REPORT #512 August 2002 HEMP IS AN EXCELLENT BIO DIESEL FUEL! #ConquestofDough


Produced by the Belize Development Trust

HEMP IS AN EXCELLENT BIO DIESEL FUEL! USA Oil Barons got it outlawed to protect oil derived synthetics in the 30’s. But THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES SHOULD LEGALIZE HEMP for their own advantage.On ANDREW MELLON, founder of the Gulf Oil Corporation: “He knew that cannabis hemp was an alternative industrial raw material for the production of thousands of products, including fuel and plastics, which, if allowed to compete in the free-market, would threaten the future profits of the oil companies. As Secretary of the Treasury he created the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, and appointed his own future nephew-in-law, Harry Anslinger, as director. Anslinger would later use the sensational, and totally fabricated, articles published by Hearst, to push the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 through Congress, which successfully destroyed the rebirth of the cannabis hemp industry.
“A prominent member of one Congressional subcommittee who voted in favor of this bill was Joseph Guffey of Pennsylvania, an oil tycoon and former business partner of Andrew Mellon in the Spindletop oil fields in Texas.
“THE DU PONT CHEMICAL CORPORATION, “which owned the patents on synthetic petrochemicals and industrial processes that promised billions of dollars in future profits from the sale of wood pulp paper, lead additives for gasoline, synthetic fibers and plastics, if hemp could be suppressed. At the time, du Pont family influence in both government and the private sector was unmatched, according to historians and journalists.
“This publication, however, reveals documented historical evidence that the suppression of the hemp industry was only one key part of a much larger conspiracy in the 1930s, not only by the three corporate interests named above, but by many others, as well.
“Congressional records, FBI reports and investigations by the Justice Department, during the 1930s and 1940s, have already documented evidence of this wider plot. A list of the corporations named include Du Pont, Standard Oil, and General Motors, all of which were proven to be conspiring with Nazi industrial cartels to eliminate competition world-wide and divide among themselves the Earth’s industrial resources and commercial markets, for profitable exploitation.
“The use of hemp as a source of methanol was known to the Nazis, revealed in the pamphlet ‘The Humorous Hemp Primer,’ published in Berlin, also in 1943. This document, recently re-published in the 1995 edition of ‘Hemp and the Marijuana Conspiracy: The Emperor Wears No Clothes,’ by veteran hemp conspiracy researcher Jack Herer, states that:
” ‘Crops should not only provide food in large quantities, they can provide raw materials for industry. . . Among such raw materials of especially high value is hemp . . .
” ‘The woody part of this large plant is not to be thrown out, since it can easily be used for surface coatings for the finest floors. It also provides paper and cardboard, building materials and wall paneling. Further processing will even produce wood sugar and wood gas.
” ‘Anyone who grows hemp today need not fear a lack of a market, because hemp, as useful as it is, will be purchased in unlimited amounts.’ “
“A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to supplant our democratic government and is working closely with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of opportunity in my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our American ruling families are to the Nazi regime. . .
“Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They extended aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are helping to keep it there.” — William E. Dodd, U.S. Ambassador to Germany, 1937.
Why Hemp Fuel? Quoting from the article:

  • Biodiesel is the only alternative fuel that runs in any conventional, unmodified diesel engine. It can be stored anywhere that petroleum diesel fuel is stored.
  • Biodiesel is safe to handle and transport because it is as biodegradable as sugar, 10 times less toxic than table salt, and has a high flashpoint of about 300 F compared to petroleum diesel fuel, which has a flash point of 125 F.
  • Biodiesel can be made from domestically produced, renewable oilseed crops such as hemp.
  • Biodiesel is a proven fuel with over 30 million successful US road miles, and over 20 years of use in Europe.
  • When burned in a diesel engine, biodiesel replaces the exhaust odor of petroleum diesel with the pleasant smell of hemp, popcorn or french fries.
  • Biodiesel is the only alternative fuel in the US to complete EPA Tier I Health Effects Testing under section 211(b) of the Clean Air Act, which provide the most thorough inventory of environmental and human health effects attributes that current technology will allow.
  • Biodiesel is 11% oxygen by weight and contains no sulfur. The use of biodiesel can extend the life of diesel engines because it is more lubricating than petroleum diesel fuel, while fuel consumption, auto ignition, power output, and engine torque are relatively unaffected by biodiesel.

The Congressional Budget Office, Department of Defense, US Department of Agriculture, and others have determined that biodiesel is the low cost alternative fuel option for fleets to meet requirements of the Energy Policy Act. [End quote.]So, my question is, why should American farmers be paid in tax dollars NOT to farm, or if they grow too much wheat, it is bought by the government with OUR tax dollars, shipped off to some third world nation where, often as not, it sits in rat-infested warehouses until it rots and never reaches the people it was meant to feed? Worse yet, keep sending it to Russia, which then stockpiles it in vast underground shelters for the coming nuclear exchange with America that Russian defectors still claim the Russian military sees as inevitable. Certainly, our own government has made no similar provision to protect American tax-payers — but they have built over 90 underground shelters for “continuity of government” and protection of the corporate elites.
Why not put American farmers to work and open up entire new industries? Since all of the major industries are high-tailing it overseas where they can get slave labor, our industrial base is shot. Well, it all comes back to those huge multinational corporations and profits. Don’t expect things to change as long as the corporations control the politicians by withholding campaign funds.

 Back to Main Belize Development Trust PageMaintained by Ray AuxillouSilvia Pinzon, MLS, and Marty Casado. Please email with suggestions or additions for this Electronic Library of Belize.

First Linked to on this Blog.
Posted 7th May 2011 by 

REPORT #17 July 12 1998
Comparing Dubai a success story and Belize a failure

REPORT #282 May 2000


Idiocracy, Carbon, It’s What Plants Crave! Why Catastrophists should get off the Brawndo.

“But come the end of the oil age — the petro chemicals are going to stop…
And there ain’t going to be any food.
That is absolutely guaranteed.”

Thomas Mathus, Resident Castastrophy Pornographer of the Surplus energy Blog.
 Thomas Malthus

James Burke Connections, Whole Series on Web Archive, Knowledge Dock and the Brain. Consciousness over Corporations! #WEB3.

I have checked in from time to time to see how the Knowledge dock, James Burkes “Connections” Deep Learning application, (Its a sort of deep Learning AI for consciousness not Corporations) is progressing.The Conciousness over Corporations preference? That is what I think the problem is with it, from a funding point of view, it honours consciousness and not Corporations.
The Stalled Kickstarter Campaign.

An Interview with the Great Man himself taslking about this project back in 2006.
Why the TechnoFascist Silicon Valley crowd do not like James.

James Burke on the Future 

James Burkes Seminal connections series for the BBC are still superb viewing today. This vision of the future bears serious consideration this man is very under-represented in Main Stream Media these days, I suspect because his intellectual honesty is too dangerous for our present dumbed down diet of MSM dross.

James Burke on the Future at 2.48 He posits that states and Governments will no longer exist in 100 years time they will no longer be needed as their predication on Scarcity and conflict will simply no longer be valid and demonstrably so.

I do not own the copyright and this is for educational and discussion purposes solely.

I Wrote this entry into a Brainstorming session earlier, we are seeking Use Cases for Web 3 distributed computing ventures.

James Burkes Connections is one of the classic UK science programmes.

The Brain was/is a mind mapping programme which is similar to things like Wolfram Alpha
Artificial Intelligence and Machine learning are where the Big Web Web 1 and Web 2 Google monopolies are headed they are Artificial intelligences’ that seek to shepherd and guide human consciousness into submission. Burke and Wolfram are I think
more libertarian in their philosophy than the big web Offerings my own view is the WEB 3 can harness human consciousness and free will leading to a huge paradigm shift in innovation and invention breaking the artificial boundaries which State Monopoly Financialisd/Capitalism imposes to maintain an artificial scarcity model around debt-based money.
James Burke is quite Old now but has been very much sidelined and memory holed along with thinkers like Quigglan, Freire, and GK Galbraith, Tesla and so on.

the brain is how I see web 3 setting up informal and temporary joint ventures and cooperatives that can merge and fork into new organisations some of which will grow and some of which will just dissolve but all of which will remain in the Blockchain recognising proof of Brain contributions and building the Social Capital of all people so that all contributions are recognised and remunerated.

I have just been clicking around the mind map I made back in 2015 the tool is   online on centralised servers but would live on the Distributed web very nicely and the mapping it performs could all be nested as separate side chins to any centralised project token and in term a FIAT money Fund or Top 20 Crypto balanced equity investment fund.

“Joined Up Thinking” this is usually meant as considering all sides of a question, on web 3 it literally means joined up thinking of groups.

from my Blog in 2011

Connections is a 10-episode documentary television series and 1978 book (Connections, based on the series) created, written, and presented by science historian James Burke. The series was produced and directed by Mick Jackson of the BBC Science and Features Department and first aired in 1978 (UK) and 1979 (USA). It took an interdisciplinary approach to the history of science and invention, and demonstrated how various discoveries, scientific achievements, and historical world events were built from one another successively in an interconnected way to bring about particular aspects of modern technology. The series was noted for Burke’s crisp and enthusiastic presentation (and dry humour), historical re-enactments, and intricate working models.
The popular success of the series led to the production of The Day the Universe Changed (1985), a similar program but showing a more linear history of several important scientific developments. Years later, the success in syndication led to two sequels, Connections2 (1994) and Connections3 (1997), both for TLC. In 2004, KCSM-TV produced a program called Re-Connections, consisting of an interview of Burke and highlights of the original series, for the 25th anniversary of the first broadcast in the USA on PBS.[1]

James Burke, the creator and host of Connections, explains the Haber-Bosch Process

Lots more James Burke Stuff on the Web Archive here.

“They Would Not dance and They would Not follow me”

My Thesis in this Post is that Religious Orthodoxy as opposed to Religious conformism are two separate things and Orthodox traditions have more to agree upon than Conformist traditions.

I use conformist in the sense of Conforming to the Strictures of a Branch or school of thought within an over arching religious/State/Political Structure.

I have been struck by the themes of Orthodox beginnings lapsing into king making and idolatry, King Making and breaking into Iconoclasm and from there to orthodoxy refreshed.

Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammad all suggest a refreshing of Orthodoxy back to the Simple word of god as Truth and Love it is later figures who then weave spells with words and concepts which seek to usurp what human beings have in their hearts and minds given as truth from being at one with the Creation, and the Creator, if you have a Religious Faith.

Free Will, False Idols and Orthodoxy. One Love. #ConquestofDough

and rationalism. And in response to those Hellenistic influences, there were a lot of
preachers trying to get the Jews to return to the traditions and the godly ways of the
past, including the Sadducees, and the Pharisees, and the Essenes, and the Zealots.
And one of those preachers, who didn’t fit comfortably into any of these four groups,
was Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus was a preacher who spread his message of peace, love and,

Determinism Free will and Predestination – Jews, Christians, And Muslims

The earliest Muslim position, namely the Mu’tazilite, distinguished between God’s causality and that of human acts, for which humans are praised or blamed. God is not responsible for sin. In contrast, the Ash’arite position is that humans appropriate an act that comes from God. Although humans are responsible for their actions, they do not act independently of God. The Sunnis adopted this account, although there is no clear explanation of what this appropriation is. The greatest medieval Jewish thinker, Moses Maimonides (1135–1204), reacted strongly against the Ash’arite position. His reaction is at least partially based on the Jewish Scripture’s insistence that God’s covenant with the Jews requires a free response. In general, Muslims emphasize God’s providence, whereas Jews emphasize human freedom.Christians share the same difficulties as Muslims and Jews, but they also hold the doctrine of predestination, according to which God’s providential decision to save some humans is prior to their response. Augustine developed this teaching in opposition to the Pelagian position that humans can obey God’s commands and merit heaven without the special form of help from God that is called grace. He argued that human freedom is severely damaged by original sin and that humans are unable to perform meritorious actions on their own. Moreover, Augustine and his followers responded to a position that was later described as Semipelagian, according to which humans have the first choice in accepting or rejecting grace. The Western Church condemned Pelagianism and Semipelagianism.

Read more: Determinism Free will and Predestination – Jews, Christians, And Muslims – God, Humans, Augustine, and Human – JRank Articles
From 9.36 The Speaker who’s name is I think, Raspect, Sums up the COvenant made between those of Orthodox Faith with their God. or their Truth, this is what I also Believe.


no more fencing bukhari more fainted and
Safie Muslim and if the hope is in your
heart so that’s why the Quran says the
only scholarship usually the only stone
is school or only thing you need to

understand the Quran is as a sin
let’s have some fun right the profit in
the Torah
did not come to talk to the people I
already did with ranch this they came to
reaffirm that but they came to speak to
that when it was worshiping the boat and
car you understand
so every prophet in the Torah including
I think Islam came to deal with the
people that was leading with
unrighteousness but there was people
that was dealing with righteousness yes
antique and and all all the prophets
came to do is reaffirm what they were
already dealing I do original way from a
I’ve got take it from a companion
it was in here for the Muslim come here
if and when you come here to learn as
well so let’s go let’s go let’s go come
on guys they will start when you when

you have or someone you don’t know you

NHS on Target to Fulfil Naylor Report Targets, This Just in from Nostradamus.

Global Financial Crisis 2- The Biggest Crisis is a lack of imagination and acute Private Frazierism.



Visitor to a village stops a local and asks, “How do I get to Aberdeen from here?”

Local answers, “Och, if I were going to Aberdeen, I wouldn’t start from here!” combined vacuum tubes and solar voltaics’ an awesome Project. I was just musing on whether this had been done yet and sure enough, here it is.
Lots of doom and gloom is very easy to embrace, yet the more I look at the Tech sector not just in digital signals and controls capability but also microgrid networking and permaculture portfolio solution as opposed to high efficiency monoculture solutions the more clear it becomes that the starting assumptions employed for diagnosing the current problems are not and should not be the same starting assumptions used to break into the Future Paradigm.


Money is simply done wrong at the moment I found this short article quite instructive I read it this morning.
The Five Stages of Money (and why we’re stuck at stage 4)

Stage 3 money so efficiently and effectively made possible—they can also be issued and used as direct government payments for non-profitable goods and services. This can happen because (a) it “costs” the government nothing to produce the promissory notes, and (b) they provide real income to the citizens providing the non-profit generating services. In other words, Stage 5 money can uniquely and directly be used to pay citizens, on a large scale, to undertake, design, build, and provide non-profit goods and services which, until now, could not be undertaken or accomplished without stressing the monetary system itself (i.e. by “printing money”).

Its worth reading the whole thread Here to get a flavour.



The great weaknesses – probably fatal – of our global, industrialized civilization: the dependence on ever-greater levels of credit/debt creation, (and on the capacity to service both by states and citizens) and the total dependence upon complex machines which are themselves the product of a global, over-extended (from a resilience point of view), supply chain.
The two are inextricably linked. Even simple products are no longer manufactured as they would have been pre-1945, nationally. No growth = failure of all financial structures and mechanism = collapse; self-evidently.
What would be the model for a no-growth, or imperceptible-growth, economy and society for say, the UK? It would take us back to that existing in 1066, with corresponding population levels. Even then, international trade existed, above all for raw wool, making England the richest kingdom in Europe, and so worth the trouble William the Conqueror took to seize it (and the hire of mercenaries to do so).
We cannot have modernity, vast populations, and ‘no-growth’, and therefore it cannot in any way be planned for. Unfortunately, the soil fertility and natural and human resources available in 1066 no longer exist and cannot be conjured up even over decades. The peasant/hunter is born, not trained. The soil is degraded and infertile, and as for woodland, heath, water…….. Population level would have to far, far lower than that obtaining then.
Ideas of ‘doing more with less’ trough technical inventiveness are puerile fantasies in this context: complexity does not solve the problems of complexity in such a crisis situation, of such profound extent and magnitude.
Historically, when complex societies can longer sustain themselves – see Tainter and not a few others – survivors have fallen back on agriculture and pastoralism, which, and this is of supreme importance, were modes of life which had continued largely undisturbed by the growth of the metropolitan areas, ad often environmental degradation was limited, above all when complex irrigation schemes had not been developed and over-grazing taken place. Nomads just carried on doing their thing…….
Previous empires climbed the ladder of growth, but left the lower rungs largely intact, and mankind could climb down and start again, or stay at that basic level (see Greece, which was no more than a collection of primitive -but well-adapted – villages and very small towns, when the Ottomans conquered it).
In contrast, modern industrial civilization, inflated grotesquely on oil and gas, has effectively kicked away all the lower rungs – creating vast populations, which cannot exist outside the urban environment, minutely divided as to labour and specializations, and destroying the ecological base of future production.
As an foot-note, this destruction of natural capital also means that the quantity of rations which ensured survival in 1939-1945 i the UK would have utterly inadequate nutritional content today, and more would be required – I believe the less has been quantified as 20-50% of nutrition due to soil degradation. The result would be slow starvation, consequent epidemics – and loss of mental capacity


Two Videos I think Point towards the essentially differing world views The Doomers and the Optimists have , here they are.


This does not embed but click the link it is worth watching. Martin Nowak: The Mathematics of Cooperation from Why Are We Here? on Vimeo.

A Final Word from Peter Kropotkin, a Biologist, from his Classic Text, Mutual Aid a factor in Evolution.

The importance of this distinction will be easily appreciated by the student of animal psychology, and the more so by the student of human ethics. Love, sympathy and self-sacrifice certainly play an immense part in the progressive development of our moral feelings. But it is not love and not even sympathy upon which Society is based in mankind. It is the conscience—be it only at the stage of an instinct—of human solidarity. It is the unconscious recognition of the force that is borrowed by each man from the practice of mutual aid; of the close dependency of every one’s happiness upon the happiness of all; and of the sense of justice, or equity, which brings the individual to consider the rights of every other individual as equal to his own. Upon this broad and necessary foundation the still higher moral feelings are developed. But this subject lies outside the scope of the present work, and I shall only indicate here a lecture, “Justice and Morality” which I delivered in reply to Huxley’s Ethics, and in which the subject has been treated at some length.
Consequently I thought that a book, written on Mutual Aid as a Law of Nature and a factor of evolution, might fill an important gap. When Huxley issued, in 1888, his “Struggle-for-life” manifesto (Struggle for Existence and its Bearing upon Man), which to my appreciation was a very incorrect representation of the facts of Nature, as one sees them in the bush and in the forest, I communicated with the editor of the Nineteenth Century, asking him whether he would give the hospitality of his review to an elaborate reply to the views of one of the most prominent Darwinists; and Mr. James Knowles received the proposal with fullest sympathy. I also spoke of it to W. Bates. “Yes, certainly; that is true Darwinism,” was his reply. “It is horrible what ‘they’ have made of Darwin. Write these articles, and when they are printed, I will write to you a letter which you may publish.” Unfortunately, it took me nearly seven years to write these articles, and when the last was published, Bates was no longer living.
After having discussed the importance of mutual aid in various classes of animals, I was evidently bound to discuss the importance of the same factor in the evolution of Man. This was the more necessary as there are a number of evolutionists who may not refuse to admit the importance of mutual aid among animals, but who, like Herbert Spencer, will refuse to admit it for Man. For primitive Man—they maintain—war of each against all was the law of life. In how far this assertion, which has been too willingly repeated, without sufficient criticism, since the times of Hobbes, is supported by what we know about the early phases of human development, is discussed in the chapters given to the Savages and the Barbarians.

James B. Quilligan The Brandt Report, The Brandt Equation, The Financial Commons and Blockchain.

The Brandt Report was updated in 2001 by James B. Quilligan, who was the director of Brandt Commission Research, a public information agency on the Independent Commission on International Development Issues between 1980 and 1987. His report, ‘The Brandt Equation – 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy’ can be downloaded here as a PDF file.

Brandt Report

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Willy Brandt, the creator of the Brandt Report

The Brandt Report is the report written by the Independent Commission, first chaired by Willy Brandt (the former German Chancellor) in 1980, to review international development issues. The result of this report provided an understanding of drastic differences in the economic development for both the North and South hemispheres of the world.
The Brandt Report suggests primarily that a great chasm in standard of living exists along the North-South divide and there should therefore be a large transfer of resources from developed to developing countries. The countries North of the divide are extremely wealthy due to their successful trade in manufactured goods, whereas the countries South of the divide suffer poverty due to their trade in intermediate goods, where the export incomes are low.
The Brandt Commission envisaged a new kind of global security. It built its arguments on a pluralist perspective that combines several social, economic and political perils together with classical military perils.

The Brandt Line[edit]

The Brandt line, division of world on rich north and poor south.

The Brandt Line is a visual depiction of the North-South divide between their economies, based on GDP per capita,[1] proposed by Willy Brandt in the 1980s. It encircles the world at a latitude of 30° N, passing between North and Central America, north of Africa and India, but lowered towards the south to include Australia and New Zealand above the line.

The Brandt Equation[edit]

Twenty years later, in 2001, the Brandt Report was updated by James Quilligan, who was Information Director for the Brandt Commission between 1980 and 1987. His updated report was called “The Brandt Equation”.


  1. Jump up^ Pal, Saroj Kumar (2005-01-01). Lexicon on Geography of Development. Concept Publishing Company. ISBN 9788180692109.

External links[edit]


Chairman: Willy Brandt Former Chancellor of West Germany
Members: Abdlatif Y. Al-Hamad (Kuwait), Rodrigo Botero Montoya (Columbia), Antoine Kipsa Dakoure (Upper Volta), Eduardo Frei Montalva (Chile), Katherine Graham (USA), Edward Heath (UK), Amir H. Jamal (Tanzania), Lakshmi Kant Jha (India), Khatijah Ahmad (Malaysia), Adam Malik (Indonesia), Haruki Mori (Japan), Joe Morris (Canada), Olof Palme (Sweden), Peter G. Peterson (USA), Edgard Pisani (France), Shridath Ramphal (Guyana), Layachi Yaker (Algeria).
Ex – Officio Members: Jan Pronk (Netherlands), Goran Ohlin (Sweden), Dragoslav Avramovic (Yogoslavia).

An Overview

The best selling book to date on International Development issues, the Brandt Report is a broad based analysis of the state of the world, with a necessary emphasis on the failure of the world economic system to provide social and economic equality for humanity. It highlights the economic trends that need to be reversed, and the solutions and strategies that urgently need to be implemented to resolve the income disparity between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, financial and economic instability, and the growing problem of global poverty.

Free Software, The Commons , Free Money and Liberty v Tyranny. Tyranny of the Geek, Web 3 ?

A feasible government response to GFC2 will be to introduce a new central bank issued digital currency, the ‘e-£’, and set a depreciating exchange rate against old £ notes.
Old £ held in bank accounts will be converted at 1:1, as will old £ notes within a set period, say 12-months; however, after said period, the e-£:old note rate will decrease, say 1:0.9.
The effect will be obvious: all holders of currency will pay in their notes within the first 12 months to get the better exchange rate. Once all cash is voluntarily removed from the system, negative interest rates can then be introduced.
The ‘war on cash’ has already started, but banning it will be problematic. This approach will be far more effective and less costly in terms of resources.
Personally I suspect this is what is being planned, because aside from the effectiveness, the biggest beneficiaries will be 1) Government: all financial transactions can be tracked and hence tax dodging and other criminal activity becomes impossible; and 2) banks: will have an influx of liquidity when all the old £ notes are paid in, bank runs will be a thing of the past, and banks can really start screwing account holders because there is no alternative to keeping money in a bank account.
It will be sold to the technology-obsessed public as ‘futuristic and modern’, maybe that its ‘blockchain’ or ‘crypto’ (it looks like there is intentional confusion in the MSM between these terms and digital currency), as well as being able to stop crime and terror attacks.

  • I also think it is possible, and there are some signs that the NSA and other government organizations are behind the blockchain technology (they are associated with some of the original white papers). So it may seem like a conspiracy theory, but there is enough real evidence and it does make perfect sense. And the people using it now who think they are “avoiding using the system” seem to be test driving the system’s next technology.
  • In all but name the currency systems of the Washington Consensus and rest of the world come under the Bank of International Settlements Central Banking system. 97% of all circulating Money ( not Cash) is Digital. This currency is created electronically ( Digitally) by Centralised Bank Ledgers. The Only Difference with a Blockchain system is that it can potentially be distributed on a Network, that is all BlockChain is, a distributed network ledger system.
    In the UK the Banking act of 1844 barred coining or printing of Cash by private banks reserving, therefore, seniorage benefits to Government.
    The System in the US and The system for the EURO are all slightly different but all Clearing Banks in the UK and Europe create digital money out of thin air The Basle Rations (Capital Ratios) are honoured more in the breach than the observance but even where there is observance collateral is a very broad brush when it comes to what Central Banks will accept acting as Lender of last resort.)
    The NSA has a Patent on the SHA 256 algorithm which is the security encrypting algo’ used by Bitcoin , The ethereum Dagger Hashimoto algorithm is open source.
    Why Be Memory-Hard?
    The main reason why memory hardness is important is to make the proof of work function resistant to specialized hardware. With Bitcoin, whose mining algorithm requires only a simple SHA256 computation, companies have already existed for over a year that creates specialized “application-specific integrated circuits” (ASICs) designed and configured in silicon for the sole purpose of computing billions of SHA256 hashes in an attempt to “mine” a valid Bitcoin block. These chips have no legitimate applications outside of Bitcoin mining and password cracking, and the presence of these chips, which are thousands of times more efficient per dollar and kilowatt-hour at computing hashes than generic CPUs, makes it impossible for ordinary users with generic CPU and GPU hardware to compete.
    That last bit might seem overly technical but it is very important. Money Circulates and its velocity is important regarding how much activity a notional fixed sum of money can participate in. Velocity will go up and down with confidence levels but can lead to large swings in economic activity which are undesirable. Currency issuance is a way to iron out these swings in confidence, in a decentralised issuance system swings in sentiment will even out on average and the control mechanism will necessarily have less extreme undershoots and overshoots. A fixed money supply is not though a good idea, the Gold Standard was a big fat failure in most respects.
    A Joke.
    a physicist, an engineer, and a statistician out hunting. The physicist calculates the trajectory using ballistic equations but assumes no air resistance, so his shot falls 5 meters short. The engineer adds a fudge factor for air resistance, and his shot lands 5 meters long. The statistician yells “We got ‘em!”
    With the existing Crypto / Blockchain Infrastructure and Hierarchy there is a problem of concentration of Economic Power, This group are known as Whales.
    The exchange of Crypto Currencies for FIAT and their price level are maqnipåulated by Fairly small volumes as the distribution is one with a very fat tail that fat tail wags the Market Dog. Mining or distribution through say a universal currency dividend would ensure that first-mover advantage for newly issued currency is not concentrated to a privileged in-group, this happens with FIAT and it is also happening with increased centralisation of Crypto Mining power on all networks, SHA 146, Dagger Hashimoto, Skrypt etc.
    Blockchain Transactions are quite traceable and piercing the anonymity veil not so hard, the trip wire is any conversion back to FIAT. There are though DASH and Monero both of which preserve anonymity much better even within the blockchain space, Governments make a big mistake if they think getting rid of Cash will stop people finding an analogue ( Cigarettes ) ( Pokemon Cards ) Red M and M’s
    anything will do, Silver Dollars, You get the idea.
    Web 3 is properly distributed network computing uncensorable and a space where Tyranny will find itself in some trouble save for the Tyranny of the Geek. The Tyranny of the Geek is quite scary. Google Richard Stallman to see why Open Source is the antidote to Geek Tyranny
    At this stage here in Sweden Cash is almost finished with I have a project Forres/Lagom which will fill the huge gap extinguishing cash will leave Crytpo Complimentary currencies are rather more healthy than Cigarettes although that said who smokes currency but then that’s the same problem with using any store of value that becomes a speculative object.

Learn More about the Free Software Foundation Here.


Click Here For Images

Hi Mike,

Cryptos are under the spotlight the US regulator recently ruled that Ethereum is not a security but Bitfinex and Tether are still under investigation.
The Whales are not stupid and the range within which Cryptos are trading plus or minus 10 per cent is still very profitable for those in control.
The Downside is always Zero, will all go to Zero? I think it unlikely, though some have and some still will.
I had this exchange with Craig Wright the other day ( I think he is one of the People who are Satoshi collectively, A collective of at Least 2 and the actual team over the first year or so of Bitcoin was a core of at least 5 Cypher Punks.

If you look at the general attitude of comments in Crypto compare and those who drive the sentiment ( people like Mc Affee, Verr and Wright, They more or less all think in terms of backing the Final Victor. I find this strange in that Distributed Networks demonstrate the theory of Anti Fragile (Robust) Diverse systems with Many points of Failure relying on the Law of Large Numbers to survive over Centralised systems with their efficiencies but single catastrophic points of failure.

The Upside for Crytpo/Blockchain relies on Two things Adoption ( Critical Mass) and Being better as an alternative to the existing system. ( Cleaning House)

Both Main Flavours BTC and ETH are working on their functionality and easier usage and hence adoption, Generally they see the main problem as a Scalability of transactions on the networks. I am much less worried about Scaleability than Diversity, Decentralisation and fair distribution.
The scaling of Proof of Stake is attractive but is that likely to lead to centralisation? This comment on Crypto Compared the other day Nails the question.

“Here’s my opinion on how they pulled this off. Most sensible people around the world, but Americans in particular, don’t want to be seen as stifling innovation. The current US government is under Republican control, and Republicans are anti-regulation, anti-taxation and pro-small-business, so they do not want to be seen coming down hard on tech startups or small businesses. 
Based on the way that Ethereum got away with it, and just my opinion here, at your own risk, but If you are serious about starting a company and not just trying to get rich quick and scram, you can start from scratch and raise funding to get your gig off the ground via an ICO. If you already have access to significant VC funding, and could afford to do an IPO properly, you may be on thin ice. The catch is that you need to convert your product into something decentralized on or near launch that changes the ERC20 token into something that is definitely NOT a security and is definitely NOT controlled by you or any single entity by more than say 5% per owner entity at most”.
“That last point, that Ethereum isn’t centralized means something very significant for Casper PoS. I’ve complained in the past about the need to have a very low minimum amount required to participate in “Staking”. The situation with the US SEC and their recent statement means that in addition to a low minimum amount, staking also needs to have a *maximum* amount, which somehow prevents any single entity from acquiring more than a certain amount of control over the network, or else they will be at risk of being declared a centrally controlled organization that is effectively issuing securities with their coin”.

Your point is a good one, but that’s where the legal subtlety comes in. There was an analysis by a securities lawyer I posted a while back that said that it’s simply not the SEC’s style to “go back in time” or “pick winners” by enforcing laws retroactively for behaviour in the past. If you’re careful about it and stay off the SEC’s radar, for example by using disclaimers for US customers like EOS did, you can get away with funding your development via an ICO. The key bit though is that you must decentralize at launch. EOS did so in a minimal way and took on too much risk in my opinion. I would probably have decentralized by at least 10x more than they did. If your entity is controlled by at least 200 different people or organizations, it’s pretty impossible to call it centralized in my opinion, and therefore it’s impossible to call your coin a security. The further you go beyond 200, the less risk you have of someone coming after you. 1/200th of $50B is $250M. That’s enough for me :)”

The way Ether is structured is quite Strong I think the ERC tokens referencing back tho ETH and ETC, I also see the Bitcoin Forks as something to be embraced. Where the Value of the whole top 20 is more evenly spread rather than between 33% and 40 % dominance to Bitcoin and 15% to Ether, with that sort of spread I think that a reference basket or index of all coins would serve as a sort of reserve currency pool to iron out swings in price to something more stable. This then becomes a key to referencing Crypto Currencies and the Value of the Block Chain Marketplace as a commons. Instead of valuing the security based upon conversion to Either, Dollars, Euros or Stirling.

At the moment conversion back to FIAt is essential and inescapable as if you want to buy things you need FIAT most of the time. That’s the linkage that needs to be broken to break it more utility has to come into the network, If you look at the State of the Dapps many of the Dappps are trivial they are games and pretty mundane analysis and moving tokens from a to b toys.
1629 projects.

The final Point is the Chicago Mercantile BTC futures, this is at below 7000 for Bitcoin nothing is going anywhere until Bitcoin starts going up and Bitcoin has the Biggest Whale Problem and also the most infighting BTC, BTG and BCH until both

Bitcoin and Ethereum communities and other decentralised Mining Currencies and also the centrally Distributed ( XRP/Cardano ) camps realise they are a symbiotic system and act accordingly the utility will not evolve as quickly and smoothly as it can. sept contract 6120-7030 approx.

Looking at the progress of Web 3 there is a lot of good stuff being done I think a speculative rise in prices right now would be counterproductive its time for the System to put up or shut up, I think it will and then the real value will grow from real adoption for real services.

Just grazing the surface here Mike I have been getting into the Web 3 ecosystem Truffle and Aragon and the GitHub repositories quite deeply You might recall this link form a while back. It represents the scaleability view, Diverse synergy is I think much more important for value added. interesting update on Ethereum truffle looks good  ( This lik is broken for me might work for you, its a very good article but the site seems down at the mo.)

this is another good one and here is a discussion I had on the Seeds blog.

New one starting here.

That’s my 5 penneth worth anyhow Mike.