A consumer loan may as well be an addictive drug preying on the weak. And unfortunately your good intentions amounts to giving people addictive drugs for free.
So does prescribing free morphine, but that's not immoral either. I hate to be the one to feed you, but it's clear that no matter what monetary system, sometimes borrowing is a good idea. Even personal (consumer) loans can be. Leave it up to the consumer to weigh their options, or at least provide better advice than "conspiracy! don't borrow!" |
|
|
|
Golly, that sure ups the old impression of just how mature you are psy old sport. Could you not throw in a couple of neener neeners to really make yourself sound like a complete 6 year old little crybaby?
Nah, my friend, that spot, unfortunately, is already yours. No way I could steal it from you...  LoupGaroux, I should probably inform you that Psy is rubber, and you are glue. That which bounces off him will only stick to you. You can't win. Cancer survivors better LOOK OUT! Psy is on the prowl and doesn't need your shit! |
|
|
|
|
100 years later:
"Daddy, why does the man in the statue have a kitchen knife taped to his gun?"
|
|
|
|
|
He ended up getting the money elsewhere, no BTC sent.
|
|
|
|
I'm feeling lucky.  PM me your desired receiving address, a photo of you with a handwritten promise to repay, and a second photo with your ID. 0% interest plus tip (if any). |
|
|
|
|
I'm surprised to see so many people opposing the Armory. Bitcoin facilitates anonymous commerce - what did you THINK would happen? Uglier things than this are already inevitable.
If you don't support the right to buy guns/drugs/whatever like this, but DO support the right to keep a secret on your computer, you should consider that these opinions might contradict.
|
|
|
|
|
If I'm understanding this correctly, it's similar to the plans for Open Transactions. They will have several servers running OT and will only sign a multisig transaction if they agree.
Trusted computing would be more open-ended, since you could run whatever code you want. Open Transactions would be cheaper and more secure, but one would need to build everything out of smart contracts. Could be useful for something like Bitcoinica, though.
|
|
|
|
|
"The fundamental difference between Washington’s view and Beijing’s is whether political rights are considered God-given and therefore absolute or whether they should be seen as privileges to be negotiated based on the needs and conditions of the nation."
I wouldn't call them God-given so much as a result of human nature. That being said, I will "negotiate" for my rights by any means necessary. As the crypto revolution continues, those means become easier and easier, in part because rights are natural.
The author portrays power slipping away from the communists as if they're approaching some intentional harmonious equilibrium, when in reality, both governments are simply being purchased by the same corrupting powers-that-be.
|
|
|
|
|
If he actually DID get all those stolen coins, who did he scam?
|
|
|
|
Hold on, let me move the goalposts for you.  |
|
|
|
I'd like to defend dayfall here, because I agree that acting towards an enlightened self-intrest is rational, mostly because of transcendental issues. Not overreaching towards something above your life does not make much sense, and you are not doing it anyway. Even if you are a reptilian bastard, what you call immediate self-interest would still serve something greater than your life, be it continuation of your genes, or your attitude itself.
I'm not certain I understand so please correct me if I'm misinterpreting: An enlightened self-interest is one that values abstracts like not defecting more highly than specifics like familial success. So if your goal is to maximize utility on a situation-by-situation basis, then defecting is always irrational. Yes? |
|
|
|
My question was how can abortion on demand be OK if abortion to select a sex is wrong?
If the expected consequences from one rule are good, and the expected consequences from another rule are bad. |
|
|
|
It is only a problem to you, because I think moral actions are rational actions.
Unless you wish your opponent to defect against you, yes, morality is as simple as cooperating in the prisoners dilemma. Are you saying it's rational to cooperate in a prisoner's dilemma? Are you universally applying superrationality? I can certainly imagine situations where I would rather someone defects, even against me. For example, we want Bitcoin miners to defect against one another, not conspire to keep profits high! If I can do more good overall by defecting against you I'll do it, and I hope that you would adopt a similar policy. Wouldn't you betray me to cure cancer? |
|
|
|
Or we could just not cheat each other. But, ok if that is the world you want, that is the world you will get. So let me get this clear, in the tragedy of the commons it is rational for the farmer to add one more cow than his share assuming no repercussions from the other farmers? And you are proud to be this type of rational. And in a situation where there are no repercussions it is rational to steal and cheat? Yes, this would be rational. I don't see it as something to be proud of, since it's not much of an accomplishment. We should create social pressures to discourage such behaviors, so that rational people act in accordance with the common good. It's irrational to steal and cheat if everyone will hate you for it.
"the economist's notion that people act “rationally” merely implies that people try to act in ways consistent with their own objectives"
And you say you are proud to be rational?
No, that wasn't me.
How do you get pride from this? Do you tell people you meet "I am proud to act in ways that are consistent with my objectives." Well, if this is how you justify any selfish actions as moral (what I was talking about) then so be it. But I don't think you are being rational. When you said "rational" I thought you meant something different having to do with consistent judgement for actions, non-arrogance, and general philosophy.
I was arguing yesterday whether a businessman or humanist would make the best president. I think I'll know after you answer my first question.
I'm not clear as to why pride should decide my actions, as opposed to what promotes all my values including pride. I'm merely saying that any solution to this problem needs to correct the incentives of selfish individuals so that they promote the welfare of others. Morality is more complex than just cooperating in every prisoner's dilemma. Sometimes defecting even helps pressure a fix for a broken system. I am NOT claiming that all rational actions are moral, or vice-versa. In fact, I completely agree with you regarding the morality of sex-selective abortion. The fact that the moral action is not the rational action IS the problem. |
|
|
|
I actually read your post.  Mine Litecoin and then convert to Bitcoin. Litecoin has a higher profitability on CPUs. |
|
|
|
Wow just wow. So by playing your role in the prisoner's dilemma you think you are being immoral? It can be proven that a truly rational person will play their part in the prisoner's dilemma (so: rat on the other criminal). Therefore your statement implies that you think being rational implies being immoral. What can I day except I pride myself in being a relatively rational person  Playing YOUR ROLE? Wow, just wow. How is defecting rational? Geez, remind me not to send you any Bitcoins for goods or trust you at all for that matter. BTW, should I defect against you? Would that be rational of me? It's rational for an individual, assuming they are acting out of self-interest. http://www.unc.edu/depts/econ/byrns_web/Economicae/rationalselfinterest.htmlIf you don't have a reason to trust someone, DON'T send them Bitcoins! Either send to people/businesses with a reputation to protect, or use an escrow who has a reputation to protect. |
|
|
|
I am not saying it should be illegal, but that mother should be shamed.
+1 Making sure I understand you both: If the "mother" says kill any or all unborn kids inside her, you see nothing wrong. But if she spares an unborn child because its a boy, you think she should be ashamed. I can't speak for dayfall, but... Yes. The difference, to me, is that sex-selective abortion will cause serious social problems like what is happening in China. Not having any children at all (or having them equally) is preferable to contributing to a sex imbalance. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
