Bitcoin Forum
May 26, 2024, 10:38:50 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ... 137 »
341  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Stefan Molyneux: Lymphoma on: May 05, 2013, 04:54:28 PM
good too, but in the movies its always the good guys that wins. in reality i would say that its 50/50, which sucks.

OK, let's take that assumption. In an armed conflict, the good guys win half the time, the bad guys win the other half. Do you think that there are more bad guys, or good?
mostly egotistic idiots.
Do you think that there are more bad guys, or good?
most bad.
342  Other / Politics & Society / Re: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism on: May 05, 2013, 04:54:06 PM
why on earth would you expect even this to cause me to alter my preference for non-aggression?
because aggression can sometimes be a means to self preservation.

343  Other / Politics & Society / Re: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism on: May 05, 2013, 04:47:40 PM
i simply have preferences. one of those preferences is that i would prefer to live in a society where people do not initiate or threaten to innate the use of violence against each other. I would prefer to live in a society where people respect each other. I would prefer to live in a society where people are allowed to pursue their own goals so long as they are not harming each other. If you feel differently and would prefer to live in a society that does not conform to these ideals than i respect that. I do not claim that you are in some way wrong and that i am in some way right, we just have different preferences.
yeah me too... but its never gonna happen, what you is describing is a utopian fairy tail land.

come back to reality...
But there is no reality, it's all in your head, right?
yup, but i choose to call it reality. because its so much more fun then floating around in the nothingness/maybe-something-ness.
Well, if it's all in your head, where do you get off telling people that their reality is "fairy tales"?
this is not relevant for the discussion. are you giving up?
344  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Stefan Molyneux: Lymphoma on: May 05, 2013, 04:42:33 PM
good too, but in the movies its always the good guys that wins. in reality i would say that its 50/50, which sucks.

OK, let's take that assumption. In an armed conflict, the good guys win half the time, the bad guys win the other half. Do you think that there are more bad guys, or good?
mostly egotistic idiots.
345  Other / Politics & Society / Re: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism on: May 05, 2013, 04:34:09 PM
i simply have preferences. one of those preferences is that i would prefer to live in a society where people do not initiate or threaten to innate the use of violence against each other. I would prefer to live in a society where people respect each other. I would prefer to live in a society where people are allowed to pursue their own goals so long as they are not harming each other. If you feel differently and would prefer to live in a society that does not conform to these ideals than i respect that. I do not claim that you are in some way wrong and that i am in some way right, we just have different preferences.
yeah me too... but its never gonna happen, what you is describing is a utopian fairy tail land.

come back to reality...
But there is no reality, it's all in your head, right?
yup, but i choose to call it reality. because its so much more fun then floating around in the nothingness/maybe-something-ness.
346  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Stefan Molyneux: Lymphoma on: May 05, 2013, 04:32:50 PM
And you still haven't answered my question.
yes, i have thought it through.
Evidently not, if you think that no restrictions on guns means that pulling a gun to enforce your opinion will work better, rather than worse.
it always works in the movies... Tongue
How well when both sides have guns?
good too, but in the movies its always the good guys that wins. in reality i would say that its 50/50, which sucks.
347  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Decrits: The 99%+ attack-proof coin on: May 05, 2013, 04:31:14 PM
Proof of work produces money, it does not secure the network--so it is not just as bitcoin. I don't know what "ah ha" moment there is to be had here that isn't already explained in the OP.
so you are just wasting alot of resources then? good choice!
348  Other / Politics & Society / Re: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism on: May 05, 2013, 04:30:15 PM
i simply have preferences. one of those preferences is that i would prefer to live in a society where people do not initiate or threaten to innate the use of violence against each other. I would prefer to live in a society where people respect each other. I would prefer to live in a society where people are allowed to pursue their own goals so long as they are not harming each other. If you feel differently and would prefer to live in a society that does not conform to these ideals than i respect that. I do not claim that you are in some way wrong and that i am in some way right, we just have different preferences.
yeah me too... but its never gonna happen, what you is describing is a utopian fairy tail land.

come back to reality...
349  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Stefan Molyneux: Lymphoma on: May 05, 2013, 04:26:42 PM
A lower chance of getting shot just increases the chances you will be assaulted with another weapon. Such as a knife. Or a bat.
proof please.

Here you go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_Guns,_Less_Crime#Opposition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott#Disputed_survey

just saying...

And you still haven't answered my question.
yes, i have thought it through.
Evidently not, if you think that no restrictions on guns means that pulling a gun to enforce your opinion will work better, rather than worse.
it always works in the movies... Tongue
350  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Decrits: The 99%+ attack-proof coin on: May 05, 2013, 03:19:34 PM
...and where did that $1 go?

Electricity, hardware, and opportunity costs.

It's the same as bitcoin, but because minting in decrits is a "burst" operation rather than a sustained one, finding ways to reduce the cost of electricity is going to cost you in hardware and opportunity--costs that are unlikely to ever be recovered because only a fraction of new money comes from minting, and even that fraction depends on a large initial wasted investment in the MBQ. Even if you can take electricity costs to essentially zero via ASICs or whatever, the development and production costs of those ASICs are distributed to people other than those who spent the time and money to develop them--both in the decrits distribution and the opportunity cost where you could have, say, bought a yacht instead of developing those ASICs.

Minters put in all the effort for only the smallest of rewards, so therefore the reward must be fairly significant for anyone but an attacker to bother. And if an attacker does bother, the algorithm could be changed, rendering the entire operation a complete failure. Reducing the profit motive of the minting system to being one only of opportunity rather than necessity for the network's protection ensures that those with the hardware cost already sunk in, such as everyday GPUs used for gaming, have a huge advantage in amortized costs over those who invest specifically to create money. Reducing the hardware tax. Much more of that $1 goes into the decrits economy than to the electric companies or the ATIs compared to bitcoin. That is why it is important to protect the everyday GPU, because any other option is a complete waste of resources.

ah ha! so your coin is just proof of work, just as bitcoin.
351  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Stefan Molyneux: Lymphoma on: May 05, 2013, 03:16:43 PM
you cant "take out" your competition in a free market. It will be instantly replaced by new competition. The only way you can "take out" the competition is if you can keep out new competition. There is no mechanism that i am aware of for doing this other than the state.
oh! i know a method that can achieve this! its called "a gun to the head"-method, and it work incredible when there is no one that restricts the usage of guns.
Haven't thought that one through, have you?
there is less gun violence here in the stupid and evil state of Denmark. I have less chance of getting shot then you.
A lower chance of getting shot just increases the chances you will be assaulted with another weapon. Such as a knife. Or a bat.
proof please.

Quote
And you still haven't answered my question.
yes, i have thought it through.
352  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Stefan Molyneux: Lymphoma on: May 05, 2013, 02:51:11 PM
you cant "take out" your competition in a free market. It will be instantly replaced by new competition. The only way you can "take out" the competition is if you can keep out new competition. There is no mechanism that i am aware of for doing this other than the state.
oh! i know a method that can achieve this! its called "a gun to the head"-method, and it work incredible when there is no one that restricts the usage of guns.
Haven't thought that one through, have you?
there is less gun violence here in the stupid and evil state of Denmark. I have less chance of getting shot then you.
353  Other / Politics & Society / Re: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism on: May 05, 2013, 02:18:59 PM


Not at all, an open source method and decentralization are clearly superior. But the way An-Cap is envisioned now, I'm afraid will lead to corporate abuse, religious dominance, and force the poor into collectivization or become corporate slaves. Or worse degenerate into a gangland. Anyhow individual freedom is lost. And this is the beauty of open source, one can improve. But this can be done only by abandoning dogma, and truly addressing problems.
So far all political ideologies are extremely buggy (some more than others).

Just as communists were naive that the proletariat will do no wrong (or if they do, their peers will correct them), capitalists seem to believe that in a free market corporations will do no wrong (or if they do they will be corrected by the free market). Things don't work as on paper in real life.

Some what what I think now. I just don't trust in my fellow man at all... And for that reason I prefer to have a state...

So you trust your fellow men when they form a state with a monopoly on violence?

Yes because there is lot more of us...

Having large groups to help impose order does not require a state.
but to work efficient and protect customers/citizens it will have to behave like one.
354  Other / Politics & Society / Re: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism on: May 05, 2013, 01:21:54 PM
if it was illegal to drink water i think you would find a reason to do something illegal.
no one, would ever make it illegal to drink water. the government should be afraid of the people, just because is it not that way where you live, it means that you suck, and are unable to realize that a government should be a servant of the people.

my idea of freedom is being allowed to pursue my own goals with out interference so long as i am not causing harm to other people. I'm sorry that you dont like this idea. Im sorry that you would prefer that people who are behaving peacefully be interfered with. But i respect your right to have your own preferences.
your idea of freedom sucks. plain and simple.

Lets be clear here, there is no argument to be made for how you are free, you arnt. But there is definitely room for debate over whether freedom is actually a good thing. So stick to that.
fuck you asshole! i decides how free i am, if i says im free, im free! you libertards all think that your definition of freedom, is universal and objectively good. Surprise asshole: IT IS NOT!

i have a lot more actual and usable freedom, right now in the state of Denmark. and i would have alot real freedom less, if there was no state to protect my interests.

your freedom is equal to social darwinism, the big ones assrapes the little ones, because they have freedom to do so. Your freedom is less free.
355  Other / Politics & Society / Re: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism on: May 05, 2013, 01:03:43 PM
so you can just turn your house into a business and start selling or manufacturing what ever you like (excluding crazy things) and the government wont try to stop you? Could you go down town and buy a building that used to be a business and set up your living quarters in there? No one ever says to you the functional equivalent of "give me the products of your labor or else ill lock you in a cage, if you refuse to go to the cage ill beat you up, if you refuse to allow me to beat you up ill shoot you?"
why would i care about all that? why would i do something illegal?

i have enough freedom, but if thats your idea of freedom i don't want anything to do with it.

where is this awesome place where you have freedom, where the government doesn't lord over you and how to live and force you to give it your money?
i like the freedom i have, and i don't want more because it give me less.

less is more.
356  Other / Politics & Society / Re: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism on: May 05, 2013, 11:30:12 AM
“Freedom requires effort if it is to be won and vigilance if it is to be maintained. People just don't value freedom until it is taken away.”
― Terry Goodkind, Faith of the Fallen
I don't value freedom, therefor it have not been taken away from me by the state.

That's fine.  No-one is saying you have to be free.  In a a free society you will have the option for others to look after you if that is what you so wish.  There will still be state-like entities I'm sure for those who want them due to market demand.

The thing is, just because you don't want freedom, that means you can say others shouldn't have it either?
Roll Eyes i did not say that i did not want freedom, just that i don't value it, because i have it. myrkul's quote states that, freedom only have value when you don't have it.
357  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Stefan Molyneux: Lymphoma on: May 05, 2013, 10:29:19 AM
you cant "take out" your competition in a free market. It will be instantly replaced by new competition. The only way you can "take out" the competition is if you can keep out new competition. There is no mechanism that i am aware of for doing this other than the state.
[/quote
oh! i know a method that can achieve this! its called "a gun to the head"-method, and it work incredible when there is no one that restricts the usage of guns.
358  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Decrits: The 99%+ attack-proof coin on: May 05, 2013, 10:25:42 AM
What about the the limits of growth? If you think big you might come to the point where global economy is not growing anymore - or even decreasing at times.

But you might be right to leave that point unsolved. However you'll do it, it will cost adopters.

It isn't unsolved. Money does not have to be created to protect the network. If there is no need for new money, it won't be produced. Say 1 DCR costs around $1.00 to create, for a profit margin Decrits must be worth around $1.10 or significantly more before minting will begin because of the burn and the need for a lot of people to see a profit margin. Otherwise you're just burning value and giving it to others in the form of free money. You could potentially cause inflation, but the new money is being distributed randomly across the globe, not under the control of governments/banks/wealthy. If decrits run up and down the system, you will quickly bankrupt yourself. If they don't, you are still adding more power to decrits by investing time and resources into otherwise useless ventures--you would have been all-around better off buying decrits instead. If you can't beat 'em... Cheesy
...and where did that $1 go?
359  Other / Politics & Society / Re: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism on: May 05, 2013, 10:24:12 AM
“Freedom requires effort if it is to be won and vigilance if it is to be maintained. People just don't value freedom until it is taken away.”
― Terry Goodkind, Faith of the Fallen
I don't value freedom, therefor it have not been taken away from me by the state.
360  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Stefan Molyneux: Lymphoma on: May 04, 2013, 07:56:58 PM
Quote
The greater the number of firms, the more probable it is that one of those firms is a maverick firm; that is, a firm known for pursuing aggressive and independent pricing strategy. Even in the case of a concentrated market, with few firms, the existence of such a firm may undermine the collusive behaviour of the cartel.

How likely do you think it will be that a maverick will pop up, in a market with no barriers to entry save overhead?
how fast do you think that the cartel companies are to take out a maverick? 10 against 1, is really no fair chance.

Except that when you "take out" a competitor, you:
Lose men, either directly through combat losses, or indirectly from quitting.
Lose customers to other defense firms who aren't going to waste money attacking when they should be defending.
Don't gain the customers of the defeated rival. They're much more likely to go to one of the other firms which don't waste their money.

So how is that going to make anyone rich?
10:1
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ... 137 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!