD has proposed "Fair Capitalism," the restructuring of Germany's economy to support the workers, and the end of the persecution on worker's rights. Planks of the SPD-SD include establishing a national healthcare service, expanding the welfare state, protecting labor rights and relations, and major expansions to the education system. The SPD-SD has also called for the decolonization of Germany's foreign assets, and has taken a hardline anti-Syndicalist stance, largely as a result of the current war. The SPD-SD also has called the OFN "traitors of the people, and full of betrayers of the German trust." The SPD, despite being somewhat pacifist normally, has called for major expansions in funding to wartime industries and the military.
The social liberals in the FVP exist in an odd space in German politics. Not socialist, nor as mainstream as the liberals in the NLP, the FVP instead has the support of various minorities around Germany and those wishing for increased protections for Germany's many different peoples. The FVP as such has focused much of its efforts on appealing to minorities and left-leaning Germans, with mixed success. They've proposed increased protections for the French minority in Germany, admitting Alsace-Lorraine as an autonomous Kingdom within Germany, protections for the Silesians, and an end to the Polish suppression. The FVP have also called for appeasement of the OFN, an unpopular initiative among the conservatives in Germany, which has helped them gain some of the pacifists votes. The FVP has also called for an expansion to the welfare system in Germany, ending the ban on socialist trade unions, and building up Germany's education and infrastructure. On foreign affairs, the FVP supports the war effort against the 3I, and has largely adopted the NLP's wartime proposals, though with additional protections and assistance to the French.
Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck
The wing of the NLP united around Paul von Lettow Vorbeck's leadership has made "Germany First" their slogan. Supporting extensive wartime programs, colonial reform, and the rural population, the NLP-PVL has specifically called for the establishment of the "German Production Board," temporary nationalization of key industries, and extensive colonial reorganization. The NLP-PVL has also called for the major expansion of Germany's Navy, Air Force, and Army, with large amounts of funding, increased conscription, and reforms to ensure the war can be won by a superior Germany. Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck has also called for major business-friendly policies, such as the establishment of a national business council, a trade council, investment tax breaks, and grants to small and medium sized businesses. The NLP-PVL has also put in planks expanding press protections, judicial independence, legislative independence, and freedom of thought and association, most notably calling for the government to completely reverse its bans on socialist trade unions as "overreach of governmental authority."
The Market Liberal faction of the NLP, ever unyielding in their principles, have made "Enterprise Capitalism" the keystone of their policy. Calling for measured privatization of nationalized industries, the reform of federal powers (to support a more decentralized model), and gradual decolonization, the program would seek to empower capitalists and entrepreneurs, as well as support small businesses across Germany. However, in the immediate future the NLP-ML has decided to support limited nationalization and mobilization of the economy to build a suitable military to fight the war currently thrusted upon it. Additionally, the NLP-ML follows the NLP-PVL's foreign policy, though only due to von Lettow-Vorbeck's popularity. The decolonization plank is the one part that draws conflict with the NLP-PVL, which is a noted proponent of colonial reform, but not decolonization.
Konrad von Adenauer
The Christian Democratic wing of the CDU (which is considered the majority of the CDU) has put forth a large program of reform. Calling for large economic reforms, the so called "Rhine capitalism" model has a large emphasis on Keynesian spending and minor nationalization to mobilize Germany's economy and ensure its ultimate victory. Specifically, the CDU-CD has called for reforms in the economic system to support small businesses and regional economic efforts, as well as measures to ensure economic equality across the Empire's citizenry. In particular, the CDU-CD wants to implement grants to small businesses and rural communities, as well as offer tax breaks to the wealthy who invest a certain percentage of their income in small businesses. Additional planks call for the expansion of the education system, expanding some aspects of the welfare system, and expanding Germany's railway system. The CDU-CD, however, plans for these proposals to be implemented in the post-war environment. For the war, the CDU-CD has proposed nationalizing "critical industries" and establishing a "War Production Board" to mobilize the economy of Germany. They have also called for grants in development of new wartime technologies, large expansions in military funding, and expansion of conscription policies to "ensure German victory." As far as foreign policy goes, the CDU-CD has announced plans to continue the Entente-Pakt cooperation, as well as "standing up to the Russian OFN's dictatorship."
Franz von Papen
The conservative wing of the CDU seeks to entrench the powers of the monarchy and aristocracy, while being friendly to rural interests. The primary planks of the CDU-DkP are to guarantee the powers of the aristocracy, the monarchy, and expand benefits for the rural population. Notably, the CDU-DkP have proposed a rural energy program, where they assist the rural populations in paying for heating and energy during the winter season, as well as an expansion to the state pensions program. The CDU-DkP has also added planks to encourage investing and reforming Germany's taxation. On foreign matters, they have largely followed the CDU-CD.
The CSU, being largely a regional ally of the CDU, is aligned to their federal policy positions. The CSU however, has presented its own agenda on Bavarian policies, pursuing a socially conservative local movement, which will promote larger families and an expansion of Bavarian culture. Economically, the CSU has proposed the expansion of rail routes to rural areas of Bavaria and subsidization of small businesses to ensure they survive the wartime conditions currently put on Bavaria; moves have also been made to mobilize Bavaria for the war effort, with a noted plank of the CSU being the temporary nationalization of "critical" Bavarian industries.
With a hung Bundestag, the CDU/CSU needed a coalition partner to officially govern the country. With the FVP and SPD obviously being off the table, they were left with the NLP. While they had little in common with the NLP's Market Liberal faction, the could easily sway the NLP-PVL faction to voting for coalition. The CDU thus promised to the NLP that the German Military, both during and post-war, will see major increases in funding, as well as agreeing to most of the NLP's military plans. The NLP-PVL also got guarantees that their councils would be created, moderate investment tax breaks would occur post-war, and the shared idea of small business grants would be implemented in a greater form. Moderate liberalization of press protections, judicial independence, and legislative autonomy would also be made, though the CDU-DkP would not agree to expanding freedom of thought and association protections, and would refused to reverse the ban on socialist trade unions, especially during the war. Finally, Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck would be made Vice Chancellor, with the NLP also getting several cabinet positions.
After hearing of the offers, the NLP's representatives overwhelmingly voted to coalition with the CDU/CSU. As such, the new CDU/CSU-NLP Coalition (commonly referred to as the Yellow-Blue Coalition) will enter government with a 486 seat majority (temporarily reduced to 485 as a member of the CSU was elected Speaker, though the CSU won the resulting by-election). After officiating their coalition, Emperor Wilhelm II invited Konrad von Adenauer to form a new German government, with Konrad being officially appointed Chancellor later in the day. The SPD will become the official opposition, with Kurt Schumacher being made Leader of the Opposition. German democracy has officially returned to the world!
Having recently done some research on the development of revolutionary thought in the Second International for a paper, I had to do some reading of syndicalist litterature. And since questions such as “How is Syndicalist Country X organized” and “How are syndicalist militaries organized” often show up on this subreddit, I thought that I might as well write out an understanding of Orthodox Syndicalism as it was presented before WW1 (Lockdown giving me all the time in the world). The idea of revolutionary syndicalism has developed far during the last 100 years, and the victory of the Soviets in the Russian civil war colored the relationship between Syndicalism and Communism to great extent. The purpose of this post is not to say whether the ideas of syndicalism were feasible or not, or whether they would or would not develop in the same paths that Leninism eventually did, but rather to present the ideology as it was somewhat understood amongst academics and syndicalist thinkers themselves in the early 1900’s. The information is therefore heavily based on the works of the CGT, as the prime mover of syndicalism in France, syndicalist thinkers such as Emile Pouget, Emile Pataut and Georges Sorel, as well as the wonderful academic works of Louis Levine.
Syndicalism in society, before the Revolution
To start with, I think it important to know definitions and the prevailing political thoughts that came before syndicalism’s development. For most intents and purposes, a “Syndicate” is just the romance word for “Trade Union”. This does not mean that syndicalism is the same as trade unionism, in socialist thought. Trade unionism is the argument that workers should organize for collective bargaining and protection, so syndicalism might be argued is the revolutionary aspect of trade unionism. In opposition to the popular types of socialism we know today (communism, social-democracy) syndicalism as a basis is defined by the ideas of “Revolutionary Spontaneity”, the use of “Direct Action”, leading to the “General Strike” and the end-goal of “Economic Federalism”. So, Syndicalism is differentiated by many other forms of revolutionary socialism by its beginning. “Revolutionary Spontaneity” is the idea that it is the task of the worker him/herself to combat capitalism and the bourgeoisie, without the guiding force of an external agent. No Leninist party vanguardism can force socialism upon a population that is not willing to accept or fight in the class struggle. Nor can a Social-Democratic/Labour Party introduce socialist legislation on behalf of a population, using the tools of the inherently capitalistic “liberal” democratic state. A liberal-democratic state governed by Socialists would not meaningfully alter the state of working class because the societal structure would remain the same. The same can be said of a Party Dictatorship controlled by a revolutionary Vanguard. Letting themselves be affiliated with Democratic Parties or Revolutionary Fighters is at best just distracting, and at worst actively demoralizing the average worker. The state must be undermined by the tools available to the proletariat. This is the direct action. “Direct Action” is then the means for workers to both combat capitalism, but also to further ideas of class-consciousness to other workers to ensure a maximal understanding of the class-struggle in preparation for revolutionary syndicalism (integral, as part of revolutionary spontaneity). While direct action can take many forms, there are 4 principal ones.
Sabotage. Well-recognised word that brings forth images of exploding railway tracks and machinery. Syndicalist thought was not so extreme as to argue for that, and in fact many argue that the destruction of factory equipment is directly harmful to the syndicalist cause. Sabotage itself can take three forms:
Non-Violent Sabotage: This could include ideas such as working slowly or “work-to-rule” meaning that every procedure would be carried out according to laid-down principles without any common sense introduced into the process. The goal here would be to lessen profits for the capitalist owner by reducing productivity in the workplace. But without breaking the labor contract or the law.
Aggressive Sabotage: This is the slightly more confrontational aspect of sabotage, which includes willfully misplacing items, misdirecting transportation and shipments, messing up paper-work, feigning illness or injury or in other ways slow productivity. These are, as the name suggests, a bit more aggressive, but can be excused away by feinted ignorance or incompetence.
Violent Sabotage: This is the last, and most extreme, form of sabotage. Here the syndicalist worker incapacitates machinery, destroys tools, and in other ways harm the productivity of the workplace by violent and illegal action. Of important note is that the syndicalist does not wish to destroy a workplace (as it is his/hers place of productivity) but rather incapacitate it for further use without the cooperation of the workers.
Labelling. By identifying their products as Trade Union approved, the working class shows its importance in the act of “producing” in society. If Trade Union approved goods outcompete those hostile to the workers, then the workers will realize their own important role as the creator of goods for the economy.
Boycotting. The opposite of labelling. Whereas labelling shows the working class can wholly occupy the role of “producer” in society, boycotting is to reinforce the role of “consumer” in society. Here the worker can impact the market by avoiding union-hostile shops and industries.
Strike. The most well-known form of workers influence. But the idea of syndicalist strike is not one of picketing or refusing work for longer periods of time. In those instances, it becomes a competition of the financial means of the Trade Union and the Workplace (a “competition of money-bags” as Louis Levine puts it). Rather, a strike must be sudden and energetic. Workplaces should be barricaded to prevent the resumption of work by strikebreakers. Boycotting of the workplace should take place by sympathetic workers in the rest of society, acts of sabotage should be carried out against places and institutions meant to stop the strike or lesson the economic impact of it. Compromise with the working place should be avoided at all cost, to avoid a working relationship between the workplace-owning capitalists and the workers.
The Syndicalist "Revolution": The General Strike
With the use of revolutionary syndicalist direct action, the general strike will occur to topple the capitalist society. It is important here to understand that when talking about a general strike in syndicalist terms, we are not merely talking about a mass worker demonstration against capitalist measures. Such actions might be deemed general strikes by workers and bourgeoisie alike. Nor are we talking about a mass amount of sympathy strikes carried out by Trade Unions in support of another labour strike. The General Strike (which I will capitalize from here on) is an event that will occur naturally and unscheduled when the working class rejects capitalist society as a whole. The end goal is not specific improved working conditions, nor political concessions, but the realization by the worker that they are wholly in control of the economy by being both the primary producer and consumer, and therefore have the means to form their own society detached from capitalism. This is why direct action is such an important aspect of revolutionary syndicalism. Because only through direct action will the worker achieve the class consciousness and realization of their own worth and power, to spontaneously rise up and reject capitalism. How then, does this general strike lead us to a syndicalist society? With the breakdown of capitalist society, production and consumption might slide to a halt because the worker will not anymore achieve capitalist means of producing and consuming. It is here that the Bourse du Travail and Trade Unions must step in. In this transformative period, the Trade Unions would facilitate both the collection and distribution of goods. It would organize workers to return to their workplaces and resume production outside of their capitalist “owners”, they would organize truck drivers to distribute the produced goods to various labour exchanges throughout society, and they would organize clerks to catalogue and distribute the produce back to the working class. Out of necessity to maintain the general strike, the economic foundation of syndicalist society would arise spontaneously. The obvious reaction to the development in the general strike would then be the use of force by the capitalist state to reaffirm its control over the means of production. Or as Emile Pataut and Emile Pouget put it in Comment nous ferons la Revolution; “It is the wage-slave in uniform; whose business it is to shoot down the wage-slave without uniform when so ordered.” (or more visually explained in this lovely drawing, where the “wage slave”, divided into uniformed and un-uniformed half, is contemplating shooting himself on order of the capitalist). Here direct action would also have had aims to foster relationships between the working class and the army. By rising class-consciousness in society in general, soldiers would be more conscious of their social responsibility to their class, and thereby more likely to defect to the side of the general strike. Pataut and Pouget argue that the revolution will be carried out without large scale clashes between the Army and the General Strike, due to the beforementioned relationship between soldiers and workers. But even if it came to civil war, the workers would have numbers and revolutionary spirit on their side (and they would very decisively be in control of railways, manufactories, farms etc., thereby lessening the capability of the army to act independently). By having the General Strike be a consequence of Revolutionary Spontaneity and Direct Action, Syndicalist thinkers argued that there would be no societal clash between worker and soldier before the majority of society was prepared for the General Strike. The event could not be forced by external agents, and therefore could not be carried out before a large majority of the workers were prepared for the final act of emancipation.
The Syndicalist Society: Economic Federalism
That, then, moves us on to the final part of Syndicalism. The society itself. Orthodox syndicalism isn’t really, as such, represented in Kaiserreich (nor seem 100% feasible, but w/e) since places like the CoF has the Comite de Salut Public, and UoB have permanent commissars that act as ministers. The basis for syndicalist society is a term that some writers on the subject have termed “economic federalism”. The idea here being, that post-capitalist society should be based around production and economy. Regional, national, religious, feudal or political terms should no more dictate the structure of society, only economy. The reason “orthodox syndicalism” isn’t represented in Kaiserreich, nor can be, is because there was little agreement as to the specifics of how a syndicalist society should be organized. There are, however, some general ideas and basic concepts (local – national, specific industry – general society) that we can talk about. Starting from the bottom of syndicalist society, we have the Syndicate / Local Trade Union. A Syndicate is the local organization of a given industry, within one locality (be that shop, factory, or field). That is, the industry is the basis of local organization, not the craft. The Coal Mine in Town A is organized as a single syndicate. Those represented there are not just the workers who are in the mines, but also the clerks necessary to organize the work in the mine, the in-house attached repairmen etc. This is what is known as Industrial Unionism. The syndicates are the organizers and controllers of production. They are NOT the owners of production, however. Ownership is collective for the society, and therefore it is only with the accept of society that the coal mine in Town A can organize production there. Next step up is the local level. Here is the Bourse du Travail which acts as an organizer and distributor of goods for the local society. Every syndicate in Town A are represented in the Bourse du Travail where they also work out what goods are needed in their locality. The Bourse organizes education, defense, justice, distribution of goods etc. Though primarily an economic institution, it will be the center of all local life. It will, also, act as the connecting link between that locality and the national level. Statistics for consumption, production, resources etc. will all be gathered by the Bourse and informed to both the local syndicates, but also to the General Confederation and neighbouring Bourses. At the National Level, we have two different institutions. Firstly, the National Industry Federations. These are the grouping of all syndicates, regardless of locality, of a particular industry. For Town A and its Coal Mine would then be part of a National Federation of Coal Miners. This National Federation would serve a primarily technical role. Gathering information from all syndicates and distributing such information and experience back to the syndicates, local Bourses or to the General Confederation. In some specific cases where an industry is highly interconnected, the National Federation might be the organization that acts as the controller of the industry in question, and not the syndicate. An example might be the railways. So while it is the local syndicates that maintain tracks and stations, it is the National Federation that control train schedules and planning. The largest part of the syndicalist society, and what might be perceived as “the state” is what we here, and previously, have called the “General Confederation”. It might also be called Trade Union Congress, the Industrial Workers of the World, Bourse Generale du Travail etc. The important bit is not the name, but the function. Here all Bourse du Travails (and maybe National Federations depending on who you ask) are represented to take decisions on national issues. What such issues are, and how they are decided, is difficult to say without diverging off to various individual writers. Pataut and Pouget saw that decisions that concerned national matters were to be decided by local voting, whereas other might see it necessary to elect permanent representatives from the Bourse du Travail to the General Confederation. Many argue that there should a permanent Committee from the General Confederation, but whether it should play an executive role, administrative one, technical one etc., there exists many ideas. Hope this was readable and gave an impression of what ideas and thoughts were entertained by syndicalist thinkers leading up to WW1. If you have any questions or comments please feel free to ask or do so. Especially if you think I have mistaken syndicalist doctrine somewhere (hard to do when the syndicalists themselves often criticized each other and their doctrine). On a final note, if you get the time during lockdown, I can highly recommend comment nous ferons la revolution as an excellent read to pass the time. It is alternate history/sci-fi and in the end of the book the Reactionary Armies sent to destroy the revolution in France are in turn destroyed by remote-controlled Drones, Biological Warfare and Lasers.
The internet of everything will be a prison you can never escape.
Once everyone is chipped, the internet of everything will be a prison you can never escape. Your vehicles, t.v., appliances, etc. will monitor you. Your chip will give away your location anywhere once the internet is everywhere, and all devices are connected. The enter-net will be a web that traps the flys (you). The Government Invented the Internet. Why the hell do you assume the internet is some last free medium? The CIA funded almost every technology company in existence. In 1962, Dr. Joseph Carl Robnett Licklider formulated the earliest ideas of global networking in a series of memos discussing an “Intergalactic Computer Network.” Both well-liked and well-respected, he demonstrated an amazing prescience many times over. His original and far-sighted ideas outlined many of the features the Internet offers today: graphical computing, user-friendly interfaces, digital libraries, e-commerce, online banking, and cloud computing. In 1963, while he was serving as director at the U.S. Department of Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), it was Dr. Licklider’s persuasive and detailed description of the challenges to establishing a time-sharing network of computers that ultimately led to the creation of the ARPAnet. His 1968 paper called “The Computer as a Communication Device” illustrated his vision of network applications and predicted the use of computer networks for communications. Until then, computers had generally been thought of as mathematical devices for speeding up computations. The ARPAnet was eventually eclipsed by the Internet http://history-computer.com/Internet/Birth/Licklider.html https://www.livescience.com/42604-who-invented-the-internet.html In truth, no private company would have been capable of developing a project like the Internet, which required years of R&D efforts spread out over scores of agencies, and which began to take off only after decades of investment. Other commenters, including Timothy B. Lee at Ars Technica and veteran technology reporter Steve Wildstrom, have noted that Crovitz's misunderstandings run deep. He also manages to confuse the World Wide Web (incidentally, invented by Tim Berners Lee while working at CERN, a government-funded research laboratory) with hyperlinks, and an internet—a link between two computers—with THE Internet. But perhaps the most damning rebuttal comes from Michael Hiltzik, the author "Dealers of Lightning," a history of Xerox PARC that Crovitz uses as his main source for material. "While I'm gratified in a sense that he cites my book," writes Hiltzik, "it's my duty to point out that he's wrong. My book bolsters, not contradicts, the argument that the Internet had its roots in the ARPANet, a government project." In-Q-Tel (IQT), formerly Peleus and known as In-Q-It, is an American not-for-profit venture capital firm based in Arlington, Virginia. It invests in high-tech companies for the sole purpose of keeping the Central Intelligence Agency, and other intelligence agencies, equipped with the latest in information technology in support of United States intelligence capability. Originally named Peleus and known as In-Q-It, In-Q-Tel was founded by Norm Augustine, a former CEO of Lockheed Martin and by Gilman Louie, who was In-Q-Tel's first CEO. In-Q-Tel’s mission is to identify and invest in companies developing cutting-edge technologies that serve United States national security interests. Origins of the corporation can be traced to Dr. Ruth A. David, who headed the Central Intelligence Agency Directorate of Science & Technology in the 1990s and promoted the importance of rapidly advancing information technology for the CIA. In-Q-Tel now engages with entrepreneurs, growth companies, researchers, and venture capitalists to deliver technologies that provide superior capabilities for the CIA, DIA, NGA, and the wider intelligence community. In-Q-Tel concentrates on three broad commercial technology areas: software, infrastructure and materials sciences. Former CIA director George Tenet says, We [the CIA] decided to use our limited dollars to leverage technology developed elsewhere. In 1999 we chartered ... In-Q-Tel. ... While we pay the bills, In-Q-Tel is independent of CIA. CIA identifies pressing problems, and In-Q-Tel provides the technology to address them. The In-Q-Tel alliance has put the Agency back at the leading edge of technology ... This ... collaboration ... enabled CIA to take advantage of the technology that Las Vegas uses to identify corrupt card players and apply it to link analysis for terrorists [cf. the parallel data-mining effort by the SOCOM-DIA operation Able Danger ], and to adapt the technology that online booksellers use and convert it to scour millions of pages of documents looking for unexpected results. In-Q-Tel sold 5,636 shares of Google, worth over $2.2 million, on November 15, 2005. The stocks were a result of Google’s acquisition of Keyhole, the CIA funded satellite mapping software now known as Google Earth. As of August 2006,[needs update] In-Q-Tel had reviewed more than 5,800 business plans, invested some $150 million in more than 90 companies, and delivered more than 130 technology solutions to the intelligence community. In 2005 it was said to be funded with about $37 million a year from the CIA. Many companies listed on In-Q-Tel's investment website page are secret. In-Q-Tel functions partially in public; however, what products it has and how they are used is strictly secret. According to the Washington Post, "virtually any U.S. entrepreneur, inventor or research scientist working on ways to analyze data has probably received a phone call from In-Q-Tel or at least been Googled by its staff of technology-watchers A small list of CIA funded technology companies. The real list is never ending, and not fully known. Keyhole, Inc – Geosatial visualization application (Acquired by Google in 2004 and would go on to become Google Earth in 2005) Boundless Spatial – geospatial software Huddle – cloud-based content collaboration software Oculis Labs – visual cyber security solutions Destineer – games FPS training simulation GeoIQ FortiusOne – visualization on maps Forterra – virtual worlds for training Quantum4D – visualization technology Visual Sciences – real-time visual analysis Spotfire – visualisation data analytics Algorithmia — Infrastructure for deploying and scaling AI/ML models Palantir Technologies – data integration, search and discovery, knowledge management, and secure collaboration PiXlogic – visual search Agent Logic – event detection and response software – Webspector webpage change software ArcSight – secure software Zaplet – email Authentica – secure messaging and secure document sharing Teradici Corporation – desktop virtualization Connectify – Wifi & VPN SafeWeb PrivacyMatrix – browsing (closed in Nov. 2001) Visible Technologies – social media monitoring Silver Tail Systems – website fraud prevention InnoCentive – crowdsourcing websites Fetch Technologies -Internet Data Management -bots & RSS SRA OrionMagic – cms software Recorded Future – web intelligence and predictive analytics Traction Software – web 2.0 Internet Evidence Finder – Digital forensic tool Basis Technology – translation software Language Weaver – automatic language translation Lingotek – translation services Cassatt – desktop software Tacit Knowledge Systems – internal software[vague] FMS – analysis, visualization, and knowledgebase to the Federal Intelligence Community Initiate Systems – real-time multiple database software TerraGo – location intelligence applications and software GeoPDF Geosemble – unstructured data analytics and geospatial software NovoDynamics – Arabic character recognition Adapx – Microsoft Office & GIS Digital Reasoning – Synthesys v3.0 – review facts and associations at a glance CallMiner – phone speech analytics software Carnegie Speech – speech recognition AzTE PRISM – handwriting recognition A4Vision – 3D facial imaging SRD – identity resolution software Inktomi Corp – network infrastructure software Mohomine mohoClassifier – organises mass data Stratify – organizes mass data Endeca – search data repositories Inxight – search engine Convera RetrievalWare – search engine MetaCarta – search engine Attensity – search engine NetBase – search engine Platfora – big data analytics and visualization Intelliseek – search engine FireEye – malware protection ReversingLabs – malware detection and analysis zSpace (company) – 3-Dimensional holographic imaging displays Socrata – Open Data Solutions for Government Innovation Interset – Security Analytics/User Behavior Analytics Material science Edit Biotech Biomatrica – biolab tech anhydrobiosis storage SpectraFluidics – detection of trace airborne chemicals Arcxis Biotechnologies – sample processing and pathogen detection febit group – DNA Boreal Genomics – DNA fingerprints T2 Biosystems – medical diagnostic devices, miniaturized magnetic resonance (MR) OpGen – microbial genome analysis Infobionics – biotech cellular database Microchip Biotechnologies – analysis instrumentation for biodefense Cambrios Technologies – biomaterials for solid-state electronic devices Seahawk Biosystems – diagnosis biosensor products Sionex – chemical and biological sensors Polychromix – material analysis and chemical sensing IatroQuest – detect biological and chemical agents IntegenX – NanoBioProcessor & molecular diagnostics Seventh Sense Biosystems – health monitoring and medical diagnostics Sonitus Medical – transmits sound via the teeth MedShape – orthopedic devices from shape memory materials Electricity Electro Energy – nickel-metal hydride batteries for satellites & aircraft Qynergy Corporation – long-lived batteries, Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems Infinite Power Solutions – micro-batteries Skybuilt Power – solar, wind, fuel cells, batteries, fossil fuels, telecommunications – Mobile Power Station(MPS) 3.5 kW to 150 kW Semprius – solar energy AdaptivEnergy – miniature piezo generators Power Assure – managing power consumption MiserWare – reduces energy Electronics Nanosys – nanotech components Alfalight – high-power lasers & torches IDELIX Software – pliable display technology Perceptive Pixel – multi-touch displays WiSpry – radio components Nextreme Thermal Solutions – circuit-board thermoelectric components Digital Solid State Propulsion – electronic controls for solid rocket motors Infinite Z – virtual-holographic monitors Voxel8 – 3D printed electronics Video 3VR Security – DVR archiving MotionDSP – digital video Pixim – video cameras COPAN – data storage iMove – immersive video Pelican Imaging – better camera phones LensVector – optical autofocus InView Technology Corporation – cameras and hyper-spectral imagers Rhevision – tunable camera lens Signal Innovations Group – signal, image, and video analytics Elemental Technologies – video processing KZO Innovations – streaming video software VSee – video conferencing Infrastructure Edit Hardware Tyfone -- digital security for mobility, cloud, and IoT Genia Photonics – fiber-optics products Advanced Photonix, Inc. - fiber optics SitScape – Command & Control room hardware SpotterRF – micro surveillance radar QD Vision – monitors, displays and lighting GATR Technologies – inflatable satellite dishes CoreStreet – door access control systems Redlen Technologies - CZT x-ray & gamma ray detectors Etherstack – radios Paratek microwave – smart scanning antennas D-Wave Systems – quantum computers Sensor networks ThingMagic – RFID Dust Networks – low-power wireless mesh networking systems Ember Corporation – ZigBee – wireless semiconductor Gainspan – low power Wi-Fi Tendril Networks – software for wireless sensor and control networks TenXsys – telemetry systems for remote monitoring, NASA StreamBase – real-time data in government/military, RFID/sensor networks Thetus – software for remote sensing instruments Soflinx defender – a Wireless Sensor Network for fences PlateScan – automatic license plate recognition (ALPR) sensor network Data centers Bay Microsystems – packet processing and data traffic Cleversafe – data storage clouds and massive digital archives Cloudera – data storage and analysis Asankya – Hypermesh data streams CopperEye – data retention Systems Research and Development – real-time data warehousing Network Appliance – Decru (networked data storage) Security testing RedSeal – Cybersecurity Analytics Network Chemistry – RFprotect, WiFi security Veracode – application security testing
Visual Capitalist 59,536 followers on LinkedIn. Data-driven visual content focused on global trends, investing, technology, and the economy Visual Capitalist creates and curates enriched ... How to Avoid Common Mistakes with Mining Actions (Part 4: Project Quality) Visual Capitalist. November 12, 2020 Business. Investors view gold and silver as safe haven investments. But companies that produce gold and silver often offer volatile returns, creating opportunities for astute investors. Volatility is a double-edged sword, particularly when it comes to investing in commodities. During ... visual capitalist silver and gold in bc feat. MINING.COM Staff Writer July 11, 2013 10:21 pm . 5 0 . Share Sign Up for the Mining News Digest. Sign Up. Comments . Cancel reply . Your email ... Visual Capitalist. Subscribe. Subscribed! Given email address is already subscribed, thank you! Please provide a valid email address. Please complete the CAPTCHA. Please try again. Subscribe. HOME; MARKETS. How to Avoid Common Mistakes With Mining Stocks (Part 4: Project Quality) The State of the Multi-Billion Dollar Console Gaming Market. The 25 Largest Private Equity Firms in One Chart ... Visual Capitalist 2 days ago. Our New Book “Signals” is Officially Published! Our new data-driven book, identifies clear takeaways—called ‘signals’— that are shaping the future of the global economy. Leadership 1 week ago. The World’s Most Influential Values, In One Graphic. Politics 2 weeks ago. Decoding U.S. Election Day in 9 Key Charts. Politics 2 weeks ago. Charting America ...
Mining Big Data Streams with Apache SAMOA - Albert Bifet - JOTB16 - Duration: 33:16. J On The Beach Recommended for you. 33:16. ... Visual Capitalist 4,424,240 views. 5:52. Understanding Shoulder ... Visual Capitalist creates and curates enriched visual content focused on emerging trends in business and investing. Video shows what megacity means. A very large city, a megalopolis.. Megacity Meaning. How to pronounce, definition audio dictionary. How to say megacity. Powered by MaryTTS, Wiktionary. Read Visual Capitalist Article – “The New Energy Era: ... Read Mining.com Article – “American Manganese Needs $12m to Build Battery Metals Recycle Plant“. - https: //www.mining.com ... 10 Best Side Hustle Ideas: How I Made $600 in One Day - Duration: 16:07. Let's Talk Money! with Joseph Hogue, CFA Recommended for you