No Such lAbs (S.NSA), Statement on Q2 2019
Note : this statement also covers the month of March 2019.
| S.NSA incoming and outgoing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incoming | Outgoing | |||
| Description | Value | Description | Value | |
| New orders | 0.0 | --- | 0.0 | |
| Total | 0.0 | Total | 0.0i | |
| S.NSA assets | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Account | 01.03.2019 | Net change | 30.06.2019 |
| Cash | 434.32844813 | 0.0 | 434.32844813 |
| Tangibles | 2.47419727 | 0.0 | 2.47419727 |
| Intangibles and goodwill | 30.26784266 | 0.0 | 30.26784266 |
| Total assets | 467.07048806 | ||
| S.NSA liabilities | |||
| Account | 01.03.2019 | Net change | 30.06.2019 |
| Shareholder equity | 467.3602423 | 0.0 | 467.07048806 |
| Total liabilities | 467.07048806 | ||
S.NSA has a total of 4`737`075 authorised shares outstanding. The total assets per share implied value is thus 0.00009851 BTC. The cash+tangible assets per share implied value is thus 0.00009272 BTC.
S.NSA has Special Stock Warrants outstanding issued as per the IPO agreement, as follows :
| # | Fingerprint | Shares | BTC | Par |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 17215D118B7239507FAFED98B98228A001ABFFC7 | 3`315`952 | 331.5952 | 1 |
| 2 | 6160E1CAC8A3C52966FD76998A736F0E2FB7B452 | 1`421`122 | 142.1122 | 1 |
| T | 4`737`074 | 473.7074 | 1 |
The "more disciplined manner" promised back in February yet failed to materialize -- for this long (ie, 4 month) quarter we have to show FFA ch 19 (published on June 1st), three chunks of the 18th chapter (published on March 29th, April 15th and May 31st), and Ch 17 (published on March 17th). Empirically and retrospectively the item appears to have settled on a more-or-less bi-monthly schedule, especially if you don't think May is a real month, but of course this did not happen either sanely or through anyone's deliberate anything. It just happened, like pregnancies do in the wild, we're all a bunch of retarded cavemen sitting around and waiting, who knows, maybe something comes out ? Maybe not ?
I don't see any way out of the conundrum. By the book I should simply fire Stan and hire someone else to do the work ; but the whole company is predicated on it doing Stan's work "whatever it may be", so what the hell sense does that make ? I suppose the true lesson here is that one shouldn't structure companies in this wayii ; and in time close this one down.
Fundamentally, the problem with intelligent people is that their flaws are unfixable -- were they fixable they'd have fixed them by now, and since they didn't fix them before they're not gonna start at any later point, and certainly not because they like you or something.
It'd therefore seem that practically speaking the outside limit of Bitcoin venture capialismiii would be, on one hand, technology firms that never keep any kind of schedule, bumbling from this to that as accidentally as you like, and certainly defying the point of even calling the effort anything in particular ; and on the other hand infrastructural firms that will not get themselves a customer acquisition process for love or money, however threatened or incentivized, just will not do it -- and that's about it.
The thing is eminently not going anywhere, as it currently finds itself. It's in a rut, and there it stays, the "give it a little see maybe it unwedges" had not only plenty of time but rather all the time we can possibly give it before we're all dead. There's evidently something we must do here, I just have no idea what -- a problem drastically compounded by the sad fact that the rut is at least stable. One certainly can't go broke with 0 account movement, it's definitionally impossible (but then again, distinguishing a company that went broke from one with no movement is rather difficult a task) ; whereas most fiat concerns are rendered improfitable precisely by the chasing of movement on the part of top management.
To sum up : the "eternal life" properly kept books seem to promise is an illusion. Yes Bitcoin is forever, and yes correctly managed Bitcoin companies can't possibly ever go bankrupt. But this does not mean anything about eternity, because ships are still just boards, and men are still just men, and we gotta blow our loads before we're dead, after's too late.
Wut do ?
———- I understand this no-movement seems improbable, but it's actually the case, what can I say. [↩]
- But hey, at least now we know why not, which is some kind of benefit, I guess. [↩]
- We're not talking here of the whole gamut of scams, from "unintentional" works of the moronically enthusiastic to the "intentional" works of the thieves-met-morons. Those can just stay on tardstalk where they belong, they're no part of Bitcoin like, apparently, almost nothing is.
Certainly the attempt to bolt business to the coin is not doing all that splendidly so far. [↩]
Sunday, 30 June 2019
http://trilema.com/2019/no-such-labs-snsa-statement-on-q2-2019/#selection-437.0-437.272 - while I can see the point of this from a very practical point of view, there is the obvious fact that all fixed faults were "not fixed" at some earlier point in time. Presumably just as they did in the end find a way to fix those faults then, they can also fix the still-existing faults at a later time and the order of fixing is more likely to do with the moment when one or another fault became fixable for them as it were. So it's more a matter of when/how to move towards making those faults fixable, not that such a thing is easy.
Sunday, 30 June 2019
I see you are holding a bunch of cash, and you have a long list of projects waiting for attention. Is there a reason you can't use the cash to pay yourself for some engineering time to get these projects moving?
Sunday, 30 June 2019
``Fundamentally, the problem with intelligent people is that their flaws are unfixable -- were they fixable they'd have fixed them by now, and since they didn't fix them before they're not gonna start at any later point, and certainly not because they like you or something.''
This is akin to saying that intelligent people cannot possibly learn, their intellect is in the way. Evidence suggests there is such a thing as gaining new insights.
``I don't see any way out of the conundrum. By the book I should simply fire Stan and hire someone else to do the work ; but the whole company is predicated on it doing Stan's work "whatever it may be", so what the hell sense does that make ? I suppose the true lesson here is that one shouldn't structure companies in this wayii ; and in time close this one down.''
This is a framing problem, where the company is put before the employee, except it is explicitly structured the other way around. The way out here is not look at the company.
The crux of the matter seems to be a communication problem. As well as someone's vindicative streak masquerading as executive-ness. You probably needn't start with burning bridges just yet. Could do worse than thinking about chiefs and indians first.
Monday, 1 July 2019
@Diana Coman Yeah, and do you happen to remember what the process involved was, in "finding a way" ?
The principal problem of management is that it consists in using what works, irrespective of what you think of it.
@PeterL Simply put, the fact that you can spend it but once.
@Chief Fetters Wtf is a vindictive streak ? You can't just make up words as you go along, you realise that, do you ?
In any case -- intelligent people do have a very hard time learning, specifically because their intellect is in the way. This much is a fact. Yet, hard time or no hard time, of the crooked timber of humanity no straight thing was ever made, which also covers this. So no, the perfect brain-dam to learning has not yet crawled out of woman either, there's leakage from phenomenology into gnoseology, at precisely the rate no amount of flailing hopelessly can possibly prevent.
Now who the hell do you take yourself for, to place "crux of the matter" and "you can do worse" in your spurious missives to me ? The republic's an organized world, not some kind of equalitarian messpie.
Wednesday, 3 July 2019
You can always hire a girl to pretend and fall in love with your brilliant but flawed engineers. People can do crazy shit for "love", sometimes even work on their flaws.
Friday, 5 July 2019
Dude is probably trying to talk about Daniel P Barron's recent negrating in more general terms. So that it sounds as important as he feels it is. You know how this goes.
Friday, 5 July 2019
Yes, of course I know how this goes. Pantsuit sees self as part-owner on my shit, because it's good shit, and therefore partly his, pantsuit logic 101.
Who ever heard of the very simple and very banal "you don't maintain your relationship with me -- I won't maintain my relationship with you ; and unlike your piddly case, I actually matter in your world" ? Oh, no, that'd be... like inequality! and capitalism fascism! and practically speaking rape. Let's talk about Bayesian bullshit instead hurr durr & blablabla.
Whatever.
@Antonymousse Stop begging, and go away.
Friday, 5 July 2019
Updated for some minor clerical errors.
Monday, 15 March 2021
Ok merci beaucoup