IMPROPERLY FORMATTED TITLE.  |
|
|
|
|
You have just pressed kiba's berserk button!
HE DEMANDS PROPER FORMATTING FOR TITLE NOW!
|
|
|
|
yep thats why im calling it for what it is. Self issued credit.
Maybe amazon is a full reserve bank for the purpose of amazon coins. |
|
|
|
This was probably the most important quote from that whole session.
The implications of JUST what that thought means for Bitcoin is huge...
Why is it important? You can't gamble with it, purchase drugs with it, purchase cars with it, etc. |
|
|
|
Saying the "Silk Road" of anything is kind of dumb. Other then the druggies, no one really likes that aspect of bitcoin here. We profit from them, but the drug addicts don't tend to mine and build payments gateways,etc... This forum, I'd like to think, is more about people trying to make money by propagating a future
With that said, I'm sure it would be easy enough to setup any kind of pirate site to charge bitcoin for downloads/memberships. You'd have to really go over the top though, and appeal to tons of niche crowds. I personally wouldn't pay for anything pirated. I still buy my physical copies of mangas.
The whole point of my idea is to align all the interests and bypass anybody who aren't helpful. Manga are left in the dustbin of history, mangaka can't monetize their work, translators only work part time, and so on. Sure, you and others may buy physical copies of the book but it's a hassle. Plus, some of your money also go to printing operations. |
|
|
|
I have an idea for a silkroad version for Asian comics. http://kibabase.com/articles/manga-readersBug reports and criticism are greatly appreciated. Feature requests are not. I am poor at grammar and it will take me a while to get real good at writing paragraphs without making a single grammatical mistakes. So I appreciate grammar nazis. Also, the reason why I won't execute the idea I proposed is that I wrote about the idea without being anonymous, making me an automatic suspect should the enterprise happens. |
|
|
|
I'm wondering how they think they can regulate bitcoin online gambling  It's not about the elimination of all gambling services. it's about the capture of the individuals who run said gambling services. If you're not anonymous and you own a gambling service and is located in the US and is well known where you work....well...you're screwed. It doesn't matter if said gambling services continue to run without ever being shut down. SatoshiDice, I am looking at you. |
|
|
|
|
Ok, I think this turned into a politics. Maybe we can get some moderators to split off the thread?
|
|
|
|
There are a lot of different movements that share the idea that government power is inversely proportional to individual freedom, and they all disagree with each other at a fundamental level. As an example, a libertarian isn't an anarchist. It is true that an anarchist would agree on a lot of points with a libertarian when compared to a socialist, but anarchists and libertarians are still fundamentally opposed in that to first group wants no government whatsoever while the second wants to limit government power.
Anarcho-capitalists are under the libertarianism banner. Anarcho-socialists are definitely not. |
|
|
|
|
Video....YUCK!
Transcript?
|
|
|
|
I agree. I believe that Satoshi had a libertarian background when he designed Bitcoin, but that doesn't make Bitcoin exclusive to libertarians. It's an idea that can connect with all beliefs: a currency that is free, transparent, and secure.
And it allows congresscritters to hide their bribe stash.  |
|
|
|
This section in particular really bugged me. To my understanding, libertarian ideology views the role of the state as protection of the rights of the people. Freedom for individuals to live as they choose as long as they do not bring harm to others. In the author's claim of exchange "[producing] an incentive to cheat, rob, and steal", a libertarian would want the intervention of the state in the manner of protecting the individuals who have been harmed, right?
I get the impression that libertarians see a difference between state intervention and state regulation: the state should intervene when the rights of the individual are in danger; the state should not regulate the behaviors of the individual (unless those behaviors harm others). In short, libertarianism is less about "no government" and more about "government fulfilling its proper role."
Some libertarians are anarchists who saw the state as completely illegitimate. This is the ideology of the Silk Road's operator. If I'm right, then there are two problems with the author's argument: the incorrect presupposition of the argument's foundation (libertarian ideology fueling Bitcoin), and the misrepresentation of that ideology. This is, to me, one of those arguments where the author's mind was made up before he started.
Libertarianism may be the ideology that drives Satoshi to create bitcoin, but we don't know if satoshi is a libertarian. Bitcoin is very appealing to the libertarians though. |
|
|
|
I'm still reading it at the moment, but it feels to me like the author just really does not like libertarians. I'm not a libertarian by any means, but it annoys me that he's linking the entire currency to one political party.  An idealogy. |
|
|
|
The genius behind Bitcoin is that it is not worth attacking when it is small and vulnerable, and it is extremely resilient once it becomes big enough.
Excellent summary of what I feel is the US government's current stance on Bitcoin. In the US, at least, Bitcoin is not big enough of a "problem" for them to waste time and resources on. My hope is that Bitcoin will have shed most of the misconception surrounding its use by the time that it does become big enough for them to deal with. Maybe it'll see acceptance instead of condemnation. Or, at the least, apathy on their part. Do they even know it's there?! Maybe the CIA knows it, or a couple of senators know it...but everyone will be like "What's bitcoin?" |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin will die when we become so rich that we don't need money anymore! Instead, bitcoin will be a retired technology.
|
|
|
|
You know what I liked best about this "critique" of Bitcoin? Its irrelevance. You don't like Bitcoin? It doesn't pass your test for "social justice"? Seems a little too "libertarian"? Well, sorry.
But I'm still gonna use it.
Libertarianism? Who care about that? Bitcoin will succeed and fail on its own merit, not because of a couple of radical fringe of idealogue, although we were the early adopters. |
|
|
|
Libertarian Bitcoin adherents and developers claim that by ‘printing money’ states—via their central banks—devalue currencies and hence deprive their subjects of their assets. They claim that the state’s (and sometimes the banks’) ability of creating money ‘out of thin air’ would violate the principles of free market because they are based on monopoly instead of competition. Complete nonsensical statement. Printing money is not a violation of free market principles. It's just stupid in a market in which currencies are allowed to compete with each other. Fiat currencies like the USD have an overwhelming advantage because it's the only form of money accepted by the government, which allows printing money on a whim to be more harmful than otherwise. I only skim the other part of it, too lazy to read the rest of it. I am not impressed by the eassy, though. |
|
|
|
I reported this thread. The title isn't fixed! How annoying! |
|
|
|
Sorry, that's what the original owner of the domain claims anyway. I have not independently verified that myself, and it doesn't matter *if* that's alright with the people giving them money, but I have to admit-- my uneducated opinion on the site when I was first referred to it and saw huge pricetags for "membership" was "scam". I am positive it's not a scam in the common sense, but it's because I *don't* know that I'm asking here in hopes those who do know will help correct me and help me to make an educated decision on whether or not to support them in the long run.
Are you a corporation? No. So, stop complaining. |
|
|
|
Satoshi develop on window?  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
