These two statements contradict each other, so it seems you are the fool.

Make up your mind, it's either a good investment or its not.

When localized fiat scrip is dead and buried.

"The prices on those markets are way above market rates"

What, are you some clueless noob who bought this hero account on ebay? Please let me know if you did so I can put you on ignore. I don't suffer fools.

Mine aren't for sale. I recommend Mycelium, localbitcoins.com, and coinbase.com

I'm gonna take the risk of a public prediction, cause I like studying patterns:



All of this has happened before.

He's not. Falling is a false prophet. Unlike me.



All of this has happened before.

Someone hasn't been paying attention to where we are in the pattern. Here, let me help you:

I checked out that Bitcoinbeauties website, and I'm trying to figure out if those girls are bitcoin prostitutes. Considering one of them has no information other than her pics, my suspicion is yes.

This whole scheme reeks of a way to catch a few dumb lonely bitcoin whales, lure them to a tropical island, and bleed them of as much wealth as possible.

On the blockchain, the concept of "ownership" does not apply.

Think of the blockchain as a huge series of glass safety deposit boxes, transparent but impenetrable. Anyone on the planet can go visit these boxes, see what's inside, and even make a deposit to any box (blockchain address) they choose.

However, the glass itself is invulnerable to attack. You either have the keys to a particular box (address) or you don't. The vast majority of boxes (addresses) has only one or two sets of keys, privately held.

But that may change, in time... in fact I predict it will as we eventually transition to a post-capitalism society.

You did actually, but I will forgive the mistake since clearly your mastery over the English language is somewhat lackluster.

Anyway, I bet you would change your tune if you were renting an apartment in some building, and some rich guy came along and bought your building, and served you an eviction notice the next month because he wants to bulldoze your slum and rebuild luxury condos which you cannot afford.

Shout out to any New Yorkers out there...

I'd bet it's not so tangential to the people who had jackbooted thugs storm their house because they downloaded a dozen or two songs from Napster in the early 2000s.

I'd bet it's also not so tangential to the political prisoners rotting in jail for the "crime" of piracy:



Your statement:

...carries with it the implication that all current owners of property paid for it, but in fact many owners of property (and wealth) inherited. A good deal of modern wealth in the South can be traced directly back to slavery.

So you must forfeit your entire argument unless you agree that all forms of inheritance should be abolished as unethical.

You also fail to see that this sort of violence for control of property is happening all over the world, right now as we speak.

So from this is it safe to assume you are for abolishing all forms of inheritance (property and wealth) and redistributing all those resources equally whenever someone dies?

Only because we invented our way (via the torrent) out of the deathgrip of copyright law. Less than a decade ago the copyright thugs were storming homes and arresting people for having pirated music on their hard drives. Remember that?

I assure you all the victims of that hideous violence-for-greed do.

Read about Pierre Joseph Proudhon, the first self-described "anarchist". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft!

Nothing, as long as you won't send men to do violence against me when I share your ebook on the pirate bay for free. Agreed?

Profit is a filthy word, wherever there is profit there is also deficit. Wherever there is profit, there is exploitation, there is pollution, there is violence.

In my opinion, your right to pursue profit ends with poisoning your neighbor's water supply, landbase, or air.

It most certainly ends at exploiting your fellow human beings, robbing them of the fruits of their labor for your personal gain.

And if you follow the trends of social evolution, my view will prevail sooner or later. Otherwise we'd still have slavery.

If I could answer this question I'm sure I would have won a nobel peace prize by now, my friend.

You know, for decades computer scientists regarded the Byzantine General's problem as unsolvable. Then one day in 2009 Satoshi Nakamoto came along and solved it. And Bitcoin was born.

That is how things go, problems often seem unsolvable right up until the day they are solved. So it goes with political systems. I'm not some political genius who will solve all the world's problems with the stroke of a pen.

I'm just a young man with a knack for studying history, calling it like I see it. And the way I see it, capitalism is already finished. A dead thing walking.

The Earth and all its bounties are the birthright of all living things. To set aside a portion for you and only you, that is the birth of theft - and murder too.

All property owned today can be traced back through history to one violent act or another.

By condoning the rights of property owners today, you retroactively condone every violent act that led to the property rights you are protecting.

You cannot on one hand protect property rights and on the other condemn violence. They are one in the same, you are contradicting yourself.

If you accept property rights than you accept violence. To arrest me for killing someone to gain their property for myself is hypocrisy of the highest order, do you see?

Capitalism IS violence. It always has been. Anyone who studies history can see it, clear as crystal.

Nope. The internet makes many aspects of capitalism obsolete, such as copyright law and the concept of digital "property". The internet, like Bitcoin, is anarchistic in nature.

No country; the internet most closely mirrors my ideals

Why must you over-simplify every intellectual discussion?

It's not "libertarian vs socialist". It's a two dimensional grid, a spectrum of social and economic perspectives.



Here, take the test and see where you fall on the spectrum. I'm in the far bottom left corner.

Here, watch this for a minute or two, it should clear things up nicely.

The new political system I would support would be DIFFERENT from capitalism in that it would NOT:

-Pillage and poison our planet
-Generate inequality
-Foster monopolies of power
-Foster exploitation or human trafficking
-Depend upon structural violence for its continued existence

These are all problems inherent to the profit motive. Capitalism is the crisis, you see?