Bitcoin Forum
November 22, 2017, 03:31:59 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: If I was a newbie....  (Read 7501 times)
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 09:18:32 AM
 #101

black markets, terrorism, osama and obama

All of them are creatures of State or government "rule", oddly.
Yeah, and states form when large ammounts of people organise into a society.... oddly enough.
Fix overpopulation and you can all live in tents in communities of 10 and make yer own food and all.
But don't expect there to be food in shops, houses with central heating, and cars, and computers, and bitcoin (along with black markets and terrorism and presidents).
1511364719
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511364719

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511364719
Reply with quote  #2

1511364719
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511364719
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511364719

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511364719
Reply with quote  #2

1511364719
Report to moderator
1511364719
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511364719

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511364719
Reply with quote  #2

1511364719
Report to moderator
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 09:19:38 AM
 #102


The only redeeming feature of ignorance is that is announces itself so clearly.
too true.
FlipPro
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540


View Profile
September 13, 2012, 09:19:53 AM
 #103

This thread should be moved. To a "soulful" discussion in Meta.

LEASE THIS SIGNATURE OUT WEEKLY/MONTHLY.

PM ME FOR DETAILS
commonancestor
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 58


View Profile
September 13, 2012, 12:50:24 PM
 #104

My point is why people care that Bitcoins are used for such things? It is easier to buy pound of marijuana than gallon of milk using bitcoins. Of course I also have nothing against using bitcoins to buy food other than space cookies, but bitcoins are not mainstream currency for now. I still use dollars and euros and love them. Then more then better!

Black markets exist because some things are banned.
Terrorism exists because there are oppressors and oppressed people who better blow themselves and enemies to pieces than being oppressed and humiliated.
I am racist. Problem?

Maybe we agree that bitcoin is neutral.

Smiley
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 04:07:03 PM
 #105


Yeah, and states form when large ammounts of people organise into a society.... oddly enough.

That's open to argument. Society doesn't depend on the State but the State always depends on society.
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 04:27:28 PM
 #106


Yeah, and states form when large ammounts of people organise into a society.... oddly enough.

That's open to argument. Society doesn't depend on the State but the State always depends on society.

Let's see how open this argument is.
Name one fairly large and successfull society without any form of state or central governance.
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 04:36:26 PM
 #107

Name one fairly large and successfull society without any form of state or central governance.

Why does a society have to be large to be considered successful?

The Amish are one example. Until the formation of Israel, Jews are another.

Societies are based around the meeting of wants and needs. States are based on coercing societies.

Another example: Anyone who uses bitcoin is a member of a society. Where's the State?
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 04:49:00 PM
 #108

The state will soon (50 years or so) be a nice history lesson.

I'm hoping. Glad to know there are others out there.
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 05:18:17 PM
 #109

Name one fairly large and successfull society without any form of state or central governance.

Why does a society have to be large to be considered successful?

The Amish are one example. Until the formation of Israel, Jews are another.


Both amish and jews use their religion as a central autority and even justice system so no go here.
Religion in general is one of the biggest players on the central governance market.

And any society that is successfull will grow. Grown up and large societies have somehow been successfull.
Even vikings had laws and courts and other centralized institutions.

mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 05:24:50 PM
 #110


Yeah, and states form when large ammounts of people organise into a society.... oddly enough.

That's open to argument. Society doesn't depend on the State but the State always depends on society.

Let's see how open this argument is.
Name one fairly large and successfull society without any form of state or central governance.

The U.S.A. became the world power it is because of the freedoms it's citizens were allowed. Over time though, government does as it always does and becomes thoroughly corrupt.
But were these freedoms devoid of central governance at the time when the USA became this power?
And yes, corruption will happen.
And decentralisation will not eradicate that.

Quote

We have technologies today that would help facilitate a stateless society. These technologies are all relatively new. Freedom of information is a vital part.
What technology replaces law and law enforcement?
Quote
The state will soon (50 years or so) be a nice history lesson. Just because something hasn't been accomplished yet, does not mean it's a bad idea or impossible.
Not as long as humans can accumulate wealth and power.
You cannot have wealth and power without some way of preventing abuse of it.
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 05:53:01 PM
 #111

Both amish and jews use their religion as a central autority and even justice system so no go here.
Religion in general is one of the biggest players on the central governance market.

And any society that is successfull will grow. Grown up and large societies have somehow been successfull.
Even vikings had laws and courts and other centralized institutions.

Religion was the center of their society. All societies are societies because the individuals in them share a set of assumptions and beliefs. Those assumptions and beliefs could be spread over hundreds or thousands of people in any geographical configuration. Centralization of society, government, doesn't make a state. The assumption of tribute to a minority sector of the society does. This tribute is always extracted through force and fraud, hence the non-aggression principle of any self-respecting libertarian, anarchist, or other foe of predation as a means of making a living.

I think the real confusion, larger than the one that confuses society and government, is the one that confuses government and the State.
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 06:07:43 PM
 #112

Both amish and jews use their religion as a central autority and even justice system so no go here.
Religion in general is one of the biggest players on the central governance market.

And any society that is successfull will grow. Grown up and large societies have somehow been successfull.
Even vikings had laws and courts and other centralized institutions.

Religion was the center of their society. All societies are societies because the individuals in them share a set of assumptions and beliefs. Those assumptions and beliefs could be spread over hundreds or thousands of people in any geographical configuration. Centralization of society, government, doesn't make a state. The assumption of tribute to a minority sector of the society does. This tribute is always extracted through force and fraud, hence the non-aggression principle of any self-respecting libertarian, anarchist, or other foe of predation as a means of making a living.

I think the real confusion, larger than the one that confuses society and government, is the one that confuses government and the State.
I'm sory, but that is plain wrong.
The very definition of a state is the organisation and centralisation of government.
By not acknowledging this you deny the specific problems of large populations.
If you want  to consider bitcoin on a larger scale you would have to, though..
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 06:12:50 PM
 #113

Both amish and jews use their religion as a central autority and even justice system so no go here.
Religion in general is one of the biggest players on the central governance market.

And any society that is successfull will grow. Grown up and large societies have somehow been successfull.
Even vikings had laws and courts and other centralized institutions.

Religion was the center of their society. All societies are societies because the individuals in them share a set of assumptions and beliefs. Those assumptions and beliefs could be spread over hundreds or thousands of people in any geographical configuration. Centralization of society, government, doesn't make a state. The assumption of tribute to a minority sector of the society does. This tribute is always extracted through force and fraud, hence the non-aggression principle of any self-respecting libertarian, anarchist, or other foe of predation as a means of making a living.

I think the real confusion, larger than the one that confuses society and government, is the one that confuses government and the State.
By this definition a casino is a state...
Any business that takes more than it gives would also fall under this category.
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 09:00:28 PM
 #114

The very definition of a state is the organisation and centralisation of government.

No, a State demands and enforces tribute.

Quote
By this definition a casino is a state...

A casino can't throw the law at you if you choose not to associate with them.
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 10:08:57 PM
 #115


Yeah, and states form when large ammounts of people organise into a society.... oddly enough.

That's open to argument. Society doesn't depend on the State but the State always depends on society.

Let's see how open this argument is.
Name one fairly large and successfull society without any form of state or central governance.

The U.S.A. became the world power it is because of the freedoms it's citizens were allowed. Over time though, government does as it always does and becomes thoroughly corrupt.
But were these freedoms devoid of central governance at the time when the USA became this power?
And yes, corruption will happen.
And decentralisation will not eradicate that.

Quote

We have technologies today that would help facilitate a stateless society. These technologies are all relatively new. Freedom of information is a vital part.
What technology replaces law and law enforcement?
Quote
The state will soon (50 years or so) be a nice history lesson. Just because something hasn't been accomplished yet, does not mean it's a bad idea or impossible.
Not as long as humans can accumulate wealth and power.
You cannot have wealth and power without some way of preventing abuse of it.

The federal government was designed to be weak with specific limited duties. It seemed to work, as the US grew into a world power. Now it's an empire, and the strong, corrupt federal government will be it's downfall. 

Decentralized money eradicates corruption of a central bank. Decentralized information eradicates corruption of the media. Imagine what decentralized energy, transportation and food will eradicate.
Decentralisation does not work well on goods that are bound to some region. Energy productio, transportation and food all fall in this category.
They al depend on location and how that land can be used. You cannot farm all land, you cannot put roads everywere and you cannot win energy efficiently everywere. The land dictates the distribution.

Money in the form of bitcoin and media are information which is much easier to decentralize.


Quote

Law enforcement is reactionary.
Not at all, there is the effect of it being present which has a permanent preventinve action.
Imagine how the streets would look if there was no law enforcement at all.
Quote

 Education replaces law and law enforcement.
Not at all, usually both are needed.
Not everyone is capable of enough education and not everyone cares enough.
I would also add religion as a 3rd way to steer and control humanity.
Each of these three covers some part of society.
You have education, if that fails you can scare them and bind them with religion and if that fails there is actual force.
These are the classical tools with which societies are kept stable enough to grow.
Quote
Do you need a law telling you not to kill? Steal? Rape? I don't.
Me neither, but the general population couldn't prosper without it.
A law against killing is useless if noone kills but that is not how reality works out.
I mean WTF, you realy think that if there is no law against killing noone will kill?
If you have a free market there will be no scams?
Quote

Don't confine yourself to outdated failing systems simply because you can not conceive of a better way of doing things.
Give me something more solid than what you suggest otherwise i'd take the old system any time of the day.
As you can see from my answers above you do not have a very realistic look on humanity. You speak in unatainable ideals.
It seems blatantly obvious to me that you don't have a clue about why we got to this point or how the world works now and would just as easy throw it away for some flimsy fantasy of how you THINK it should work. The fact that i can easily attack these ideas from all sides means they are leaky as hell and totaly not wel thought through.
And noone can give me any straight answers to the hard questions i ask.
Problem with real life is there is not debugging time... It has to work and that is why it is wise to learn from history and adjust accordingly. That means you need to change this system from within and do it gradually. You cannot overlay your ideas and expect them to work. They won't because they would be completely out of context.
First you'd have to think realy realy hard if your new system of "who the hell needs laws" and decentralisation will be able to feed nearly 7 billion people when this depends on so many established trades.
Quote

As long as humans can accumulate wealth and power without production. This is the true problem. Government produces nothing, yet being a part of it can lead to both wealth and power. Which path will the corrupt choose? Will they gain wealth and power by producing goods and/or services that people want/need, or will they gain wealth and power by greasing the wheels of a corrupt system? The government isn't preventing abuse, it is the abuse!
No, it is not the true problem. Even if there is production, power and wealth corrupts.
You can see this in how corporations and lately business in general work.
Even if they produce someting usefull they can still act as powerfull assholes.
This is a symptom of power and it is indiscriminate of position in society.

BTW, government produces lots, just not goods.
But there is more to society than goods.
And you cannot just compare all governments.
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 10:10:36 PM
 #116

The very definition of a state is the organisation and centralisation of government.

No, a State demands and enforces tribute.



Quote
By this definition a casino is a state...

A casino can't throw the law at you if you choose not to associate with them.


If a casino couldn't use the law they would make their own laws and enforce them.
And, yes, casinos have their house rules and you can be thrown out if you don't obey.
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 10:13:41 PM
 #117

The very definition of a state is the organisation and centralisation of government.

No, a State demands and enforces tribute.

Quote
By this definition a casino is a state...

A casino can't throw the law at you if you choose not to associate with them.
They can if you insist on staying on their premise.
Severian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 11:34:01 PM
 #118

They can if you insist on staying on their premise.

A government using force to exact tribute is a little different from voluntarily walking into a place to gamble and getting belligerent with the management.
mobodick
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile
September 14, 2012, 12:22:58 AM
 #119

You can see this in how corporations and lately business in general work.
Even if they produce someting usefull they can still act as powerfull assholes.
This is a symptom of power and it is indiscriminate of position in society.

For starters, a corporation is a government construct. Without the government to legitimize things such as limited liability, these entities wouldn't wield the power that they do today. The infiltration of government by large businesses has resulted in a conglomerate that is free to create laws to strengthen itself. The very thing which, in your mind, is supposed to reduce the power of something has increased it, drastically.
I can agree to the fact that they can get laws pushed through but not freely.
Still a worrysome development and i think this kind of power should be reduced.
Quote
As for the rest of the post, perhaps another time. Some of your interpretations of what I've said are so far from what I've actually said that I consider it borderline trolling.

For example:

I mean WTF, you realy think that if there is no law against killing noone will kill?

I never said anything of the sort and the fact that you think I did shows that communication with you is probably futile.

You said : Do you need a law telling you not to kill? Steal? Rape? I don't.
Which to me says: "Hey, we don't need laws".
So that remark was relevant and i still think WTF.
Otherwise please explain what you mean by that.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!