Bitcoin Forum
June 27, 2017, 03:54:49 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.14.2  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Bitcoin is beggining to get "bad" publicity...  (Read 8715 times)
airdata
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560



View Profile
June 03, 2011, 08:03:51 AM
 #41


So my question to you is how Silk Road users are going to be surprized?

Mewants uses silk road to buy the sacred herb for his avatar cat ^ ^

1498535689
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498535689

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498535689
Reply with quote  #2

1498535689
Report to moderator
1498535689
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498535689

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498535689
Reply with quote  #2

1498535689
Report to moderator
1498535689
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498535689

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498535689
Reply with quote  #2

1498535689
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
TraderTimm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1862



View Profile
June 03, 2011, 08:07:06 AM
 #42

Quote

Mewants uses silk road to buy the sacred herb for his avatar cat ^ ^

Given his posting style, I can't find one fault with that statement. In fact, he should do *more* to stay away from a keyboard. Smoke up!

fortitudinem multis - catenum regit omnia
rebuilder
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1618



View Profile
June 03, 2011, 08:16:42 AM
 #43

I expect governmental responses to Bitcoin will tend to be similar to their responses to illegal narcotics. If they don't manage to kill it off right away they'll marginalize it with propaganda and persecution of users. They can't stop it altogether, but that's something governments have learned to live with already. What I'm wondering is to what extent they can suppress Bitcoin usage.

Selling out to advertisers shows you respect neither yourself nor the rest of us.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Too many low-quality posts? Mods not keeping things clean enough? Self-moderated threads let you keep signature spammers and trolls out!
shady financier
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


etcetera


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 08:29:17 AM
 #44

Progressives are raving on Twitter about how Bitcoin is a ponzi scheme founded upon faux-libertarian economics. Apparently the UK Serious Fraud office is looking into Bitcoin. A German lobbying group wants none of it. It keeps only getting better and better. How are things going to pan out. If you were a power-hungry government seeing Bitcoin as a threat, what would you first do to see to its destruction? Make it taboo in the eyes of citizens (a threat to freedom, etc.)? ...or raid households that seem to be running a Bitcoin node?

I have a feeling in my gut that things are about to get really exciting.

Bitcoins one drawback is that so many of it's early adherents are stuck in a Star Wars fantasy land of their own creation.

Only this time the 'good guys' are the Sith....


1G8AUgSTAw8hfatNnDHuYEqBAUzC3qvAAL

Bitcoin news: http://thebitcoinsun.com/

Rapidlybuybitcoin here.

The value of goods, expressed in money, is called “price”, while the value of money, expressed in goods, is called “value”. C. Quigley
gigabytecoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 08:43:20 AM
 #45

Progressives are raving on Twitter about how Bitcoin is a ponzi scheme founded upon faux-libertarian economics. Apparently the UK Serious Fraud office is looking into Bitcoin. A German lobbying group wants none of it. It keeps only getting better and better. How are things going to pan out. If you were a power-hungry government seeing Bitcoin as a threat, what would you first do to see to its destruction? Make it taboo in the eyes of citizens (a threat to freedom, etc.)? ...or raid households that seem to be running a Bitcoin node?

I have a feeling in my gut that things are about to get really exciting.

No offense OP.. but are you not like 17 years old?

Have you even finished high-school yet?

I remember what my "gut" thought in high-school... and it was usually 100% wrong.
Timo Y
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


bitcoin - the aerogel of money


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 08:52:40 AM
 #46

Don't kid yourself. Don't assume these places hire dummies.

There is a difference between simply being intelligent and knowing how to use your intelligence.

I know lots of highly intelligent people who fall for the most stupid theories because of group pressure, ideology, or emotional baggage.  I know one guy with IQ 150 who believes in astrology. *eye roll*. Human beings are all kind of crap, really.

People who are both intelligent and wise are very rare indeed, and they don't tend to work for government.

Also, people working for such agencies tend to be sequential thinkers and may struggle to grasp the bigger picture with Bitcoin.


GPG ID: FA868D77   bitcoin-otc:forever-d
Vladimir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


-


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 09:02:45 AM
 #47

"UK Serious Fraud office is looking into Bitcoin" is this based on statement by some idiot sysadmin at a hosting provider who said so while banning a user who used lots of CPU on a "trial account"?

-
kroptofer
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 03:39:23 PM
 #48

I hope they make us look like pigf*cking sodomite necrophiliac pedophile terrorist racist drug-dealing money-laundering gun-running slave-trading kiddy-porn puppy-stomping paint huffers. I need the price to stay down until I finish buying.  Nothing anybody does will kill Bitcoin. Nothing will stop it except nuclear war or a giant asteroid.  Satoshi Nakamoto himself couldn't stop it now. Critical mass has been reached. There is no going back. Cryptocurrency will be money for our great grandchildren. Austrian economics will be called...economics.

Wow.
MacFall
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


Agorist


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2011, 03:56:29 PM
 #49


I doubt they have the intelligence to really grasp how bitcoin works.

ok, i've heard this around here before(end of the forbes article for one), the idea that the government, the people strong enough, powerful enough, confident enough to steal well over half the wealth of its citizens with one hand while destroying other countries and keeping them from doing it to us in return, somehow, with all this pirated wealth have been unsuccessful in hiring anyone who knows anything about technology to be on their team. now, i think our quality of life as humans can be greatly improved, but i think it comes from returning to the use of simple logic that we are all capable of. If you don't like something, explain why, don't just mindlessly belittle it and chuckle about your meaningless unthoughtout insults, it really truly does not help.

All government has at its disposal is violence. Violence displaces rational thought. It is not mindless, but it is certainly limited in its ability to utilize the minds of its members. And that is even more true when compared to the market, which is the sum of all voluntary human action - all the creative and analytical thought in the word combined in the most productive of ways.

Observe a spontaneous protest or rally some time. Or read some of the stories of civil disobedience being carried out by Free State Project members. Each and every time, the .gov shows up looking for someone "in charge". They simply cannot comprehend something happening without someone running it from the top down. Now that is not quite the same thing as bitcoin, but it is analogous. Government is predicated on authoritarian violence and the threat thereof. It is saturated with it. All of its "problem solving" consists of taking a hammer to what always looks, to it, like a nail.

Any individual can understand bitcoin, but in the role of a government employee or agent, he would be unable to apply that understanding to the problem. All he can do in that role is think of the best least embarrassing way to use violence to "solve" the problem. It's not that the government is completely impotent to act against bitcoin. It's just that the voluntary, creative, and highly mobile environment of the bitcoin community is exactly the sort of "problem" that governments are least suited to "solve".

All they can do is hurt some people enough to make them stop using it, or scare them with threats. That won't kill bitcoin any more than the War on Drugs has killed cannabis sales in the USA.

No king but Christ; no law but Liberty!

Fledge Press: Pro-Liberty Fiction and Art
1JBmYmG2U5ETj8BXZUBCXDKWCQcFoERBNP
cloud9
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 04:49:52 PM
 #50

Don't only criminals and not bitcoiners in general need to fear non-repressive governments and the democratic law?  Are bitcoiners not on the right side of the law?  Is trading/exchanging cryptographic key pair data rights illegal?  Are there a lot of computer power going into generating these key pairs?  Does the effort in producing these unique key pairs make them valuable (for other cryptographic applications as well due to the key holder having access to the public key and privately holding a valuable key solution - do you need to brute force attack the right to 50 x 1e8 SHA keys for 10 minutes at 4.44 Thas/sec?  Will the effort to brute force break this SHA keys be cheaper than their value?  Are they worth their value?  Are they valuable in cryptographic value, to protect their own value?  Does the key holder have the ownership rights to the key pair as the key holder?  Can you legally transfer your unique digitally protected transferable software licenses if the license allows for that?

Disclaimer:  Postings of Cloud9 are only individual views of opinion and/or musings and/or hypothesisses.  On a non-authoritative, peer-to-peer public forum, you do not need permission from Cloud9 to derive your own conclusions or opinions, so please do.  Calculations and assumptions to be verified.
MacFall
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


Agorist


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2011, 05:19:07 PM
 #51

Don't only criminals and not bitcoiners in general need to fear non-repressive governments and the democratic law?

No. Because all governments are based on repression (of individual rights in favor of the interests of the political class) and democratic law can easily and at any time outlaw any peaceful activity if it is practiced by a minority.

Quote
Are bitcoiners not on the right side of the law?

Currently, yes. But I'd wear it as a badge of honor if we weren't. Laws against peaceful and mutually beneficial activities deserve to be broken.

No king but Christ; no law but Liberty!

Fledge Press: Pro-Liberty Fiction and Art
1JBmYmG2U5ETj8BXZUBCXDKWCQcFoERBNP
Jack of Diamonds
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
June 03, 2011, 05:58:23 PM
 #52

Currently, yes. But I'd wear it as a badge of honor if we weren't. Laws against peaceful and mutually beneficial activities deserve to be broken.

Bitcoin is not "just" for anarchists and state-haters. In fact I beg to differ and refuse to believe it has anything to do with it.

Bitcoin is not ideological. Crypto-currency has no agenda. It is a perfectly legitimate, legally created commodity.

1f3gHNoBodYw1LLs3ndY0UanYB1tC0lnsBec4USeYoU9AREaCH34PBeGgAR67fx
MacFall
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


Agorist


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2011, 06:04:42 PM
 #53

It doesn't have to be, but it is inherently disruptive to the status quo, and libertarians and anarchists are going to use it. If you don't want to be affiliated with us, you will have to not use bitcoin. Sorry.

...No wait, I'm actually not sorry. I look forward to more and more people rejecting the political means.

No king but Christ; no law but Liberty!

Fledge Press: Pro-Liberty Fiction and Art
1JBmYmG2U5ETj8BXZUBCXDKWCQcFoERBNP
supercomax
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 06:18:23 PM
 #54

Actually, if I were from the Gov, I would simply do some online campaign claiming Bitcoin is EVIL and will make you BANKRUPT, and declare any use of it is ILLEGAL

shady financier
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


etcetera


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 06:32:28 PM
 #55

It doesn't have to be, but it is inherently disruptive to the status quo, and libertarians and anarchists are going to use it. If you don't want to be affiliated with us, you will have to not use bitcoin. Sorry.

...No wait, I'm actually not sorry. I look forward to more and more people rejecting the political means.

christ.  Roll Eyes

I will use bitcoins and still think anarcho-caps and libertarians are dumb. Millions of others will use bitcoin and not give a fuck about anarcho-caps and libertarians or what they want to achieve.

Is bitcoin disruptive? Certainly, and a good thing too in my opinion. Sure I want disruption that empowers people, but I'm not interested in the retarded inanities of people whose conception of reality amounts to little more than the self-centered egotistical petty-bourgeois ignorance of those that have never known hunger or oppression. Others just want an easy way to pay for stuff. Ideologies as usual will have to run to keep up with the world before finally falling away with exhaustion. This is how it has always been, and thank fuck for that.

1G8AUgSTAw8hfatNnDHuYEqBAUzC3qvAAL

Bitcoin news: http://thebitcoinsun.com/

Rapidlybuybitcoin here.

The value of goods, expressed in money, is called “price”, while the value of money, expressed in goods, is called “value”. C. Quigley
Anonymous
Guest

June 03, 2011, 06:35:28 PM
 #56

I wish you had one coherent clear argument against these supposedly inane ideologies along with a rational defense for your preferred system. If you could do just that, I would respect you; however, so far you have only stated your position, strewn a helter-skelter of ad hominems and fooled yourself into having the last laugh.
shady financier
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


etcetera


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 06:39:50 PM
 #57

I wish you had one coherent clear argument against these supposedly inane ideologies along with a rational defense for your preferred system. If you could do just that, I would respect you; however, so far you have only stated your position, strewn a helter-skelter of ad hominems and fooled yourself into having the last laugh.

You're right, perhaps I will start a thread, The G Manifesto.

In the mean time I do not fool myself into having the last laugh, I merely amuse myself in laughing at anarcho-caps and libertarians. I do this because it's easy, and fun.

I should be ashamed of myself though, as it's exactly like picking on autistic children.

1G8AUgSTAw8hfatNnDHuYEqBAUzC3qvAAL

Bitcoin news: http://thebitcoinsun.com/

Rapidlybuybitcoin here.

The value of goods, expressed in money, is called “price”, while the value of money, expressed in goods, is called “value”. C. Quigley
unk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 07:22:14 PM
 #58

true and well said, though a bit mean.

on the assumption that it's fine to be a libertarian when you're 17 and only objectionable if you don't outgrow it in your 20s, i'll actually answer atlas's questions in the formal terms that could possibly be persuasive to him. i'll choose to suppose that he'll learn the contextual nuance through experience eventually.

(1) if you oppose state action because of a distaste for 'violence', you ignore even a hint of any consequentialist ethic in dwelling on the state's use of force to impose law rather than on its reduction of violence in imposing law. you also ignore the negative effects of inaction. e.g., you would never kill someone, but you'd have to conclude that it's okay to let them die (rather than, say, impose a small automated tax) of 'violent' forces like illness or starvation. very few people on reflection are willing to admit that they care nothing about the consequences of their moral choices and, accordingly, bar consequentialism entirely from their ethics.

(2) markets are imperfect because (a) the starting position for everyone is not the same, (b) humans are not fully rational, (c) humans face informational asymmetries and other transaction costs in bargaining, (d) much fraud and private coercion goes undetected, including the sort that leads to monopoly and oligopoly, which in turn affects trade.

(3) advocating for a libertarian endpoint makes the same mistake of a greedy algorithm: even if you assume that no government is better than what we have, that doesn't mean that monotonically reducing government (by any measure) is superior. that requires a separate argument that is rarely if ever offered, because it's (surprise!) context-dependent and requires nuance and sensitivity.

(4) most of the criticisms of government 'coercion' are misplaced because they depend on voluntary action. don't like taxes? nobody's 'forcing' you to earn money, and you can move to a regime you prefer. don't like 'fiat currency' because it inflates? then don't hold it long-term. don't like banks because of their relationship to central bankers? nobody says you have to use them; credit unions in the united states often charge no fees and pay higher rates anyway.

(5) there are collective-action problems in many large-scale endeavors, and these relate in complex ways to pecuniary and nonpecuniary externalities. our choices affect others in many ways, not all of which are efficient. good papers on this topic are 'the tyranny of small decisions' and, actually, any good legal textbook on an economics-rich subject like contract or tort. a simple nontechnical example are the environmental costs of industrial activity, but libertarians often have a viscerally negative reaction to that point.

if you're serious about reflecting on your own beliefs, atlas, and aren't just interesting in thumping your chest and repeating the same truisms, i am happy to provide reading materials at any level of sophistication you would prefer.
Anonymous
Guest

June 03, 2011, 07:54:18 PM
 #59

true and well said, though a bit mean.

on the assumption that it's fine to be a libertarian when you're 17 and only objectionable if you don't outgrow it in your 20s, i'll actually answer atlas's questions in the formal terms that could possibly be persuasive to him. i'll choose to suppose that he'll learn the contextual nuance through experience eventually.

I'm not a libertarian. Try political nihilist.

(1) if you oppose state action because of a distaste for 'violence', you ignore even a hint of any consequentialist ethic in dwelling on the state's use of force to impose law rather than on its reduction of violence in imposing law. you also ignore the negative effects of inaction. e.g., you would never kill someone, but you'd have to conclude that it's okay to let them die (rather than, say, impose a small automated tax) of 'violent' forces like illness or starvation. very few people on reflection are willing to admit that they care nothing about the consequences of their moral choices and, accordingly, bar consequentialism entirely from their ethics.

It's impossible not to dwell on the state's use of force because the entire planet is under coercive rule. One should not have to resort to a desert island under your absurd social contract theory. One should be able to interact with other persons with no previous arrangement unless it was one they explicitly agreed to. Not only is a social contract invalid, it serves no utilitarian purpose other than possibly to serve the parasites that benefit from the current status-quo. Which brings up the question is that could a society without our current set of order function better or be on par? That has yet to be determined; however, we remain with a set of order that leaves a lot to be desired.

In addition, to your argument about a lack of order allowing many to starve and die of illness: It simply holds no water. The fact you argue that the labor of many should be enslaved (taxes) to care for the 'less fortunate', only demonstrates a certain belief that humans cannot naturally gain value from voluntarily caring for its fellow man. This is easily destroyed by the fact of the existence of effective charities and it can be further argued that these charities would be a lot more effective if they wouldn't have to compete with government monopolies on force and the ineffective systems of welfare it supports.

Simply put, there is little ground supporting the current status-quo over trying new regimes.


(2) markets are imperfect because (a) the starting position for everyone is not the same, (b) humans are not fully rational, (c) humans face informational asymmetries and other transaction costs in bargaining, (d) much fraud and private coercion goes undetected, including the sort that leads to monopoly and oligopoly, which in turn affects trade.

The starting positions for people will never be the same and I have yet to see a solid argument proving that there is something wrong with this. In fact, 'poverty-stricken' nations tend to be the most well-off in terms of happiness. Citations can be provided upon request. Also, of course humans are not fully rational, so why in the name of all that is rational would you want to put a few humans in the charge of the regime of life and our affairs? In addition, what makes you think a central regime can detect more fraud than through voluntary means? Won't a central regime with a monopoly on force would simply act more in its best-interest and encourage more fraud?

This holds absolutely no water.


(3) advocating for a libertarian endpoint makes the same mistake of a greedy algorithm: even if you assume that no government is better than what we have, that doesn't mean that monotonically reducing government (by any measure) is superior. that requires a separate argument that is rarely if ever offered, because it's (surprise!) context-dependent and requires nuance and sensitivity.

Of course but the amount of government control, it's techniques and much of its variables have been tried with absolute failure, starvation and holocaust. Really trying anything else would be better than trying the same shit again.


(4) most of the criticisms of government 'coercion' are misplaced because they depend on voluntary action. don't like taxes? nobody's 'forcing' you to earn money, and you can move to a regime you prefer. don't like 'fiat currency' because it inflates? then don't hold it long-term. don't like banks because of their relationship to central bankers? nobody says you have to use them; credit unions in the united states often charge no fees and pay higher rates anyway.

Invalid argument. Monopolies on force disrupt the ability for voluntary services to thrive for they would only threaten the enabled bodies. Also, we are forced to earn money and sustain ourselves by our very right to life. You are indirectly implying the right to live is negotiable. That the right for an individual to sustain himself can be somehow compromised.


(5) there are collective-action problems in many large-scale endeavors, and these relate in complex ways to pecuniary and nonpecuniary externalities. our choices affect others in many ways, not all of which are efficient. good papers on this topic are 'the tyranny of small decisions' and, actually, any good legal textbook on an economics-rich subject like contract or tort. a simple nontechnical example are the environmental costs of industrial activity, but libertarians often have a viscerally negative reaction to that point.

We all affect each other. So, somehow, in your arrogance that it's best we elect a powerful few to somehow effectively manage it all? There is no point here.

if you're serious about reflecting on your own beliefs, atlas, and aren't just interesting in thumping your chest and repeating the same truisms, i am happy to provide reading materials at any level of sophistication you would prefer.

You're an arrogant, pedantic, hypocritical individual.
unk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 08:03:11 PM
 #60

ah, well. ~~~~~, you were right.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »  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!