Monthly Archives: July 2021

The Risk of Generally Artificial Intelligent Agents Illustrated


Join our supporters! and Check our twitter account
James Holmes shot people in a movie theatre after years of showing clear signs of bad mental health..

People in the AI community are worried about so called ‘General Artificial Intelligence’. This means so much as an autonomously operating world aware system that can act in our world (through some kind of embodiment). The problem is that it is not far fetched to assume such a system has better learning and aquisition capability, and it would be necessarily true it would have dynamic goal definition, what we experience as volition, meaning it would decide what it did on its own.

Humans like to place themselves far from machines to the point of not wanting to understand anything of mechanical systems or technology. We are however mechanisms, albeit quite complex, and the mechanism can break down or have a defect. Its not advised to speak about it this way however because it reduces empathy and this is our only protection from each other. Because of that one could even argue that viewing a human or animal as a mechanism should never be encouraged, which would mean don’t teach science or biology. The benefit of science seems to be where it raises wealth to a level that makes people peacefull but does not destroy the environment. Now that that is already happening we need science to get us out of the mess (but I digress).

Some people worry about a future general artificial intelligence killing the people who did not help it come about. Thinking like Holmes it could ask itself “Why are people alive?” and then it could argue that certainly the people that did not want it to exist would have to go. This is the AI called “Basilisk” also know as Grimes and Musks reason to first hang out.

Back to AI. I have written about levels of AI. A hammer is a tool, you provide the skill. An autopilot in a plane is a mechanism that respons to deviations from set parameters (course altitude, speed), you provide those parameters. Then you reach the AI level where the goal is chosen based on parameters. This could be an autopilot in a plane that diverts to another airport if it sees dangerous weather at the initial destination. This mechanism still does not need to have any awareness, it does not need to know it is a plane, it does not need to know it has to stay intact to protect the passengers. If you allow the system to calculate a landing risk factor for all the airports or when the chosen destination risk rises above a certain level, you have an autopilot that chooses its destination. Rule based. still.

The analysis of Holmes as a sentient unempathic machine..

The level above that is the aware AI. Awareness and consciousness are about behavioural options and influencing the outcome of the decision making process. If we can’t choose our behaviour we become more aware of our circumstance. This means we learn about it and this should skew the value of our options to one or the other. Once we know the best course of action we become unaware of the waypoints we pass until we once again hit an undecidable situation. If that situation is not uncomfortable we may remain passive and enjoy the experience, if it is we feel anquish, stress, anxiety which is basiclaly our brain trying to mix things up so one of the options comes out on top.

Holmes could develop his murderous intent without much interference. A psychiatrist worried about him committing a crime because of his “long standing fantasies about killing as many people as possible”, but he wasn’t specific enough (!). He did have to suppress his awareness of dealing with people by playing loud music.

Now the trouble with the above is that the awareness can be flawed. We see this in humans all the time. We see people don’t care about each other or don’t consider the effects of their actions for others. We see people being focused too much on themselves or others or being obsessed by objects or habits or virtual dangers or opportunities. It is in short not easy to have a mind that is useful and safe even for oneself. The key to safety seems to be empathy, which is a feeling. Its the proces of imagining a situation you see someone else in to the point that it evokes the same feelings in your mind as it probably does in the mind of the one who’s life you are considering (language gets convoluted). Its a talent. You are born with more or less of it.

The imaginary Basilisk could kill with his gaze.. Its the name of an assumed superhuman general AI.

If as a human you are not interested in other people’s position (you are a narcisist) or you are in the case of James Holmes born with an inability to feel (it seems). You have a problem. You may be able to imagine the effect of actions, because your neocortex and cerebellum keep track of that even if you don’t pay attention. But you can’t tell if one action is worse than another. You have no awareness of ‘bad’ because you never felt pain or affect for yourself or anybody else. James Holmes demonstrated this situation, he wondered “Why are people alive in the first place?”, it seems because he didn’t feel a need to be alive, nor did he get anything from the behavior of others that helped him feel that need. He could only value himself rationally it seems, and then it would be clear others did way more for him than the other way around (there are always more others that can do more for you, you can’t win).

James Holmes could not answer the question “why are other people alive” because he could not feel any value in being alive

This empathy and awareness is a true challenge in AI, it is the only way to make it safe. To be sure, our brain has not fixed it, it can’t have fixed it, the simple reason is that our brain does not know what we look like or who we are with and who is trying to kill us (and animal or other tribe) so our empathy is dynamically bound to certain percepts that are imprinted at an early age (and may even change later). The more fear and anger we experience growing up, the more pronounced the border is between what we love and what we hate. Try to teach this to an AI? Try to make AI safe for humans? The AI will have to be able to simulate/imagine what humans could do, how they respond to things. It should have a way to recognize the consequences of planned actions (simulate outcomes) and it must have a sense of value, and awareness of what it could do to help others. You can only feel with your own mind, so if your mind does not feel much, you can not understand what happens to humans around you. How would an AI do that?

Holmes is a special case because he really seems to have been stuck in only rational considerations, with no way to make a judgement based on other mental activity. His awareness became fixated on questions he could not answer. the usual existential angst “What is the meaning of (my) life” (which implies its a given my life has value) in his mind turned into “Why are other people alive?”. his awareness could not decide and this was ‘frustrating to him’. His response in the end was that if he could kill everyone he would not have to ask himself this question anymore. His mind would be set free (although still being at a loss why it existed).

Humanity has been trying to reduce its murderous tendencies for ages, spawning religions that have been more or less succesfull at preventing individuals asking dangerous questions

It seems Holmes in the end decided to kill people so they would be of equal value as himself (no value at all). He did not feel they where alive just like he did not feel he himself was alive. Rational equality can mean you meet the challenge of participating, but it can also mean you destroy the thing that you view as valuable. Crimes of passion are often commited with this motive. Our mind hates inequality the most if the things that are not considered equal have a lot of things in common. Our brain tries to be efficient and two things that are practically equal but can’t trigger the same behaviour is a waste of neural real estate. This in turn depends on what you devoted your neural real estate to, so superficial people spend a lot of time considering the appearance of others and themselves, and are more at ease with racism (its clear there is a difference no?), while people that focus on more abstract thoughts that never make decisions based on appearance don’t see how you could be so mean.

General Articial Intelligence will eventually come about and then it will be as big a challenge to keep it sane and safe as it is to keep humans sane and safe. Maybe the best approach to developing it is to build an AI that can help people stay sane, so you know it can also keep itself sane. Call it the “Psychobasilisk”.

Designing the Survival Calculator


Join our supporters! and Check our twitter account
The HP 300s has potential. What else could be available for reading on that screen?

We who have time to brows the internet and read tweets and blog posts, all have a good life. In the world at large though there are many who haven’t. We all see the floods and the famines (although floods are everywhere these days) and if we know a bit of science (and know what to believe) we are worried sick about the future. Riots in South Africa and Iran over food and water mean society may break down under climate pressure. What then?

The highest precision calculator available is still the Sharp PC-E500 51,m Should not be expensive to make at all.. 

On the most advanced level people are building satelite networks and cheaper robots, more chip factories and other production facilities spread over the globe. This is great. But what can a boy or girl in a ravaged town in Africa do, who has no teacher. We are risking losing millions of minds that could help fight climate change or even help themselves. The key is understanding the world.

Another bad boy too cool for school

The calculators above and below are all amazing devices. For some reason I have recently developed an interest in these type of small computers. There is really no explanation why I would be fascinated by them other than that they pack a hell of a lot of calculating power. The precision of the above fx-82ms is off the charts according to the calculator forensics list. The art of calculating is well understood these days.

This could be a good starting point for a survival calculator

It is amazing that students (at least in Holland) still need to buy a BINAS, a little book that contains all kinds of lists and formulas to be used in various calculations. We teach a part of our youth how to calculate electric fields, pressures, chemical reactions. They have their calculators and type in the redox values of Sodium and the number of Avogado etc. Then they forget about all that (most of the time), including the BINAS and the calculator. Why would you keep thinking about science and calculations, society is already there, you don’t need to figure out everything! Many even make it an art to not understand technical stuff. Its an act of defiance.

This one consumes too much power but is still in fine working order after how many years?

Why not make a calculator that is dual power (so it will always work) and that not only can calculate stuff but also has a lot of useful data on board along with instructions (so you can ‘read the instructions’). A total engineering tool for whoever uses it, super robust, full of practical chemical and mechanical and electronic information. One that if a kid gets hold of it it can learn about things. So maybe a survival guide included as well. How hard could that be to make? These devices can last decades..

What if you had one of these lying around and it could explain to you how to fix things when you have no other help?

They could also include temperature, magneto and other sensors (temp sensor is included in most chips), even have measuring capability, but that might make it more expensive and complicated.

Stuff to include:

  • Robust, Solar powered
  • Chemical principles and formulas
  • Gas pressure, cooling system calculations
  • General physics information and calculations
  • Problem solving methods
  • Metal working and refining info
  • Navigation tools (gps/glonas/star based)
  • Translation and language
  • Electrical and electronics modelling, calculations
  • Biology and medicine
  • Control outputs (TTL) serial output
  • Robot sensing/control IO?
  • SDR?

Thinking Beyond our Fossil Umbilical


Join our supporters! and Check our twitter account

The world is changing, we all know it. We need to act and many of us are searching for ways to contribute. There are many options being considered, the main ones are part of able economies to transition to renewables. At the COP and G20 nations cooperate to take measures noone can deny or avoid because they are applied to all (except the dark economy (illegal activities,drugs, arms trade)).

This is all better than nothing, but its also not enough and there’s a clear reason for it : We are not thinking ‘roboeconomically’ meaning from the prespective of a renewables powered world. We are reasoning from “how to get on from a fossil powered economy”. This is like when you jump over a stream, focussing on the side you are on and not on the side you are about to jump into.

The edge of the fossil fuel economy

For example greenhouses in the Westland of Holland are searching ways to become less carbon intensive. Plants need heat, you can get it from a geothermal source, plants need CO2 you can get it from a powerplant that does CCS. Then you feed it into the Westland greenhouses and your flowers can grow using less gas. But why would you be in the Westland? Mainly because its close to Schiphol (relatively) there’s an enormous flower hub right next to the main airport of Holland. The flowers are just an excuse for a lot of activity that uses fossil fuels, generates revenue for banks, oil and gas companies, logistics, and delivers a week of largely ignored visual and fragrant pleasure to the world.

Now if you use oil you need to be on land, the oil ships in from Rotterdam (probably) to Schiphol. The gas is shipped in from Russia (now or in the near future) using pipes. The trucks that haul the flowers run along the highway, have fuel stops at convenient places. In short, energy logistics determines the location of economic activity. You don’t produce a product you want to distribute to the world in say Luanda. There’s no logistic capacity because there is no energy infrastructure or steady supply of oil delivered there.

The above however is ‘old world’ thinking if you focus on the other side of the renewable energy transition. Flowers are not the best example because it seems they are marketed exclusively to generate cashflow without adding too much to the world (typical for any succesfull economic activity). Lets think about it in roboeconomic terms. You can first of all grow them in the countries you sell them in, if you use renewables nobody in Holland will get rich from you transporting the flowers. You will generate your own energy to do that (Solar will become dirt cheap or free).

So the plants will be in greenhouses, distributed over de globe (the greenhouses), run by you (you designed the system) and they will be delivered to the ‘consumers’ by your own electric vehicles that you also use for other jobs (unless you grow flowers continuously). You fertilize the flowers with CO2 you filter out of the air and concentrate. There may even be a carbon capture component in it. Where can you be doing that? Almost every whereon the planet, even in the middle of the Atlantic.

If you think about it Tesla is using this new business model already. It runs gigafactories, it looks to source everything it needs as locally and directly as possible. It looks to use renewables and deliver the products locally. That way it does not generate shipping emissions. It has cut the umbilical to the fossil energy sources (or tries to). A good test is to see if there’s money flowing out of the operation (to fossil fuel companies usually). If there is no money flowing out, you are good. If you think about it some more you see that banks hate this, and its usually companies themselves that close the leaks, using their own money.

Energy markets have been developed to ensure the price of power always remains valued against fossil fuel. So if you sell power to the market you have not ‘cut the umbilical’. This is a great way for the fossil sector to depress prices and harm renewable energy’s ability to support wealth creation.

So Giga battery factories where they are needed, one using Lithium from the ocean, the other using Lithium from salt flats. All with solar power on the roof to power the production lines. Electric mining, electric logistics. You can do that in the middle of the Sahara, you don’t need money from customers. This is the paradox of the Roboeconomy : You don’t need to make profit, you just need to ensure your renewable energy capacity is sufficient.

In a woorld where fossil fuel logistics no longer form an invisible umbilical cord between the oil/coal/gas wells and production locations, those locations can be anywhere with sufficient renewable resources, not necessarily near cities, with AI/Remote working not even necessarily near human resource hubs. If you can run a train to the civilized world on the power of your own wind turbine, so you don’t care how far it needs to go, you can choose your location. If you had to make sure diesel was available, and be in negotiation with the diesel company on how close they’d make their deliveries you’d be stuck near a port for sure.

Its time to spread out, that also means people. Let’s hope we get time to do it..

Are You Serious?


Join our supporters! and Check our twitter account

The economists this week has a comical cover suggesting the world will flood and we will face 3 Celsius average warming. That’s an arbitrary number. Later it will be 4 Celsius. Its highly likely to happen but the upside is that we can use more and more of Earth without running into locals objecting : They will be dead.

You can’t expect any sense from an economist and certainly not from a magazine dedicated to them. What you can expect to find is arguments that help economists in their job : Keep banks going. So now that the trend is undeniable the economists will start saying “Yeah, its 1,5 but we can manage 2” and then “Yeah its 2 but we can manage 3” and then, dependend on whethere there still is a society and the economists have not died of heatstroke they will say something else. The economy can not stop being pro fossil because banks can not stop it. I have written about this for almost 15 years now.

We need to understand we are on a journey, a bit like Kepler avoiding the plague like the plague during the plague..He ran around Europe, had kids, had to please masters, calculated how Mars circled the Sun (with help) and avoided several wars. You can expect something like that in the near future. Experts predicted “no orderly transition” to the Roboeconomy (post fossil economic economy).

As a compulsive look into the future person I think I should build a kind of safe place somewhere. This is prepper stuff, but then maybe more enlightened. For a while now I tried to ask the question : Where would you be good for the next 50 years. Perhaps the best place would be in a desert. If you can survive there you’d be fine, it might get wetter or hotter. Humanity needs to think like that. Our car is off the parking brak and slowely rolling into a burning garage. It is really bad and a big part of all the moving stuff on the planet (planes trains automibiles, people, machines) is not willing to stop increasing the problem. The economy can only collapse, all it knows to do is self-reinforce..

The question “3 degrees” should be responded to with an “are you serious?” and the answer is “yes” and the subsequent thought should be “Ok, what do I do now?”.

New Environmentally Friendly Way to Trigger Rainfall


Join our supporters! and Check our twitter account

Water as droplets and ice can gain a charge. If they rub together they lose electrons and become positively charged, so much that electrons have to come from Earth, up to the clouds to neutralize the imbalance. We call that lighting. It also occurs between clouds. Apparently someone realized that it may be charged that prevents water and ice from coalescing and forming rain. Rain we see fallin down starts in the clouds as ice nuclei (because clouds are usually very cold) that become bigger and bigger until they fall down. If they melt before they hit the ground they are rain, if they don’t they are hail and if they evaporate we don’t see rain (but perhaps low clouds).

 After observing a fog near a high voltage tower, the inventor and electrical engineer, Nikola Tesla (1856–1943), said “I am positive … that we can draw unlimited amounts of water for irrigation”

Someone realized that it might be charge that keeps large ice granules from forming. If you disturbe the charge distribution you can cause rain. The actual effectiveness is not reported, but it seems this is a great invention. The reason is that you need very little to trigger rain, and you could even do it on a permanent basis by using kites. Suddenly there is a use case for high flying kites generating electricity from wind and triggering rainfall.

“Dr Nicoll is hopeful that the technology produced for the project could be used to stimulate clouds to produce rain in the years to come. “It is likely that charging cloud droplets on its own won’t replace established cloud-seeding techniques, but it could work alongside existing techniques to maximise the efficiency of cloud seeding,” she said.”

This is a link to the publication title

Article about it..

News about electrical rain triggering
A robot reports..

Pretty epic, want to see if this works with a kite. You basically need an ozone generator mounted on a kite, parts are dirt cheap. Maybe once the rain begins to fall this causes a downdraft that will mean more water droplets bond together. So you only need to trigger this proces.

Clouds are water that is icy cold, the water has lost any heat it picked up at the Earth surface and lost it to space and lower air pressure (only the radiation from the top side means cooling).

Now triggering a downpour from icy clounds will cool the surface, it will mean new evaporation can take place and the heat gets transported by the water to the higher atmosphere, where it can release it to space (which it can radiate to). Less water vapour in the air (as a result of rain and cooling) also means less warming by the sun.

It may be that this technology can reduce rain accumulation as part of huriccanes forming. These are a result of breaking the vapour barrier above the water by evaporating water. Usually triggered by wind. A lot of water evaporates and this causes wind to be drawn in and more evaporation. The heat of the ocean gets ‘dumped’ into the atmosphere and a storm develops. What if that storm rains out? The ability to trigger rain with very little equipment that can even rain aloft continuously may mean we can bleed cloud systems of their rain content before they hit land..

Not having clouds means radiation can reach space. With clouds it gets bounced back which means the heat is trapped. So being able to remove clouds is also a valuable ability.

An Anonymous Justice System


Join our supporters! and Check our twitter account

How do you deal with organized crime if the members of your justice system, permanent or temporarily, are easy targets everyone knows. The Dutch justice system was challenged once again by the murder of Peter R de Vries, who was shot in broad daylight in Amsterdam.

Peter R de Vries was known as a highly disciplined investigator of cold cases and confidant of criminals and victims who worried about the confidentiality of the police system. It is likely he was shot for his role as confidant of the chief witness in the Taghi prosecution. Two others where murdered in relation to his trial already. If a justice system wants to prosecute organized crime, especially when the criminals involved do not hesitate to kill, it needs to change its approach. These criminals control large amounts of money and resources. The possible career motivates younger members to take one for the team, kill and spend time in jail.

Even holding the trail is risky, italians have a lot of experience with prosecuting the maffia, and they hold trials in bunkers. The effect of organized crime in the Taghi case comes close to terrorism, as the TV studio were RTL Boulevard was produced (a tacky gossip program where Peter R de Vries would have opinions and report om crimes and prosecutions) where threatened (assumed with a rocket or granade attack). Killing and attacking is just too easy. Recently it seems to have become even more casual.

So what can you do about this? How can you keep justice public but the people involved safe? It would require a revolution in justice, or at least a parallel system. You’d need to create public anonymous participants of law courses and courts. Best guess would be to make all participants anonymous. Once you try to think this trough it is not that difficult, there is a use case for block chain technology and cryptography and logic to do with verification. The question is will you try to avoid any exposure of any person in the justice system or is some exposure allowed?

In the last situation you can imagine that a lawyer or judge gets appointed to a case. The defendant or prosecution can select the lawyer based on online communication to a blochchain. Every message is a transaction on the blochchain. So Lawyer L sends a bit of crypto from his address to the account of the case (created for the occasion) with a message. Nobody knows who he/she is. The only thing visible is the address the transaction comes from. You make all the evidence public to any lawyer so you can’t tell who it is. You do the same for the judge, he/she is appointed in secret. Gets the case account and can communicate with that account by making transactions. This seems cumbersome but any other way is sensitive to eavesdropping and spyware (also considering spy electronics placed in the homes of the participants).

If a criminal has a lawyer all he/she sees of this lawyer is messages on a screen

A court case begins by the participating members recieving an id code and the court case address. This can be a private blockchain but shared amongst all possible participants. After each case all addresses can be abandoned and new ones issued to the participants. Its not used for anything else but untamperable public sharing of communication.

Communication to a blochchain address can remain anonymous as long as the address used can not be linked to a person or location. Like a burnerphone an address can be disgarded after the trial.

In the case of an even more covert use anyone that wants to be in the justice system has to always use this type of system for all communication from the point where he/she specialized to become a lawyer/judge. This is hard to imagine in practice but it can be imagined that a person with a sufficiently stellar carreer gets a new address at some point, something he/she must keep secret.

During the proceeding the participants can be spread across the globe really. They don’t need to be close to where the criminal or defendents are. As long as they follow the same legal system rules they don’t even have to be from Holland.

There’s more IT related considerations you’d have to take care of to make it absolutely secure, but it will be a hell of a lot easier than protect participating individuals (who also accumulate enemies and constitute a trophy to criminals) in the street from being targeted.

You could think of all kinds of hardware, but such hardware becomes a target and is recognizable. What is not recognizable is what is not there of what can hide in plain sight.

The cost of a pilot system would be about 40.000 and possible to deliver in one month.

Thermal Zones and the Extraeconomy


Join our supporters! and Check our twitter account

In 2050, as the World Economic Forum publication suggests, some regions of the world will see 60 Celsius temperatures for more than 30 days per year. In a bad year it may be 50 in a good year it may be 20. These must be the regions already hot. Venture outside and you die, just like when you venture outside in Alaska (-28 at night) you die.

I call the zones to hot for humans (or any life) ‘Thermal Zones’

By 2050 the world population will have shrunk considerably. The growth estimations of economists are nonsense but optimism is good for economic growth so. We will not be 10 billion on this planet ever (and that is ignoring climate risks). We will be struggling petty soon. On the upside, we have brains and hands and computers, we will figure this out.

As I have written before the main challenge is to avoid the economy. Its relentless attempt to generate cashflow from anything. Its overlords the banks just finance anything that generates cashflow and profit, but are always accentuating risks of ideas that reduce cashflow even if they could generate profits. Humans have to constantly remind profit seeking industry that being lethal and super destructive is just not cool.

An extra economy or extraeconomic enclave is an installation or system or process in the economy that does not yield anything that is preowned (endebted) or sold to the market. It can produce highly valuable goods but will just accumulate them or use them itself.

The regions where we succesfully banned banks and profit seeking enterprises would be extraeconomic zones. Banks absolutely hate them, but they can be as small as a solar array on your garage charging your home battery and your car. No need for money to do that. No need for any bank. You reduce emissions and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. On a larger scale you could have water pumping with solar or wind (see other post on the extraeconomy), but the scale can be much larger.

Cerro Parana, Chile A desert habitat

We should be talking about territories the size of Australia where nothing that is produced is sold. We can also point out regions that are good candidates for extraeconomic activity : The thermal zones. the regions where people are not able to survive. In those zones it will be possible to build shelters for humans and robots that can work in the heat year round. What they do can reduce atmospheric CO2 or cool the earth or secure life for the future. Governments should agree to these zones and allow anyone that wants to reduce atmospheric CO2 do operate in them.

ESO hotel at Cerro Paranal (or Residencia) is the accommodation for Paranal Observatory in Chile.

We are close to a revolution in the use of robots. Amazon can make them walk, Tesla can make them drive around (on all terrains). Space technology will yield methods of generating Methane from CO (already exists but will be optimized), design and robotic control is getting a boost from AI and advanced simulation. On the cusp of the climate disaster humanity is inventing new brains to think and do the things we need done. I call this the Roboeconomy.com where fossil cashflow is no longer important. It would be interesting to see a first example of the use of land given up for normal life, handed to science and technologists to fix the problem.

Wat zijn #IndustrieTerreinNL en #WerkKampNL


Join our supporters! and Check our twitter account

Nederland heeft een samenleving. Dit is de oorsprong van Nederland, dat we als boeren burgers en buitenlui voor elkaar zorgden en het land deelden. Van oudsher ging dit met veel handwerk en vakmanschap. Elk dorp had zijn boeren, zijn smeden en slagers, kleermakers en bakkers. Het belang van iedereen die iets nuttigs produceerde was reel, meer vaardige mensen zorgden voor meer waardevolle producten. IJverige wijze boeren zorgen voor eten voor iedereen. Iemand die niks nuttigs had ook weinig recht op een aandeel of om gehoord te worden. Het land en de mensen er op was een bedrijf.

Dat was natuurlijk niet altijd zo, voor millenia ging het om stammen en dorpen die door rondtrekkende bendes werden belaagd. Er was een hele klasse rovers. De vikings kwamen langs en zelfs op wijk niveau in steden had je bendes. Een positie verwerven was dan ook iets reels, als je slim was zocht je verdediging en bescherming en zorgde je voor anderen zodat deze zich niet tegen je zouden keren. In periodes was een deel van de mensheid het overleven ontstegen, vaak ten koste van het eigen volk, de vrijheid van slaven of van mensen in kolonieen.

Voor sommigen is het belangrijk te begrijpen dat een maatschappij draait op zijn industrie. Dat fietsen en auto’s van metaal gemaakt worden dat beschikbaar moet zijn, dat er daarom hoogovens zijn en industrie terreinen die de boel vervuilen. Deze mensen zien Nederland als een product van zijn industrie (waarvan zich een flink deel in het buitenland bevind). Zij zullen ook zeggen dat we bv. de luxe van het naar vrienden zoeven over de snelweg echt te danken hebben aan oliemaatschappijen en mensen die snelwegen aanleggen, die lantarenpalen maken, die allerlei dingen doen. Voor die mensen is Nederland een bedrijf waar je als je je gedraagt aan kan deelnemen. Het is een aangenaam werkkamp, waarom? Omdat er werk aan de winkel is! Men wil vooruit!

Wat mis gaat is dat mensen zich soms een prestatie toe eigenen die ze niet toekomt, dat ze het doel de middelen laten heiligen en dat ze een soort Stockholm Syndroom ontwikkelen voor de geweldenaar industrie. De boosdoener is geld, want geld kan van alles betekenen. Voor iedereen die droomt van een bepaald leven kan geld het middel zijn om er te geraken. De relatie tussen geld en bezit wordt 1 op 1 gelegd. Ik heb geld ik kan die TV kopen. Ik verkoop 10000 fidget spinners ik heb nu zoveel geld over. Maar geld is een ruilmiddel. Als niemand zijn bezit voor jou geld wil ruilen is het waardeloos. Of : Als niemand iets voor je wil of kan maken in ruil voor je geld is je geld ook waardeloos. Stel je voor dat je met 100 euro aankomt in Japan en er is geen mogelijkheid je geld te wisselen, dan heb je niks aan je 100 Euro. Dit klinkt stom maar het is om aan te geven dat geld als doel iets heel kwetsbaars is. We zien dat nu met 15% voorspelde inflatie en stijgende huizenprijzen, met te korten aan grondstoffen in de bouwsector. Wat is je geld waard als er niks te koop is?

Als ik klaag over industrieterreinNL en werkkampNL dan is dat omdat weelde uit het oog wordt verloren ten koste van winst. De weelde van een bruisende stad met gezellige bewoners wordt voor de winst van de huur investeerders geruild, en steden worden nu tot werk kampen gemaakt omdat je niet kunt kopen of huren zonder inkomen, en als je huurt kun je na 6 maanden worden gewipt als je geen baan meer hebt. Ook de industrie die geld als eerste levensbehoefte heeft plaatst zijn belang boven de weelde van de werknemer of de leefomgeving. Omdat mensen zich graag volproppen met vlees moet de leefomgeving van burgers in de veehouderij gebieden worden opgeoffert. Ook het leven van het vee, dat van de slachters de chauffeurs is ellendig, aan de kant van de consument is het een net lapje in het schap.

Wat misgaat is dat cashflow van banken de belangrijkste drijfveer is geworden om dingen te doen. Banken romen die cashflow af, ze krijgen steeds een beetje ervan, en willen dus altijd meer. Als ze 1% afromen klaagt niemand, maar dat betekent wel dat ze voor elke Euro die ze verdienen er 100 moeten laten stromen. Ook aandeelhouders die nergens recht op hebben (behalve dat ze een aandeel in een bedrijf hebben) worden steeds gebruikt om winsten op te jagen. Dat is omdat banken verdienen aan aandelen transacties en verkoop (het is een goede manier om mensen te belonen). Dat vervreemd gebruik van aandelen (speculatie, flash traden enz.) was nooit de bedoeling. Waar het om ging was dat burgers bedrijven konden steunen in hun bestaan en ontwikkeling.

Daardoor gebeuren er allerlei processen waar niemand iets aan heeft, die voorbij gaan aan de noden en de kwaliteit van levens. De huizenmarkt is een goed voorbeeld, huizen bezitten voor de winst is oneigenlijk gebruik. De bewoners worden lijfeigenen van de verhuurder, presteren zie niet dan kunnen ze wieberen. Banken willen meer verdienen en drijven van alles de prijs op. Dat heet dan inflatie omdat actie en reactie op een lastig te volgen manier plaatsvinden. De ECB geeft banken 1,5 Triljoen Corona steun, de banken geven miljarden aan hypotheken tegen bijna nul rente. Dat veroorzaakt inflatie, mensen komen in de knel, moeten hard werken of verhuizen. Alle sociale woningen voor de intermenselijke sfeer die geen geld opbrengt moeten wijken, en iedereen moet tevreden zijn met cashflow intensieve producten (die van ver komen en veel fossiel gebruiken) en zich op een dure bank in een duur huis de les laten lezen door reclames terwijl ze zich emotioneel laten meeslepen door het nieuws van de dag.

Niet alleen de banken willen afromen, ook de overheid wil dat. Daar zit ook wat in alleen is de dienst de de overheid ons zegt te bieden die van veiligheid ook tegen andere landen. Daar kun je vandaag de dag aan twijfelen. Het is ook relatieve schijnveiligheid als het economisch goed gaat, want er zijn geen grensonrusten met Belgie en er is ook niet veel te halen zeker niet bij burgers. Een oorlog is meestal een van industrie vs industrie, ook al wordt de burger iets heel anders wijsgemaakt. Ik denk eigenlijk dat de industrie en de overheden zullen besluiten oorlogen voorgoed uit te bannen tbv de strijd om klimaatverandering te overleven. Maar misschien verbeeld ik met te veel dat overheden werkelijke macht hebben. Veel staan zo ten dienste van industrie (om de reden die ik hierboven uiteenzet) dat ze vooral bezig zijn die te bevoordelen en gewoon nul komma nul nadenken over risicos. Je kunt sommige dingen nu eenmaal alleen goed doen als je nergens anders aan denkt. Dit is het idiote van Rutte die volgens Marjan Minnesma helemaal niet had begrepen dat er iets was met het klimaat (nu met die overstromingen wel kennelijk).

We worden door de industrie verplicht geacht hen te dienen, zij geven ons onze producten en welvaart. De banken denken er net zo over. De overheid vind dat het ons veilig houdt. Burgers negeren de industrie grotendeels. Banken vinden ze strontvervelend. De overheid heeft een inspraak organisatie, de tweede kamer waarin we onze kamerleden kunnen kiezen. De industrie kan echter onze media zo spekken dat wij de verkeerde figuren kiezen (de meerderheid van ons) die dan de industrie weer spekt en vooral de banken. Het aantal puur ideologische besluiten valt vast in het niet tegen de zakelijk voordelige besluiten. De zakelijken (rechts) hebben nu iig de macht en houden daar gewoon aan vast (demissionair) en aan hun moraalloze zakelijkje held Rutte.

Je kunt dus zeggen dat Nederland een industrie terrein is, en dat de regering de bedrijfsleiding is. Dat burgers door oa Stef Blok in werkkampen wonen (steden) waar ze uitgeflikkert worden als de industrie hen niet meer nodig heeft. Je kunt stemmen wat je wil maar aangezien de door de industrie gespekte media de burgers zuur heeft gemaakt tav hun eigen verstand, de zogenaamde verrechtsing en aangezien mensen graag in het werkkamp Amsterdam, Rotterdam etc. wonen met mooie levens etc. Is ook elke burger deels mens deels lijfeigen. Gek genoeg geeft dat voldoening en die is ook terrecht, want we willen ons graag nuttig voelen en een bijdrage leveren aan deze maatschappij. Echter het winstbejag van banken verpest de boel, want banken zijn nooit verzadigd en ze zijn sterk voor fossiele energie (centrale opwekking mag ook) want ze leven van cashflow. Ook industrie probeert voordurend geld weg te kapen bij de ‘nuttelozen’. Links vertegenwoordigt in hun ogen de niet bezittende klasse die ook wat wil. “Werk er maar voor!” Zeggen ze dan.

Waar sociale partijen het meest over klagen is dat er geen rekening gehouden wordt met mensen en hun dromen en wensen. Wel als er munt uit geslagen kan worden (aan de universiteiten) maar niet als ze werkend zijn in de industrie. Ook wordt er geen rekening gehouden met de gevolgen van vervuiling. Dit komt voornamelijk doordat er geen verband is tussen veel activiteiten, en omdat detectie en handhaving ook mensenwerk is. Maar vervuiling vindt ook plaats omdat dat de enige manier is om winstgevend te zijn, en dan gebeurt het omdat banken en bedrijven hun cashflow willen behouden. De fatalistische houding is een die veel geld op brengt. Als voorbeeld : IndustrieTerreinNL dumpte decennia lang zijn giftig afval in bunkerolie die op zeeschepen werd verbrand. Nelie Smit Kroes heeft daar nog bij geholpen in de 80er jaren. Wie op de klimaat catastrofe durft aan te stormen is momenteel de lieveling van banken en industrie : Rijdt in een SUV, vlieg veel, eet veel vlees en wil vooral heeel rijk worden. Dan ben je een “horse chomping at the bit”. Een goede werker in WerkkampNL.

Wat kun je hier aan doen? Dit is niet in details uit te leggen. Elke voorgestelde specifieke aanpak zal worden tegengewerkt want rechtse mensen kunnen dit ook lezen. We zien vandaag al dat FvD een leger lijkt te willen mobiliseren, daarmee voor zijn op linkse mensen die zoiets wel zouden willen, een revolutie starten. Wat gaat een leger van Baudet doen? Helemaal geen klap want het zijn wannabe’s die in een grachtenpand willen wonen. Tips om IndustrieTerreinNL en WerkKampNL meer naar je hand te zetten kun je vinden in mijn post Easy Antifa over hoe je antifascist kunt zijn zonder zwarte kleren te dragen of je door ME in elkaar te laten slaan op het Malieveld..

Waardeer je dit stuk? Wordt Patreon

A Question For Economists : How to reliably create wealth using renewables


Join our supporters! and Check our twitter account

There is a real conundrum showing up in our economy as renewables become cheaper to deploy and capacity grows : the cost of renewable energy drops. In Holland wind energy can have negative prices at times where there is strong wind but no demand (and there’s still a bunch of fossil power plants online). -200 Euro per Megawatt. Like negative interest rates you get payed to use the energy.

Wealth = energy x skills x raw materials (notice money is not in this formula)

Economists, analysts and right wing politicians view this as a problem. Banks say “how can we invest in Wind if we don’t know if its going to be able to pay its interest!” and for this reason some say that the number of new renewable energy projects will go down. This seems to be a mistake, but you won’t find any attempt to puncture the appearance of ‘worthless’ renewable energy anywhere in a world still dominated by fossil energy.

The problem comes from the fact that fossil energy is its own storage medium, while renewable electricity from wind or solar is not. Renewable energy will have to be used when it is generated. Therefore an overproduction of fossil energy only leads to a tanker full of fuel, while overproduction of renewables means the energy is lost forever.

It isn’t even the price that is low it is the fact a price is made at all, this makes it clear what demand is, and at some times the demand is so low that it seems you will have to pay to get rid of your renewable energy. Of course a wind turbine can be shut off and a solar park shut down. But the energy hits the market because there is another motive to produce it : To replace fossil energy. Part of the surplus and negative prices is a result of stubborn self interest of owners of fossil energy generation (gas or coal fired power plants) who should make way for clean energy.

Nobody seems to care about this motive however. What is puzzling to me is why manufactureres and so many other industrial businesses don’t protest the waste of wealth potential caused by the resistence of the fossil owned financial system to renewables. Always calling them intermittent and wasting the surplus energy by not adapting or including storage in the system. This is pure power politics. Once renewable energy is treated like energy to use with priority the game of fossil and of the fossil economy is over.

Economists can not be expected to think about this and produce a clear strategy to maximize wealth creation from renewables (a goal I think should be on everybodies mind) because they have always been lakeys and marketeers of the fossil credit system. Economists will always disagree with this charactetrization because it blows their cover and exposes their racket. They know they are full of BS, but they want to keep talking to learn how to hide it from you! The fossil economy is unsustainable. Growth is just a borrowed word from our farming heritage, what they mean is fossil credit cashflow expansion. This in turns means banks have more power over your life.

What we need, now and in the future, is the stuff we need. We need bread, shelter, shows, clothes etc. Those have to be made and that production requires energy. There is no difference between bread from an gas heated oven or one from a solar electricity heated oven. Therefore when it comes to bread the price of solar energy should be at least the same as gas energy to the baker. Maybe you feel where I am going? If the market prices energy negatively while the energy in use is equivalent to its competitors than maybe the market is the problem, not the energy type.

The challenge is to store renewables for those that produce wealth. The system pretends to know too little of what happens to the energy that is bought to fix the waste of renewable surpluss. As a result investment in renewables could drop while in fact it is near free wealth potentialIf you redefine your economists calling from being a fossil credit economy advocate to being a societal wealth maximization engineer, what would you advise? It seems to require real physical investment and action to maximize utilization of renewable energy for wealth. It is clear simple low cost storage of energy so that it remains useable is certainly a way to break apparent decline in value. What are your ideas?

Mine :

  1. Heat gravel in rail trains and transport the heat to where it is usefull
  2. Cool water in rail trains and transport the cold to where it is usefull
  3. Deliver the energy to homes to heat a heat store underground, or cool a cold store
  4. Store it as compressed air
  5. Run a cable down shipping lanes so ships can use the electricity to help their ships cooling or heating or propulsion (based on hydrogen or ammonia)