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

[Globb0]

Illegally gathering peoples opinions! Burn them!

[1715278636]

1715278636

[1715278636]

1715278636

[1715278636]

1715278636

[1715278636]

1715278636

[bitserve]

What possible motivation could there be for removing someones freedom of expression by using law?
It is acceptable that a government may take a different view to a sub set of it's people, but it is not acceptable that a government denies those people from  expressing themselves in a peaceful way,

It is a common misunderstanding that freedom of expression is an unlimited freedom. It isn't. You can't publish clearly racist manifests, etc...

But this is not a matter of free speech. It is a matter of breaking the law.

Expressing anything (not ilegal) in a peaceful way is ok.

Who has said/or done anything against that?

This type of expression can't in any way be describe in a negative way like you are suggesting. Its not hate speech or screaming fire in a movie theatre.

Screw the law, this is about rights!, laws can be made to say anything but it doesn't make them right. Stop looking to Law makers or the state as some unquestionable deity.

The right of peaceful free expression trumps all laws!

 

Again, free expression has nothing to do with this.

Do you think I have the right to go and just lay down in the middle of a road as a matter of "free expression"? Do police have the right (or better yet the duty) to remove me from the road for my own and others safety? Or do my right of "free expression" prevails?

DO I have the right to stash a bunch of neumatics in the middle of the road and burn them as a matter of "free expression"?

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbPuBAk_lQE

Do I have the right to block police when they are going after a criminal just because I feel like? Are they right if they just put me apart or even beat me if I persist in my obstruction?

Maybe you would prefer to live in full anarchy (if there is any country like that) but I would prefer to live according to a minimum of rules that everyone, or at least most the people, respect.

Also, for all those people that vouch for anarchy but do have Bitcoins.... Do you really think you would be able to keep hodling them when someone went to beat you to death until you gave your private keys to them... because they have the "means" and "freedom" to take it from you?

[jojo69]

wow, I don't put people on ignore very often, in fact roach is I think the only one right now, but this fascist Spaniard fuck is pissing me right off.  Peacefully cooperate with law enforcement REPRESSING A DEMOCRATIC PLEBISCITE indeed.

Watch and cry as your tidy little world of centralized power disintegrates into the dustbin of history asshole, I'm done with you.

[bitserve]

wow, I don't put people on ignore very often, in fact roach is I think the only one right now, but this fascist Spaniard fuck is pissing me right off.  Peacefully cooperate with law enforcement REPRESSING A DEMOCRATIC PLEBISCITE indeed.

Watch and cry as your tidy little world of centralized power disintegrates into the dustbin of history asshole, I'm done with you.

I would say you are the fascist here, but I do respect your opinion about this thing and also your right to never read anything from me again. No bad feelings on my part.

[conspirosphere.tk]

It is a common misunderstanding that freedom of expression is an unlimited freedom. It isn't. You can't publish clearly racist manifests, etc...

But this is not a matter of free speech. It is a matter of breaking the law.

Expressing anything (not ilegal) in a peaceful way is ok.

Who has said/or done anything against that?

This type of expression can't in any way be describe in a negative way like you are suggesting. Its not hate speech or screaming fire in a movie theatre.

Screw the law, this is about rights!, laws can be made to say anything but it doesn't make them right. Stop looking to Law makers or the state as some unquestionable deity.

The right of peaceful free expression trumps all laws!

Freedom of expression is binary: either there is or there is not. "Hate speech" is b/s. Hate is as legit as love.
That said, who does not want be governed by Spain or anything else is fully entitled to pursue his intention with any measure necessary.

[fluidjax]

What possible motivation could there be for removing someones freedom of expression by using law?
It is acceptable that a government may take a different view to a sub set of it's people, but it is not acceptable that a government denies those people from  expressing themselves in a peaceful way,

It is a common misunderstanding that freedom of expression is an unlimited freedom. It isn't. You can't publish clearly racist manifests, etc...

But this is not a matter of free speech. It is a matter of breaking the law.

Expressing anything (not ilegal) in a peaceful way is ok.

Who has said/or done anything against that?

This type of expression can't in any way be describe in a negative way like you are suggesting. Its not hate speech or screaming fire in a movie theatre.

Screw the law, this is about rights!, laws can be made to say anything but it doesn't make them right. Stop looking to Law makers or the state as some unquestionable deity.

The right of peaceful free expression trumps all laws!

Again, free expression has nothing to do with this.

Do you think I have the right to go and just lay down in the middle of a road as a matter of "free expression"? Do police have the right (or better yet the duty) to remove me from the road for my own and others safety? Or do my right of "free expression" prevails?

DO I have the right to stash a bunch of neumatics in the middle of the road and burn them as a matter of "free expression"?

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbPuBAk_lQE

Do I have the right to block police when they are going after a criminal just because I feel like? Are they right if they just put me apart or even beat me if I persist in my obstruction?

Maybe you would prefer to live in full anarchy (if there is any country like that) but I would prefer to live according to a minimum of rules that everyone, or at least most the people, respect.

Also, for all those people that vouch for anarchy but do have Bitcoins.... Do you really think you would be able to keep hodling them when someone went to beat you to death until you gave your private keys to them... because they have the "means" and "freedom" to take it from you?

Each one of your examples is not "peaceful", or it infringes on other peoples rights.
Voting infringes on no-one elses rights and is peaceful.

[conspirosphere.tk]

Voting infringes on no-one elses rights and is peaceful.

Actually it infringes if it's about ruling on other ppl's (non voters) lives.
That's why if you vote you can't complain.

[ssmc2]

Can anybody give some clarity on segwit 2x? I don't get it.

How high chance is it that it happens? Is it confirmed to happen and will it be a fork like bitcoin cash?

Bumping this, need to know to understand how it might affect price

And how much I can sell mine for to get more real BTC  

[fluidjax]

Voting infringes on no-one elses rights and is peaceful.

Actually it infringes if it's about ruling on other ppl's (non voters) lives.
That's why if you vote you can't complain.

No it doesn't, it's the expression of an opinion. The enforcement of rules (usually state/police by threat of violence)  that have been enacted by the voting mechanism, is the thing that may infringe on people's rights.

[ragnar0k]

Also, for all those people that vouch for anarchy but do have Bitcoins.... Do you really think you would be able to keep hodling them when someone went to beat you to death until you gave your private keys to them... because they have the "means" and "freedom" to take it from you?

I think you are a bit uneducated on what anarchy is, maybe you think of it as something like mad max
I guess it makes sense as media usually portrays anarchists as vegan communists with bombs in their hands

[Ludwig Von]

About the referendum it is indeed ilegal, as anyone that knows spanish law and constitution do inmediately realize. It was the Judges and not the government who sent the police to seize the ballot boxes.

Illegal or not, you shouldn't beat your own people for: a) Peacefully protesting. b) Voting.

I do completely agree. AFAIK noone was beaten for that (trying to vote or peacefully protesting). Police had strict orders from Judge to seize ballot boxes, the only people that were beaten were actively hindering (not sure if that is the right english word) the police job. In fact, in most the places they were not able to comply orders because it would have mean a major confrontation and put people (and police units themselves) in higher danger. It was an extremely complex operative, probably the most complex this country has ever coped with.

I do also recognize this incident have had a very bad impact in international media. It would have been way better to have intervened way sooner and just arrest the promoters of the rebelion without exposing any law-abiding citizens to any innecesary risk.

What possible motivation could there be for removing someones freedom of expression by using law?
It is acceptable that a government may take a different view to a sub set of it's people, but it is not acceptable that a government denies those people from  expressing themselves in a peaceful way,

It is a common misunderstanding that freedom of expression is an unlimited freedom. It isn't. You can't publish clearly racist manifests, etc...

But this is not a matter of free speech. It is a matter of breaking the law.

Expressing anything (not ilegal) in a peaceful way is ok.

Who has said/or done anything against that?

Lol, the only thing they expressed in a peaceful way is their desire to separate from Spain. Which was promptly declared illegal and hence the following violence. Also, I do not think they expressed or published racist manifests... .

YOu are right, they didn't (mostly) it was just an example that even freedom of expression has limits but, as I said, this is not a matter of freedom of expression.

The "violence" you are referring to was the outcome of police following an order from the Judges to seize the ballot boxes of an illegal "referendum". No videos I have seen show the people peacefully cooperating with law enforment on their task, on the contrary you can clearly see people actively obstructing the judicial mandate.

Anyone has the right to express their desire to separate from Spain or anything else that is not clearly ilegal (as blatant racism as an example) but NOONE has the right to be above the law and obstruct law enforcement in a task that has been ordered by the Judges. I don't think that is allowed anywhere in the world.

That said... I would have put all this shitshow to an end way sooner going directly for the promoters of the rebellion.  It is sad and very unfortunate things let go up to this point.

So far there are no promotors of rebellion. Only promotors of independency. The Spanish government has made a terrible mistake by obstructing the referendum. They should have supported it and have promoted the no voters. Which now in a strange way, stayed home. Probably because they were afraid of potential violence induced by their government.

[bitserve]

Also, for all those people that vouch for anarchy but do have Bitcoins.... Do you really think you would be able to keep hodling them when someone went to beat you to death until you gave your private keys to them... because they have the "means" and "freedom" to take it from you?

I think you are a bit uneducated on what anarchy is, maybe you think of it as something like mad max
I guess it makes sense as media usually portrays anarchists as vegan communists with bombs in their hands

Yeah, I do recognize that I don't know much about anarchy. Maybe because AFAIK there is no real life practical example. But no, I am sure pro-anarchy are not (necesarrily) vegans, comunists or terrorists or anything like that. I just can't realize what would protect someone from anyone else from being abused by other individual if there is no higher authority or controlling system or laws/rules in place that have been agreed by all the rest.


Or maybe there is.... I don't really know, never really explored much into that subject.

[ragnar0k]

Also, for all those people that vouch for anarchy but do have Bitcoins.... Do you really think you would be able to keep hodling them when someone went to beat you to death until you gave your private keys to them... because they have the "means" and "freedom" to take it from you?

I think you are a bit uneducated on what anarchy is, maybe you think of it as something like mad max
I guess it makes sense as media usually portrays anarchists as vegan communists with bombs in their hands

Yeah, I do recognize that I don't know much about anarchy. Maybe because AFAIK there is no real life practical example. But no, I am sure pro-anarchy are not (necesarrily) vegans, comunists or terrorists. I just can't realize what would protect someone from anyone else from being abused by other individual if there is no higher authority or controlling system in place that have been agreed by all the rest.


Or maybe there is.... I don't really know, never really explored much into that subject.

Your family is an example of anarchy... Not everybody have a great family, but a lot of people do and don't need a system to talk to their parents. In a strong community (which they constantly try to destroy, for whatever intention), it would be the same. Take some good readings, interesting stuff
On the other hand if your system is the one abusing you, who will protect you?

[conspirosphere.tk]

I just can't realize what would protect someone from anyone else from being abused by other individual if there is no higher authority or controlling system or laws/rules in place that have been agreed by all the rest.

You really believe that there will be a cop there to defend you if someone tries to kill you in the street?
That's funny.

[Torque]

...lol with the recent news from Russia re competing with China in Bitcon mining - coupled with the faux China ban , and taken into context with the usual bullshit the MSM spout..

This "supposed" Russia "ban"

Who could really give a flying fuck.

Not me that is for sure.

Not a single fuck given.

(Even if Putin were to come into my  house and smack the hardware  wallet outta my hands I would still laugh in his face)

He would do a little martial arts on you, and you would not be laughing, then ... 

I heard that Putin and Steven Seagal are best buds now, and Stevie has been teaching ol' Putin some Aikido.

[Torque]

About the referendum it is indeed ilegal, as anyone that knows spanish law and constitution do inmediately realize. It was the Judges and not the government who sent the police to seize the ballot boxes.

Such laws are bull shit. Referendum for independence should be every Earthing right. And specially every Europeans right.  Europe dont exist without it. It is simple as that. Countries that dont care of their citizens rights have nothing to do in Europe.

Ok, so I can go and do a "referendum" with a bunch of my friends and decide, for example, that we are not going to pay any taxes anymore?

Can now Barcelona go a do a "referendum" and secede from catalonia? Can Girona?

Maybe they can.... is it legal? No. Do they have the right? No. Should they have that right? I don't think so, but it is of course opinable.

That said... I don't think any country would let me independence from it (and not pay taxes) while leaving inside its territory. Also, it would probably a chaos if it were possible because..... who the fuck wouldn't independece then? Who would pay taxes? Who would build roads, hospitals  or anything?

I don't think it is that simple as saying that there's absolutely no limits to freedom.

P.S.: If anyone knows of a country where that is possible (and living is GOOD), just tell me. I can relocate

If the colonists of the New World had thought that same way, there would be no United States of America.

Just sayin'.  

But I don't live there where you live, so I can't judge. I'm sure the Spanish people will figure it out eventually.

Also, think about Bitcoin. Do the people have the "right" to create and use their own form of private money outside their government(s)? Granted by whom?

[infofront]

About the referendum it is indeed ilegal, as anyone that knows spanish law and constitution do inmediately realize. It was the Judges and not the government who sent the police to seize the ballot boxes.

Such laws are bull shit. Referendum for independence should be every Earthing right. And specially every Europeans right.  Europe dont exist without it. It is simple as that. Countries that dont care of their citizens rights have nothing to do in Europe.

Ok, so I can go and do a "referendum" with a bunch of my friends and decide, for example, that we are not going to pay any taxes anymore?

So if the miners decide to hardfork you follow them? Or do you stick to the consensus rules you choose? Imo Bitcoin shows the flaws of our legacy governance systems. They are are not able to soft fork. Only hard forks possible. Either you are with us or against us. Where it leads to can be found in various history books. Seems learning from past mistakes is impossible.

In the bitcoin world, if someone creates their own fork, and some hash power follows, nothing happens.

If you declare independence in the real world (create a government "fork") you'll be beaten, jailed, and/or killed.

[Wilhelm]

About the referendum it is indeed ilegal, as anyone that knows spanish law and constitution do inmediately realize. It was the Judges and not the government who sent the police to seize the ballot boxes.

Illegal or not, you shouldn't beat your own people for: a) Peacefully protesting. b) Voting.

I do completely agree. AFAIK noone was beaten for that (trying to vote or peacefully protesting). Police had strict orders from Judge to seize ballot boxes, the only people that were beaten were actively hindering (not sure if that is the right english word) the police job. In fact, in most the places they were not able to comply orders because it would have mean a major confrontation and put people (and police units themselves) in higher danger. It was an extremely complex operative, probably the most complex this country has ever coped with.

I do also recognize this incident have had a very bad impact in international media. It would have been way better to have intervened way sooner and just arrest the promoters of the rebelion without exposing any law-abiding citizens to any innecesary risk.

What possible motivation could there be for removing someones freedom of expression by using law?
It is acceptable that a government may take a different view to a sub set of it's people, but it is not acceptable that a government denies those people from  expressing themselves in a peaceful way,

It is a common misunderstanding that freedom of expression is an unlimited freedom. It isn't. You can't publish clearly racist manifests, etc...

But this is not a matter of free speech. It is a matter of breaking the law.

Expressing anything (not ilegal) in a peaceful way is ok.

Who has said/or done anything against that?

Lol, the only thing they expressed in a peaceful way is their desire to separate from Spain. Which was promptly declared illegal and hence the following violence. Also, I do not think they expressed or published racist manifests... .

YOu are right, they didn't (mostly) it was just an example that even freedom of expression has limits but, as I said, this is not a matter of freedom of expression.

The "violence" you are referring to was the outcome of police following an order from the Judges to seize the ballot boxes of an illegal "referendum". No videos I have seen show the people peacefully cooperating with law enforment on their task, on the contrary you can clearly see people actively obstructing the judicial mandate.

Anyone has the right to express their desire to separate from Spain or anything else that is not clearly ilegal (as blatant racism as an example) but NOONE has the right to be above the law and obstruct law enforcement in a task that has been ordered by the Judges. I don't think that is allowed anywhere in the world.

That said... I would have put all this shitshow to an end way sooner going directly for the promoters of the rebellion.  It is sad and very unfortunate things let go up to this point.

So far there are no promotors of rebellion. Only promotors of independency. The Spanish government has made a terrible mistake by obstructing the referendum. They should have supported it and have promoted the no voters. Which now in a strange way, stayed home. Probably because they were afraid of potential violence induced by their government.

From what I see there are two things
 - people should be heard even if you disagree
 - the world should unite instead of break down

[conspirosphere.tk]

- the world should unite instead of break down

the world is a globe, so it's already 1.
unless you mean one fuhrer or a(nother) bureaucratic monster to rule it, in which case you better count me out.

[itod]

END list, good luck!

...
10/10 bikerlezno*     LAST WINNER

it looks like lightning will strike twice at the same spot.