Anarchy != chaos.
Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.
Who enforces them? Rules are private, so who do you think? |
|
|
|
I'm sorry but you have been mislead. Anarchy is a society not without rules but witout ruleRs. There certainly are rules in anarchy, it's just that they are private, mandatory, consistent and above all else voluntary(meaning no one is forced to sing a contract to follow those rules and be part of such a society).
Anarchy != chaos.
Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.
anarchy - absence of government
- a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
- absence or denial of any authority or established order
- absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>
I was not talking about a word, I was talking about the real world circumstances. Describe a society with some private, mandatory and consistent rules how ever you like. I only used the word anarchy because most people use that word to describe such a society where there is no central authority and no monopoly on violence i.e. a government. |
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry but you have been mislead. Anarchy is a society not without rules but witout ruleRs. There certainly are rules in anarchy, it's just that they are private, mandatory, consistent and above all else voluntary(meaning no one is forced to sing a contract to follow those rules and be part of such a society).
Anarchy != chaos.
Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.
|
|
|
|
The one and only purpose of anarchy is to enable the creation of a new State. Extended anarchy is bad, and anarchy for anarchy's sake is pure insanity.
Very well said. It has even been proven in real-life situations. What real life situations? Where have we had a society with some private mandatory and consistent rules i.e. an anarchy before?? Btw SR provides a glimpse at what I'm talking about.. so please explain to me how their market place is bad for any of the participants? |
|
|
|
]The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent. Well that's pretty much all I needed to see.  It's sad to see someone as smart and as capable as you clearly are showing as little or no knowledge about how to think rationally and logically about the world. I'm sorry to burst your bubble but I do not consent to being a slave to any person or their invisible friends. Bitcoin doesn't care for the monopolies of violence that are the governments and their laws in the real world and their merely presumed and under threat of violence enforced authority and if we want this to remain a market regulated by strictly us, the market consumers, neither should we. You are not Bitcoin. Neither are you. |
|
|
|
The sad reality is most people are afraid of freedom. Freedom is scary. They may talk about freedom, and being free of the man but the first time something happens (they lose coins) they suddenly don't want freedom. Tainted coin registry is all about control. The "Oh Noes someone got coins they don't deserve WE need to stop them". Honestly it is just one step above chargebacks. I mean if a thief steals 18K from 1 person we should block that via tainted coin registry? What if a scammer steals 18 coins from 1000 people? Why not just implement chargebacks into the protocol to get rid of the need for a taint registry with millions of coins and thousands of participants.
It seems like you haven't taken your argument about freedom far enough. Why shouldn't any accepter of coins be free to track tainted coins? Isn't that their choice? If Mt.Gox want to look for tainted coins and make it harder for the person who deposits them, they should be free to do that. Whether it is a good idea remains to be seen; but just as we don't need an authority telling us some coins are bad, we don't need an authority telling us that all coins are good. To be honest; the bitcoin community seems to be handling these issues as well as is possible. And look: it's happening in an emergent way without diktat, just as we thought it would. Yes freedom indeed does also mean that anyone can decide to not accept certain bitcoins. But they must do so openly in their contract before a client signs up for their service. Anything else is breach of contract and should be resolved accordingly. I can tell you this much, if mtgox does not accept those coins, there are plenty of other exchanges who will. |
|
|
|
Wow.  Also with fiat money you don't have a government made up of luke and his friends that launch crusades against tainted coins I think I need to clarify my position here: - Coins that have theft in their history ("tainted coins") shouldn't be taken out of circulation
- People who knowingly accepted coins they know came from a computer break-in and fraud ("stolen coins") should return them
Says who? You? How can they be sure that what you or anyone else say is stolen is actually stolen? When have the rest of us agreed to your "oughts"? - People who knowingly accept stolen coins and insist they are their own are guilty themselves to some degree
Again how can people be sure what you or anyone else describes is stolen is actually stolen? - I never demanded people return the coins to Bitcoinica or the address I created for them. I politely asked and made it easy for honest people to do so
In a free society with some mandatroy and consistent rules (i.e. anarchy) that's all you can do. - I don't have the authority to prosecute people who don't return stolen coins, or even the original criminal
In a free society with some mandatroy and consistent rules (i.e. anarchy) no one does without a prearranged contract with the party found guilty of a theft. - Tainted coins should be flagged as such, using arbitrary algorithms, for the purposes of finding the criminal
Again, who will make the determination what is a genuine stolen coin and what is not? You? - MtGox and other service providers are justified in requiring additional verification before making withdrawls, if you have deposited a significant amount of tainted coins
Says who, you? Was this specified beforehand in the contract these service providers have with their clients? - The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases
Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent? - Everyone with information on these cases should cooperate with law enforcement's investigation
Says who? You? Why should I? Did I sign a contract I would? - Even confidential information on these cases should be shared with law enforcement after they have followed due process for their jurisdiction
Again says who? You? Why should I? Did I sign a contract I would? Luke I'm deeply disappointed to see such arrogance and presumption of authority over other free people. Bitcoin doesn't care for the monopolies of violence that are the governments and their laws in the real world and their merely presumed and under threat of violence enforced authority and if we want this to remain a market regulated by strictly us, the market consumers, neither should we. There are no guarantees in life, especially not when one has true freedom. That's why man invented insurance. If you are afraid of a theft, insure your belongings, if you can't get insurance, improve your security but don't assume you can punish other free people for your lack of preparation for tackling the risk preemptively. As for the thief, if he is caught prevent him from being part of society until he repays the damages by preventing him from doing any further transactions through his identity. Problem solved. Just please, I beg you and anyone thinking like you, stop supporting that stupid and destructive tyranny that we have in the real world today of slavery and monopolies on violence. |
|
|
|
So you don't think there's going to be QE3, QE4, ect?
maybe, maybe not. what i think is, it won't matter. in fact, i think it will make things worse. deep down market participants know this is a self defeating strategy in the end. And there you go, my bet isn't as much on PM's and Bitcoin as it is on politicians and central bankers doing what they do best and I guess you on the other hand are either undecided or leaning the other way. Time will tell which of us made a better bet. |
|
|
|
|
So you don't think there's going to be QE3, QE4, ect?
|
|
|
|
Who is even deciding they are stolen? Have they been reported stolen to the appropriate police agency in the appropriate jurisdiction? What is the Police Report Number? So people can report reception of stolen coins? Who is the assigned case officer? So the people reporting can talk to the right person.
If no report has been filed, then this is 'self help' in order to retrieve stolen coins. Which could make the people recovering the coins thieves themselves if they haven't dotted the 'i's' and crossed the 't's'.
There will be many DB's of 'Tainted' coins. Some will be updated, some will not be, some will be forgot, so when the coins are returned to a rightful owner there will be a probability that those DB's won't be updated and the coins will be confiscated again from the rightful owner.
Then there will be the issue of why some coins form some businesses get returned but other coins form other businesses don't get returned. It will not be 'equally' enforced which is a problem in of itself. Don't forget, it's impossible for anyone to know whether or not coins that have been stolen, even if decided by a court that the theft actually happened, there's no way to tell if one of the transactions between the theft tx and the tx transferring the coins to you was not the coins being returned to the original owner already and spent again "legitimately". |
|
|
|
Maybe launching a service to facilitate capital flight?
That's the only thing that has any chance of some traction since Bitcoin is so far out of their general population's world view making it extremely hard to accept as valid. But a path to avoid capital controls is surely going be attractive once their government starts limiting people's freedom with their money. |
|
|
|
Very similar to what Antal Fekete says. Strangely, he predicts that gold will skyrocket.
yes, he was the one who alerted me to this dynamic. i went to one of his conferences once in SF. yes, he does think gold will skyrocket. but does he know about Bitcoin? You favor Bitcoin over gold?! |
|
|
|
.....
.....
.....
in conclusion: Broberg's arguments are a straw man and can be viewed in the context of the known problem of Central Banks (esp the Fed) creating moral hazard.
 Wow excellent post, got to handed to you! And I see you have a crystal clear picture of what's going on which is the same picture I see. One question though: but i still wouldn't bet against UST's just yet b/c there is now significant evidence the worldwide economy will be heading into the tank as i have been predicting for a couple of months now. foreign sovereign bonds are failing and provide a hint of what is to come. Why not? What use will the nominal gains have once the bubble pops and the FED steps in to reinflate it destroying the purchasing power of the dollar in the process? Unless you believe they can reinflate and not destroy the dollar?? |
|
|
|
Jesus...
a fool and his money soon part...
Not nice to kick the guy while he's already down...  |
|
|
|
oes anyone know , or have any idea about, his reasoning? Doesn't seem like a rational decision .... Based on his comments on IRC, it seems his intention is to harm Bitcoinica more than anything else. I am sure that not everyone who got bitcoins will return it to Bitcoinica, so it's a clever way to launder bitcoins by giving portion of it to random people. That's what I was thinking. Now he can simply claim he got them donated when the hacker was giving them away.. reasonable doubt established. |
|
|
|
If you KNOW you're accepting stolen cash, you're guilty of a crime. It's a crime according to who? When did I agree this is a crime? Stop imposing your fantasy world of monopolies on violence and the laws of a group of people that call themselves the government on me, KTHXBYE. |
|
|
|
What a waste of time that was. Ty, I was 2min in and paused reading this thread. I closed the tab now. Curiosity got the best of me and I'm actually glad. The video is quite decent and his points have a lot of merit and I suggest people to at least listen to this presentation. Of course he is completely oblivious to the invisible regulations by strictly market consumers (i.e. the free market) and wrongly thinks we must have governmental regulatory tools to avoid volatility which is a shame since I got the feeling he is pretty intelligent. Wow 54:40 guy presents a beautiful counterargument to Kenneth Bromberg's argument that Bitcoin is not a currency because it doesn't have sufficient future value guarantees to which he doesn't have an answer for. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
