Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[kurious]

A voluntary society cannot be designed at all. It will be emergent. When a critical mass of people realize that the rules we tell children to live by (namely don't hurt people, don't mess with their stuff, and keep your promises) should be applied across the board, and that no other general rules are necessary, then such a society will form.

There can be no formula for dealing with people in need. As soon as such a formula is known, most of the marginally needy and some of the non-needy attempt to game the system. Subsidizing poverty creates more poverty. The best way to deal with those in need is on an individual case-by-case basis. It's too important of a problem to be left to monopolists. Concrete answers are wrong answers.

Great post,
Just wanted to say that

I read this earlier on a train and couldn't really post in response, so allow me to say this a little late:

I was starting to get a little bored of the more /less government argument.    

Also, personally I have sometimes found billyjoeallen (while obviously smart) a tad arrogant and guilty of snappy put-downs that felt unnecessarily harsh.

So, I was reacting badly to what seemed to be the utopianism and snobbery of the ancap side's arguments, mixed with frustration at the lack of a real explanation I could actually sympathise with - and I am not a conventional lifestyle type, I am all ears.

Then he posted this.

There are two basic ways to influence behavior; you can use/threaten force or you can persuade. The taxers think that persuasion is insufficient encouragement in many cases to get people to contribute to public goods. I think this ignores shame. Shaming has been regarded particularly by leftists as an unethical tactic, even if used for socially beneficial ends, but that actually depends on what you compare it to. Compared to coercion, shaming reduces violence and carries lower social costs.

There is no reason to assume that a completely voluntary society would have any less competition for social status than our present society. By imposing status costs on free riders and rewarding status to contributors, there is every reason to expect that the net level of public goods would be just as high if not higher without a monopoly government. The difference would be in how those goods were administered and their composition. Contributors would have much more control over how their contributions were distributed with a result of more efficient administration.

Competition is the force that turned single-celled organisms into vertebrates, turned apes into engineers. Sanction against violence is what differentiates civilized societies from savages and barbarians. An optimized civil society is one where competition among members is encouraged in socially beneficial ways and discouraged with regards to initiatory violence.

I am impressed and I see what reasoning is behind the philosophy.    I get it.

It is by far the most clearly written, intelligent, persuasive and therefore powerful post he has written.

I have to applaud it, it has increased my respect enormously of both him and his philosophy.

Edit - missed the actual post out

[1714702274]

1714702274

[1714702274]

1714702274

[aminorex]

I can't justify watching this paint dry any more.  Set the alarm and walk away...

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Erdogan]

insight: friend of mine working in JP Morgan in London also confirmed they are kinda elaborating their own coin as we speak..  

JPMorgancoin? lol. I can't wait for it.

They'll be great for buying early and then shorting the shit out of (like all alts).

Oh man, piling on naked shorts in JPM coin?  What competing banker could resist?

What will be their genesis? Created by a former forex whale who got lost in the gold vaults and then vanished?

[Erdogan]

Is there anybody in this mighty thread who has used bitcoin for actually purchasing something with it besides FIAT ?

Bought some gigs at Fiverr. But who cares? I'm in it for the store of value.

Zyk is not really interested. He just wants to tell you that _he_ can not use bitcoins.

[chessnut]

Billyjoelallen,

'Freeriders' are not a problem (not the small ones - technically anyone with no income is a free rider!). we have a massive surplus of work, everyone wants a job, but they are not needed, because the innovation we have seen in the 20th and 21st century has been immense.

But there is obviously a problem, this is that the income that a robot generates does not go to the poor guy it replaced, it goes all to his boss.

this is why today wealth disparity is greater than ever.

When I was young, I never understood why politicians were always trying to create work, how daft. I still dont understand.

There are always unpleasant jobs that go to people with low skills. The fact that these jobs are unpleasant is what motivates people to obtain skills, such as robot repair.

all jobs that are necessary are filled, but when the worth of the employers welfare can be regarded less than the worth of their wages, then we have a fundamental problem in society.

work needs to be rewarded more than skill, if all the people in the world were 'skilled', some would still have to clean toilets, and they would deserve none the less for it. if not more!

It is not good that the labourers that form the foundations of society are paid the least. farmers, construction workers etc... they are worth more to us than lawyers. But because there are a surplus of them, they are treated as fodder. that is fundamentally the problem, capitalism has become more about economics than it is about welfare.

yet there is so much wealth in the world that everybody could live very comfortably, working much less and sharing shifts. the 'freeriders' are not a problem, and they are not the cause of the problem, they are the outcome of innovation. there are those who are disguistingly rich that continue to abuse power and stifle innovation strategically to maximise inequality. they are the root of the problem. there are 1500 billionaires in the world and 12 million millionaires..... does that sound right to you? no man needs a billion dollars, no man needs a million dollars.

[Erdogan]

$200 billion in potential savings in retail, Etail and remittances. What about micropaypents, equities trading, voting, corporate management, wealth storage, accounting, and charities?

a $10,000 bitcoin at Google market cap is a reasonable expectation for the next couple of years, but he the upside potential is substantially greater than that.

Take a birds view. Shave off 2% of everything that is sold to consumers. More, when you realise that there is payments also during the production.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[keithers]

where has bitcoinsteve been lately?  I miss his crazy predictions...did he get assassinated by the bitcoin bilderbergers?

[seleme]

I'm bit sick of anticipating next BTC moves so I'm buying alts at the moment, there's room for profit on most of them.

[FullLife]

Anyone else received a similar email?

[chessnut]

I'm bit sick of anticipating next BTC moves so I'm buying alts at the moment, there's room for profit on most of them.

+1
I traded a BTC for some LTC yesterday, good move so far. besides the fact that alts are indeed looking promising, and moving, huobi might cause a rush into LTC.

[billyjoeallen]

I for one welcome our new corporate banking overlords. They think they are co-opting our technology when in reality it is our technology that will be co-opting them.

By far, the thing most commonly traded for bitcoin is U.S. dollars. The thing most commonly traded for corpcoins will be bitcoin. It is the most liquid cryptocurrency. Almost anything that is good for crypto is good for Bitcoin.  Bitcoinbuilder showed us an exchange can be put up in a day. It's impossible to make an altcoin that isn't an on-ramp to bitcoin. It's another facet of the anti-fragility of our system.

[CoinDox]

"Almost" anything that is good for crypto is good for Bitcoin.

[FullLife]

Anyone else received a similar email?

no, but I'd suggest not clicking the link

Don't worry, I never do.  The link is what intrigued me.  How are they using the bitcoin.org site for this phishing email?

[seldon]

Anyone else received a similar email?

no, but I'd suggest not clicking the link

Don't worry, I never do.  The link is what intrigued me.  How are they using the bitcoin.org site for this phishing email?

Most likely just a html link description.. you can hover your mouse over the link to see the actual reference

[billyjoeallen]

Billyjoelallen,

'Freeriders' are not a problem (not the small ones - technically anyone with no income is a free rider!). we have a massive surplus of work, everyone wants a job, but they are not needed, because the innovation we have seen in the 20th and 21st century has been immense.

But there is obviously a problem, this is that the income that a robot generates does not go to the poor guy it replaced, it goes all to his boss.

this is why today wealth disparity is greater than ever.

When I was young, I never understood why politicians were always trying to create work, how daft. I still dont understand.

There are always unpleasant jobs that go to people with low skills. The fact that these jobs are unpleasant is what motivates people to obtain skills, such as robot repair.

all jobs that are necessary are filled, but when the worth of the employers welfare can be regarded less than the worth of their wages, then we have a fundamental problem in society.

work needs to be rewarded more than skill, if all the people in the world were 'skilled', some would still have to clean toilets, and they would deserve none the less for it. if not more!

It is not good that the labourers that form the foundations of society are paid the least. farmers, construction workers etc... they are worth more to us than lawyers. But because there are a surplus of them, they are treated as fodder. that is fundamentally the problem, capitalism has become more about economics than it is about welfare.

yet there is so much wealth in the world that everybody could live very comfortably, working much less and sharing shifts. the 'freeriders' are not a problem, and they are not the cause of the problem, they are the outcome of innovation. there are those who are disguistingly rich that continue to abuse power and stifle innovation strategically to maximise inequality. they are the root of the problem. there are 1500 billionaires in the world and 12 million millionaires..... does that sound right to you? no man needs a billion dollars, no man needs a million dollars.

You must have never been an employer. How can laborers be the foundation of society if they can be easily replaced by robots? Would robots then be the foundation of society? I agree that lawyers are mostly scum, but there is no way to overturn the laws of supply and demand by legislative fiat. Employers pay what they have to pay given the labor market conditions and workers take the best options available to them given the same. There will never be a time when the common man will only work for two days a week because competition for status and mates will exist at every wage level.

You would need at least a billion dollars if you were in love with Kate Upton and you were ugly. You would need at least a million dollars for any girl in the 90210 area code.

There are skilled labor shortages in many industries. There are unskilled labor surpluses. The free market could easily and quickly solve both these problems if the government would get out of the way.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[FullLife]

Anyone else received a similar email?

no, but I'd suggest not clicking the link

Don't worry, I never do.  The link is what intrigued me.  How are they using the bitcoin.org site for this phishing email?

Most likely just a html link description.. you can hover your mouse over the link to see the actual reference

Right, forgot about that.

[chessnut]

Billyjoelallen,

'Freeriders' are not a problem (not the small ones - technically anyone with no income is a free rider!). we have a massive surplus of work, everyone wants a job, but they are not needed, because the innovation we have seen in the 20th and 21st century has been immense.

But there is obviously a problem, this is that the income that a robot generates does not go to the poor guy it replaced, it goes all to his boss.

this is why today wealth disparity is greater than ever.

When I was young, I never understood why politicians were always trying to create work, how daft. I still dont understand.

There are always unpleasant jobs that go to people with low skills. The fact that these jobs are unpleasant is what motivates people to obtain skills, such as robot repair.

all jobs that are necessary are filled, but when the worth of the employers welfare can be regarded less than the worth of their wages, then we have a fundamental problem in society.

work needs to be rewarded more than skill, if all the people in the world were 'skilled', some would still have to clean toilets, and they would deserve none the less for it. if not more!

It is not good that the labourers that form the foundations of society are paid the least. farmers, construction workers etc... they are worth more to us than lawyers. But because there are a surplus of them, they are treated as fodder. that is fundamentally the problem, capitalism has become more about economics than it is about welfare.

yet there is so much wealth in the world that everybody could live very comfortably, working much less and sharing shifts. the 'freeriders' are not a problem, and they are not the cause of the problem, they are the outcome of innovation. there are those who are disguistingly rich that continue to abuse power and stifle innovation strategically to maximise inequality. they are the root of the problem. there are 1500 billionaires in the world and 12 million millionaires..... does that sound right to you? no man needs a billion dollars, no man needs a million dollars.

You must have never been an employer. How can laborers be the foundation of society if they can be easily replaced by robots? Would robots then be the foundation of society? I agree that lawyers are mostly scum, but there is no way to overturn the laws of supply and demand by legislative fiat. Employers pay what they have to pay given the labor market conditions and workers take the best options available to them given the same. There will never be a time when the common man will only work for two days a week because competition for status and mates will exist at every wage level.

You would need at least a billion dollars if you were in love with Kate Upton and you were ugly. You would need at least a million dollars for any girl in the 90210 area code.

There are skilled labor shortages in many industries. There are unskilled labor surpluses. The free market could easily and quickly solve both these problems if the government would get out of the way.

if robots are the foundation of society, then we should all benefit equally from them. we dont, the wages of the robots go to an elite group of people, and generally not innovators.

Innovation used to be this; a man builds a well. he is rewarded because he doesnt have to walk 5 hours a day to get water from a stream (free rider), and society is thankful to have a well in the community, he is praised.

today if a man builds the metaphorical well, he privatises the water system and everyone dies of thirst.

innovation does not naturally need monetary incentive.