|
3861
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Did the cryptography revolution begin too late?
|
on: January 16, 2011, 04:55:02 PM
|
Sure, but this example generalizes. Consider the limiting case of private control over unique (no substitutes exist) and critical resources. The demands can literally be anything. This is the definition of coercion. "You want access to clean water? How much are you willing to pay?" All these scarce resources have to be rationed, anyhow. It also convinces people that democracy is evil or a path toward centralized power, which is exactly where private control over all capital consistently leads. All governments are centralized power. Democracy is a kind of evil you prefer. |
|
|
|
|
3863
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Promoting bitcoins to teenagers
|
on: January 16, 2011, 01:45:53 AM
|
|
I have this idea in my "Kibabase" virtual world conception that players can earn bases(currency of my virtual world) in mini games that help other players. They can then exchange bases to bitcoin for a fee..which is how I will make my money.
One such game is the taxi. A player can either buy a taxi or rent a taxi and then take part in the transportation market. They determine their own rate and so on.
|
|
|
|
|
3865
|
Economy / Marketplace / Looking for Jobs
|
on: January 15, 2011, 11:42:12 PM
|
|
I have ludirious amount of free time but no bitcoin and no economic indepent.
So it's time for me to look for...bitcoins.
Here is what I can do:
1. Programming in Ruby, and Javascript. I spent much of my time in those two languages. Other languages I could handle: Python, java. Other language, I barely touch: C. I am perfectly suitable for creating small scripts, little web projects, and anything that's not too aglorithmtic or required advanced mathematics.
2. Writing. I recently got paid for an article. Might be worth hiring.
3. Art. So-so.
As you can see, my intellectual toolkit is relatively limited, but I am cheap. I am willing to do at minimum 50 BTC for a programming project. 25 BTC each per 1000 words. Art is so time consuming, that it would have to be worth 100 BTC at minimum.
They all have to be within my ability to do, so don't ask too much.
OFFERS
1. Forum avatar art: 100x100. Anime style. 25 BTC
2. Advertising game: I'll be happy to write short HTML5 games meant to advertise your products and services. You could use the game as a way to generate prizes. A project cost at minimum 250 BTC.
3. Chrome extension development. I acquired experience in writing chrome/chromium extension from working for noagendamarket. Let me know if you want me to develop one for your service.
Happy clients
1. ducki2p
2. noagendamarket
|
|
|
|
|
3867
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Did the cryptography revolution begin too late?
|
on: January 15, 2011, 11:14:49 PM
|
Then that is your root problem. If this is how you believe people are, then you will gravitate towards authoritarianism throughout your life. For if no individual can be trusted to have a code of honor, then only the threat of collective force could ever keep them in check.
For the record, I am an anarchist, and an anti-authoritarian. |
|
|
|
|
3873
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Did the cryptography revolution begin too late?
|
on: January 15, 2011, 06:24:48 PM
|
I am not going to discard my intuition and experience. It has helped me avoid mistakes and solve problems. Just because I cannot show definitely why intuition and experience (induction) works does not disqualify it as a useful method. I prefer deductive methods, but induction and deduction may complement each other. You may disagree on my conclusions or reject my experience as invalid, and that is fine.
My experience tells me that human beings are all evil. It doesn't matter if they have good intentions. It is an academic exercise then. In reality, property owners routinely conspire to allocate resources and capital to their own ends at the expense of others. This has been repeatedly demonstrated.
We have relative strong property right in the western world. Without the ability of accumulation, there is no capital. Without capital, there is no wealth. It is not an academic exercise, but an actual economic consequence.
By that logic, I can commit all sorts of atrocities and blame them on "nature" or "acts of God." The problem with this logic is that one can predict a likely outcome of such situations; this is sufficient to show intent in a court of law.
Cannot follow the logic. Shooting someone in the face and denying them a means to earn food lead to the same predicable outcome: death. If they only way to earn food is by working in a sweatshop, I think one could demonstrate that the situation is coercive. In my estimation (and I would wager - the estimation of most), this is criminal.
I agree that the outcome is the same. However, for coercion to qualify, a human being must actively threaten another to do something. Denial of resource a human being own is merely "not helping". Working in a sweatshop is a lifesaver compared to the economic condition I would have to endure outside the sweatshop. Also, I noticed you skipped over my example about property rights over air and water. What is you stance on that?
It is up to those who possess the mean to determine what they shall do something with it. It is an extreme situation with impossible ethical choices. Save others, or yourself, or die altogether. I do not wish ill well on those who are forced to make such decisions like this. |
|
|
|
|
3874
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Did the cryptography revolution begin too late?
|
on: January 15, 2011, 04:50:49 PM
|
Any such relation is difficult, perhaps impossible, to show. It is my conjecture, based on experience and intuition. Human nature/interactions are far too complex to try to nail down the validity of any such statements. I will say that I am not alone in suspecting that the relation holds in most meaningful cases.
You need to drop all such arguments. I think you know you are being obtuse, but I'll play along. The contract depends on who lives in the society. You "sign" it by living in the society.
The contract is invalid. You must sign it to implies that you understand "society's rule". The real situation is clear. Do as we say, or we use violence or throw you in jail. That is reality. Property rights are defined by those who own lots of property. Eminent domain is sometimes used by private interests to re-appropriate land.
This is not property right people understood in Libertarian parlance. It is understood that people, no matter how rich they are, cannot take your property away, unless you specifically sold it to said person. I see no distinction between being forced to live in a sweat shop to feed your family and slavery. I do see a difference between that situation and a factory that is run cooperatively by employees.
It is my opinion that slavery required coercion. A threat of violence. If there is no such threat but nature, than it is not slavery. |
|
|
|
|
3875
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Walter Block
|
on: January 15, 2011, 04:28:18 PM
|
That is never going to happen with a forum full of people that think that bitcoin is able to do things that it is demonstrably incapable of doing. I can understand that people don't like being told that they are being unrealistic, but scrutiny is the price of improvement.
The community here are very interested in making sure bitcoin succeed. There's had been historically genuine disagreement in the past, such as the wikileak debate, which was pretty heated. So this isn't an echo chamber, at least, not always. However, don't think that people will necessary agree with your arguments just because they're open to criticism and suggestion on how to strengthen bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
3876
|
Economy / Economics / Re: A study on Somalia
|
on: January 15, 2011, 04:18:43 PM
|
Why am I not surprised?
It is polite to take the most charitable explanation and strongest arguments of a position and work from there. Otherwise, you end up in epistemic trouble. |
|
|
|
|
3877
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Did the cryptography revolution begin too late?
|
on: January 15, 2011, 04:15:24 PM
|
That is a fair assessment. I think a good case can be made that historically what are now called "libertarian" views have been co-opted by powerful interests. Is it really that surprising that fundamentally selfish motives can be leveraged to construct large scale injustice?
Selfish motives -> injustice is unjustified. You need to reason why selfish motives equal injustice. I don't think anyone should (or even can) be forced to partake in any society against his or her will. Hermits have always existed. However, if a person wishes to enter society (a relationship of some sort with at least another person) then compromises must necessarily be made. A democratic community should decide (yes - likely though difficult deliberation) what that standards and social contracts are based on their values and goals. Again, a person may be cast out of society for failing to meet some social obligation, or leave voluntarily. This seems elementary to me.
Where is this social contract and how do I sign it? You assume it is voluntary. Consider a farmer forced off his land and into a city by a powerful landowner. He can choose to work in a factory in basic slavery. Or he can choose to starve. Some would consider that "voluntary" free trade. This is not a hypothetical example, by the way.
If the rich landowner purchase land from him, than it's fine. If the landowner took it by force, that's a violation of property right. Working for food does not equal automatic slavery. |
|
|
|
|
3878
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Walter Block
|
on: January 15, 2011, 04:02:13 PM
|
This post really helped me shake my hangover this morning. Nothing quite like a good laugh to get the blood flowing. As for the "GTFO" attitude, that is an excellent way to build an echo chamber.
All socialists that I have seen on this forum are driven out by almost relentless argumentation, alone. They left on their own. But you, on the other hand, seem to piss off people more readily than any socialist crank that come here. I don't know what you did, actually. So, I hold no personal grudges against you. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
