Bitcoin Forum

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hello, my name is R and this lovely piece of technology -- Bitcoin -- has just been brought to my attention.

A money, a store-of value for the people and truly by the people. Excellent. It seems we have taken one step against those who agress against us. I wish to take it another step further:

We need to rid this world of all thieves, aggressors and murderers through incentive, incentive defined by ours truly, Bitcoin. This incentive standarized by a lovely listing of all agressors small and large with a price on their heads, with either the request of the inhibition of their activities or total termination.

I will be sharing more about my future and initial creation gradually. All I ask is that if you're interested, speak.

Uncompromising love,

R

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREKAAYFAk4cwFQACgkQhINmdj5KVnHzVgEA4tFVom1JCouZYgt4RjIPYB8z
pakNfkNE9Sdjsyvww/kA/1C0FSilsZl4UkD0CU9CLh2+DpgkvHfqNi9eOzQsE6CJ
=Bjye
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Interesting views.

What is your profile picture? I can't quite make it out.

Where are P, L, and U? :P

Love.

Define?

i don't get it.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Think of another decentralized system. This time its (natural) law enforcement. In other words, a comprehensive list of criminals our society wants gone paid for by Bitcoin with no inhibition.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREKAAYFAk4cxqIACgkQhINmdj5KVnF03QEA1/g3nXtj6naODvA2nZTuP6wo
KJDMdo735eoAgdYGZhoA/imDwdrg9RiBdce/7QBs5ftMXxIP0DAOhyeT1RNxxYtf
=j1qw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary.
Mahatma Gandhi, 'Satyagraha Leaflet No. 13,' May 3, 1919

Be careful what you wish for, given the potential of bitcoin you can be sure there are unfriendly eyes watching, waiting, and making lists.

Welcome to the community

In other words: vigilante justice. By a mob. Dark age, here we go again.

Get on skype. Also, interesting, R. Best of luck.

If the mob is full of regular people, I'm sure it will be just as good (if not better) than the justice we have now.

Sure thing.
If the witch hunt is performed by regular people, that's ok.
If the dictator is just a nice guy, that's okay.
If the majority is behind it, that's okay.

Sarcasm aside, I can hardly think of anything more sickening than vigilante justice. History proves me right. Bottom line.

For what its worth, when you take away all legal means to affect the system when change is needed, you essentially mandate that illegal means will be used because they are all that is available.  As the system breaks down, it'll likely happen.... Doesn't have to be that way, but it's a choice our collective world leaders have to make, not you and I.

Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will.
Mahatma Gandhi

What is our current form of our justice? Why is it so righteous?

Who defines the law?

Look it up: Rule of Law.

It may be a little hard to understand, but your question just makes no sense.

If you insist on an answer, I suggest "A Theory of Justice" by John Rawles, just to get your feet wet.

If we were going to throw books at each other, I would have gone to /lit/.

I'll rephrase: Who determines the laws that govern our society?

Humor the conversation.

There are two of those, though.

I'll rephrase as well: in reply to me pointing at the Rule of Law, your question is a (probably unintentional) straw man argument.
Both, "who" and "what" are not applicable.

I would love to get into lengths about Rule of Law, but right now i'm typing on an ipad, which is unfortunately not well suited for such a task.

To get you started, i'll just quote from wikipedia, but strongly advise you to read the full article:

How does R's system not follow the Rule of Law?

Quoting from him:

I would accept that as a definition of arbitrary rule of majority.
Which is contrary to the Rule of Law.

...but isn't such an ideal only dependent on the majority being proponents? If the majority does not uphold this entity then what value does it have?

If it inherently does, shouldn't R's system follow?

There is no excuse or rationale for violence except in defense of ones self or ones family, and I mean from direct, imminent, physical harm.

We have right on our side, so all we have to do is tell the truth. 

Heres another one for you

It can, and it usually has disastrous effects.

I'm not going any deeper into this, as it will inevitably lead to fullfilling Godwin's law.