BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//InvisionCommunity Events 5.0.18//EN METHOD:PUBLISH CALSCALE:GREGORIAN REFRESH-INTERVAL:PT15M X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT15M X-WR-CALNAME:RMCommunityCalendar NAME:RMCommunityCalendar BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Europe/London TZURL:https://tzurl.org/zoneinfo/Europe/London X-LIC-LOCATION:Europe/London BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20260329T020000Z RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20261025T020000Z RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT SUMMARY:Economic Corner 47 10/09/2026 DTSTAMP:20261009T155124Z SEQUENCE:0 UID:899-7-c3fe8195a3dde498d013e477e2142422@aalbc.com ORGANIZER;CN="richardmurray":noreply@aalbc.com DESCRIPTION:From the web to the world\, the following are my comments in a post from Troy HIS ARTICLE https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12912-a-search-en gine-you-have-to-consider/ MY COMMENTS https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12912-a- search-engine-you-have-to-consider/#findComment-83635 In all earnest\, the web directory is the best model\, it isn't just keywords relating to cont ent but also the quality of the website. the web search does away with the quality standard. https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12912-a-search-engine-you-ha ve-to-consider/#findComment-83643 @admin\n\n19 hours ago\, admin said:\nDi rectories definitely had their time but the problem with them is they simp ly don’t scale.\n\nIT is interesting\, I argue\, the directory developer s were not good programmers. Like many systems\, from email to directories to large language models that are the basis for the commonly called AI th e programmers were and are poor. Everything they create is speed based but not efficient based\, andI do comprehend that working for the private sec tor with the investment firms constantly hounding for what they are owed a side the publicly traded mechanism who are filled with those constantly ho unding for increased revenue\, this falls upon programmers to be focused o n speed over efficiency\, sequentially the search engine is preferred over the directory.\n\nBut I think the directories needed smarter algorithms.\ n\nThe question is why didn't web directories scale?\n\nThe reason why is the web directories weren't designed to let their usage have a role to pla y in the categorization. For example\, the internet was flooded with websi tes \, from humans or non humans\, at a high speed secondly\, as the inter net has global usage at all hours\, sequentially having a manual categoriz ation even with twenty four hour cycles will never keep up with the rate o f creation\, what you say is a failure to scale. But\, i see it as a simpl y problem of categorixzation. They could had inputted the uncategorized we bsites in the directory in an expansive category designed to grow but not to be rated. So\, all the websites online are in. Then\, let the users of the directory dictate the quality rating. How so? for example\, when someo ne types\, an authors name\, the website of the author will not be in the rated category if it was just put in a half hour before the query. but if it is in the unrated category\, the directory can simply state it doesn't have a rated directory entry for the author and then display best search c ase\, based on the index words for the website. And then if a user clicks it\, it gets a positive search rating but not a quality rating.\n\nThus th e directory will have two segments\, rated + unrated\, the rated is curate d\, tested\, proven\, assured\, grown manually. The unrated is grown progr amattically\, but all of its entries are rated with the lowest value and o nly vary from each other by traffic usage\, and when one reaches a certain quality of traffic it will be tested onto the rated segment.\n\nThis way the scaling aspect you and other speak about happens while the quality of the directory isn't diminished. All it requires is a modulating algorithm which can be adjusted for various factors to qualify when one from the unr ated can be brought into the rated.\n\nWhat is my final argument? yes\, th e internet has tons of many different websites and addresses but i argue\, most of them or at least 99% of websites or webpages \, do not warrant be ing placed into a rated directory\, by quality of the page or website or t he traffic to said site or page.\n\nBut again\, I Comprehend the larger pr oblem with my strategic approach.\n\nsearch engine optimization from the s earch engines allows for two key financial aspects\, one people can pay fo r better rating in the optimization and two the influence of low quality s ocial media content on wealthy websites can push through search engine opt imization.\n\nMy directory system as i described has a manual system for t he best content\, and places the rest as available but ranked equally\, no matter their quality which doesn't allow for businesses to pay for a bett er rating or position in the directory\, and thus losses the financial ave nue that the search engine optimization provides.\n\n19 hours ago\, admin said:\nAI did exactly the same thing.\, but at scale. Again\, AI will gut the Internet. Steal from all types of content from creators\, artists\, wr iters\, musicians\, you name it monetize or and never compensate the origi nal creators.\n\nI know artists who had work stolen by humans so the compu ter programs called ai\, designed to scrape and use simply do it faster Bu t\, when you say monetize\, you mean the humans or some humans are getting ai money. ai's don't actually monetize right? are you suggesting AI's hav e bank accounts? Even if AI's do\, what do they do with their money?\n\n19 hours ago\, admin said:\nThe bullshit lawsuits won’t do a damn thing to stem the tide.\n\nlawsuits aren't bullshit\, don't knock the power of law suits and in modernity all countries including the china's and russia's of the world have legal systems even though many in the usa don't seem to th ink they do. The lawsuits may not manipulate the programs but they will ma nipulate the firms that made or operate the programs and that will lead to an interesting thing. This is why the AI firms want protection\, they wan t protection because even if computer programs can't go to court\, the hum ans who made them or their owners can and they can lose everything in cour t. Remember\, the Social media firms got away with that nonsense\, the fed eral government gave them a protection from lawsuit cause it was coming an d i argue should had occurred.\n\n@ProfD\n\n8 hours ago\, ProfD said:\nThe objective under capitalism is to make as much money as possible by any me ans necessary.😎\n\nYes\, but I wish we all would also add that the usa is taking away the risk element. One part of fiscal capitalism is making m oney by nay means necessary The Other part and I Argue most important in m odernity is the losing property or other valuables when one fails to make money.\n\nFrom 1990 to 2026 we have all witnessed the entire banking indus try collapse\, the entire real estate industry collapsed three times i thi nk\, the entire automotive industry collapsed\, the airline industry hasn' t recovered since pan am was lawsuited out of existence\, the arms makes l ike boeing and lockheed martin are all bankrupt. All the major industries in the usa are bakrupt. the film industry and entertainment industry is ba nkrupt\, thus all the mergers. Now all of these industries have been saved by discretionary policy but discretionary policy isn't fiscal capitalism. Discretionary policy as used in the usa isn't about fiscal capitalims but macroeconomics. And the usa is showing that regardless of fiscal capitali stic quality\, since all of the industries in the usa have failed complete ly within my lifetime\, a macroeconomic protectionism \, in terms of bailo uts/monetary injections or other similars \, all supported by a militarist ic quality \, which the usa doesn't have the ability to extend\, allows fo r negative fiscal capitalistic quality to be protected.\n\nyes\, kill peop le for their land\, enslave other people for cheapest labor... yes\, by an y means necessary. But what people miss today is the safety net.\n\nUnwarr anted macroeconomic protectionism keeps the fiscal capitalistic activity i n the usa organized\, notice i didnt' say positive or negative\, regardles s of its fiscal capitalistic quality in the USA.\n\nto me Unwarranted Macr oeconomic protectionism is the correct label for the usa today\, to sugges t the usa is acting as fiscal capitalistic I argue is unwarranted when all the industries have failed or are failing in modern memory. Fiscal capita lism isn't just making as much money as possible it is losing money when y ou fail to make money\, it is others buying your assets when you go bankru pt. That is important you know. When black people were enslaved\, whites i n the usa went bankrupt and other whites would buy what other whites forme rly owned. I just dont see how the industries in the usa are making money. I Argue they all are in the red\, and are simply being propped up by welf are checks.\n\nUnwarranted Macroeconomic protectionism is keeping the orga nization\, the haves and have nots\, financial alignment of the various de mographs consistent in the usa. But unwarranted macroeconomic protectionis m is not fiscal capitalism. I argue it is a monarchic system \,and monarch ic systems are not about money but military power. And human history prove s that little countries can have far better fiscal capitalistic quality th an bigger countries\, ala holland next to its peers in europe\, but those bigger peers are still stronger militaristically and that militaristic mig ht has its own influence. But I repeat that power is not a symbol of fisca l capitalism \, simply a symbol of militaristic power. https://aalbc.com/t c/topic/12912-a-search-engine-you-have-to-consider/#findComment-83650 @Pro fD\n\n3 hours ago\, ProfD said:\nThe economists know exactly what &\; h ow to keep the USA propped up.\n\nThe government keeps printing money & \; moving the goal line on its debt.\n\nIf any creditor decides to call in the markers\, the USA has the military might to strongly suggest they tak e a hike.🀣😎\n\nbut this is my point\,\n\nthe economist dont\, the fi scal capitalist have failed. Your suggesting the economist have value but I don't see any evidence of that.\n\nthe macroeconomic proteciton that the government provides through the power of the military is the only potent part.\n\nFor me\, the military and the government are the real system. And if anything the government and military have the power to and need to dem and a change that the fiscal capitalist clearly are unable to do on their own. the people you call economist are to me the true welfare mothers whit es falsely claimed black women were.\n\nWe both see how the usa is operate s but you give value to the economist while I view the economist as a dysf unctional aspect that the government + military will have to eventually ge t rid of or change in potent ways. https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12912-a-sear ch-engine-you-have-to-consider/#findComment-83653 @ProfD\n\n5 hours ago\, ProfD said:\nSomewhere between the Federal Reserve playing with interest r ates &\; the stock market turning folks into millionaires &\; billio naires\, seems like aome fiscal capitalists are allowed to thrive &\; s urvive.\n\nI concur some/many are thriving or surviving but are they fisca l capitalist or simply nepo babies? Are they merely people who are inherit ing a position of wealth. Many government officials are related to former government officials. many athletes are related to former athletes.\n\n5 h ours ago\, ProfD said:\nThe question is who or what is going to bring that house of cards to collapse.😎\n\nthe trillion dollar question.\n\nThe o ne thing is certain is the usa military is the primary engine of this syst em\, not fiscal capitalist or financial marketeers or government guidance or laws.\n\nand the usa military has a dual problem\, it doesnt have the l egal right to manipulate the government but clearly its role is the key to the usa's fianncial condition. to be blunt\, the usa military can protect the usa while all the business [whole industries or individual firms] tha t the government bailed out in the last thirty years were allowed to go ba nkrupt and all their assets put up for auction. But as long as the militar y of the usa protects it but doesn't demand better fiscal capitalism or be tter government\, the private sector + goveernment sector will continue th eir failing and bailing ways.\n\nAnd the usa military is looking more and more impotent in protecting international places. if the usa can't use its force to manipulate the world's governments they will force an action aga inst the usa\n\nhttps://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12912-a-search-engine-you-have- to-consider/#findComment-83685@Troy\n\n19 hours ago\, Troy said:\nOK so wh o determines what is the \"best\" content? Who anoints them? Are they volu nteers? Volunteerism does not scale and if they are paid the money must co me from somewhere\, then we are back to the same problem we are in now...\ n\nI will restate what I wrote\, the directory i suggest has two tiers \, the top tier is manual\, the bottom tier is programmed.. The top tier chec ks entries based on popularity fro teh bottom tier but only accepts based on a quality review. So the bottom tier is based purely on popularity done by computer program and with adding quality labels things that are highly viewed can still be given a low quality which will flesh out the bottom t ier.\n\n19 hours ago\, Troy said:\nI dunno\, but following your logic they can use the money to secure more resources and manipulate humans.\n\nInte resting\, I don't see how you come to that destination from my logic but o k\n\n19 hours ago\, Troy said:\nYes\, you've made my point \;-)\n\nyes\, t he protections is why they got away BUT laws can change to and metoo has s hown something else that people aren't thinking about in the future\, laws may become more retroactive. in nature in the future which is uncommon fo r the usa\, usa historically generates laws that dont allow retroactive ap plication based on the heritage of whites wanting to get away with enslavi ng + terrorizing black people but... I ponder.\n\n19 hours ago\, Troy said :\nHubris reflecting being raised in this country. But I guess it really d epends on how long you think you will be around and what metric(s) you are basing you rankings.\n\nyour point to measures is key\, being a super pow er is a military distinction which is fully warranted by the usa\, but the problem is when many people\, and I add profd to this speak of superpower they tend to attach alot of other aspects that to me are unfounded\, the usa is fiscally crap. it isn't planned well\, the government is crap. the fiscal environment is the weakest power\, the government is the weakest po wer\, but the military is the sole superpower. And yes\, like the roman em pire whose last age capitoled in nova roma was quite long but was in truth based on their military strength which eventually waned\, their governmen t\, their fiscal quality was negative that whole time.\n\n@ProfD\n\n19 hou rs ago\, ProfD said:\nMy idea of collapse is the USA no longer being the m ost powerful nation on the planet.\n\nAs a Super-Power\, I do not foresee the USA sliding into 2nd or 3rd place within our lifetime.😎\n\nthe usa is the most powerful government in the college of human governments but on ly militaristically and that is what I keep trying to explain to you . fis cally the usa is done man. the fiscal environment in the usa is a bunch of welfare recipients who masquerade as free market capitalist\, when in tru th they are props for a government that is a welfare state with the milita ry that allows the ledger dysfunction to be righted by non fiscal capitali stic means.\n\nAnd to superpowerdom the usa has a deeper problem\, china d oesn't want to be one\, nor does the european union. The usa has wanted ch ina to have a war for the top chair but china realizes\, correctly\, that being second is better than first. the chinese government is the governmen t no other government in humanity can do without\, including the usa\, whi ch the usa itself stupidly but expectedly as a white country set up. But\, looking at the usa\, why would china want to be number 1? to get into war s? china already has control over its economy\, even russia has a level of control over itself that is superior to what any other country in europe has. China has a space station all on its own\, the usa has never had a sp ace station all on its own. the iss is a joint project between russia and the usa. This is why the isolationist movement is growing in the usa\, eve n though the internalization movement is growing alongside it in the usa. because of modern international financial activity\, you don't need to be first to be ahead financially\, and the usa proves being the global law en forcer just means a ton of resources spent that give nothing in return rea lly. the afgahn war\, the iraq war\, the vietnam war\, the ...iran war... all these wars are very costly. yes\, the arms dealers love it\, but overa ll none of these wars helped the domestic financial situation in the usa t o a wide effect. Vietnam I argue the usa has never recovered from. yes\, t he usa has gone on but\, I don't think the usa has ever actually helped an y country it has gone in similarly since vietnam. Germany aside western eu rope and japan post world war two\, because of the soviet union were rebui lt and prospered by the usa. south korea was made by the usa post korean w ar but south korea prospered by the usa. but vietnam onwards\, all are hor ror stories. HAiti/Venezuela/Colombia/Iran/Afghanistan/Egypt- with the cou ps from the usa giving the country to its generals/IRan... why would china want to be like the usa. China does business with governments all over th e world but they are not their bullies. It isn't china's fault that many\, more honestly most\, governments throughout humanity are functionally poo r. The only place that chine contest is Taiwan and if you know your histor y the truth is Taiwan should be a part of china proper. Chiang kai shek fl ed to formosa at the end of a war between chinese peoples over the future of china. Taiwan is merely like hong kong or macau \, two other places tha t were always chinese but through the international environment were allow ed to act foreign from china. But\, china hasn't wasted time in wars all o ver the world or in schemes destroying countries all over the world. YUgos lavia is the usa's fault\, its dissolution and all of its parts chaos\, s the usa's fault.\n\nWhy would any intelligent country\, remember\, china h as been led by my fellow engineers not lawyers since the 1980s\, want to b e doing what the usa does? silly .\n\nThe history of empire's shows clearl y most empires spend their last phase of life all military and nothing els e. The usa clearly is in that phase. IF anything china should be frightene d to be number 1 cause they will eventually share the fate of all other em pires.POST URLNot needed\, comments in the referred to postPRIOR EDITIONht tps://aalbc.com/tc/events/event/798-economic-corner-46-08282026/NEXT EDITI ON DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20261009 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1 END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR