|
DATA COMMANDER (OP)
|
 |
June 19, 2011, 10:32:30 PM |
|
Just wondering how many rationalizing hypocrites we have on this board.  |
Tips are appreciated (very tiny tips are perfectly okay!) 13gDRynPfLH3NNAz3nVyU3k3mYVcfeiQuF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you see garbage posts (off-topic, trolling, spam, no point, etc.), use the "report to moderator" links. All reports are investigated, though you will rarely be contacted about your reports.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
NghtRppr
|
|
June 19, 2011, 10:36:23 PM |
|
Just wondering how many rationalizing hypocrites we have on this board. What does the contract say that you agreed to when you joined their service? They can do anything within those bounds. If you don't like it, you shouldn't have voluntarily agreed to it. |
|
|
|
|
|
DATA COMMANDER (OP)
|
|
June 19, 2011, 10:54:22 PM |
|
Just wondering how many rationalizing hypocrites we have on this board. What does the contract say that you agreed to when you joined their service? They can do anything within those bounds. If you don't like it, you shouldn't have voluntarily agreed to it. Do you actually know anything about contract law or are you just talking out of your ass? Tons of contracts are unenforceable, even from a libertarian perspective. |
Tips are appreciated (very tiny tips are perfectly okay!) 13gDRynPfLH3NNAz3nVyU3k3mYVcfeiQuF
|
|
|
|
NghtRppr
|
|
June 19, 2011, 11:11:31 PM |
|
Do you actually know anything about contract law or are you just talking out of your ass? I've studied libertarian theories of contracts and title transfer. Tons of contracts are unenforceable, even from a libertarian perspective. That's true. For example, you can't have a contract to buy a square circle because those are logically impossible. You also can't have a contract to sell true love because feelings of love aren't something that can be consciously controlled. However, this seems completely irrelevant because I highly doubt MtGox had anything that was unenforceable from a libertarian perspective. Do you even know? I doubt that as well. If you agree to a contract that gives someone authority to reverse transactions or simply take your money and run then there's nothing you can legitimately do about it except learn not to agree to such foolish contracts in the future. I have a feeling that you understand my point is valid but instead wish to engage in personal attacks. Of course, you can prove me wrong by explaining what you think is unenforceable about what you agreed to with MtGox. Otherwise, this is just a red herring. |
|
|
|
|
Timo Y
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 938
Merit: 1001
bitcoin - the aerogel of money
|
|
June 20, 2011, 10:53:13 AM |
|
It's mtgox's decision.
The owner of the site never promised you anything when you deposited your BTC or USD there. Please show me a contract signed by either party guaranteeing that there would be not rollbacks.
You have basically entrusted him to do whatever he likes with your BTC. It's the risk you were willing to take.
|
|
|
|
lemonginger
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
firstbits: 121vnq
|
|
June 20, 2011, 06:35:59 PM |
|
err no. libertarianism and rollbacks have nothing to do with each other, nor do libertarianism and "regulation". All sorts of voluntary regulations could be offered in the bitcoin economy.
besides, i fail to see how openly profiting off of stolen funds has anything to do with a libertarian(left or right) perspective on the world where being free of coercion is paramount or an anarcho-capitalism perspective where individual property rights are held up as the highest good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
myrkul
|
|
June 20, 2011, 07:01:49 PM |
|
Anyone who is against the rollback is just upset that they don't get to profit from the hack.
I don't really have a dog in the race, as I had less than .01 BTC in the account, and $0.00, But here's my interpretation:
Libertarians/AnCaps believe that the only one who should suffer for a crime is the one responsible, which is why we're so big on restitution.
MtGox is the only responsible party we're liable to catch, so, it is reasonable that they should pay to make the damaged account(s) whole, and return things, as much as possible, to the state they were in prior to the attack.
Should we ever find and track down the hacker, he would be liable for the damages his (Or her) attack did to MtGox. (probably not lost revenue, but definitely for the cost of fixing the accounts.)
|
|
|
|
|
NghtRppr
|
|
June 20, 2011, 07:17:47 PM |
|
MtGox is the only responsible party we're liable to catch, so, it is reasonable that they should pay to make the damaged account(s) whole, and return things, as much as possible, to the state they were in prior to the attack. How is MtGox responsible? That's like me letting you keep your car in my front yard with a "for sale" sign on it, the car gets stolen and then you demand that I buy you a new one. |
|
|
|
|
|
myrkul
|
|
June 20, 2011, 07:27:43 PM |
|
MtGox is the only responsible party we're liable to catch, so, it is reasonable that they should pay to make the damaged account(s) whole, and return things, as much as possible, to the state they were in prior to the attack. How is MtGox responsible? That's like me letting you keep your car in my front yard with a "for sale" sign on it, the car gets stolen and then you demand that I buy you a new one. Except that you told me you would keep that car safe, and instead left the keys in the ignition and the doors unlocked. The thief (should we find him) would still have to pay you back, because they did the actual deed, but since it was your failure to secure my belongings that caused the loss you are liable for that loss. |
|
|
|
|
NghtRppr
|
|
June 21, 2011, 03:50:33 AM |
|
Except that you told me you would keep that car safe, and instead left the keys in the ignition and the doors unlocked. Where/when exactly was that said? |
|
|
|
|
|
myrkul
|
|
June 21, 2011, 04:03:17 AM |
|
Except that you told me you would keep that car safe, and instead left the keys in the ignition and the doors unlocked. Where/when exactly was that said? You know.... I think you may have a point. I don't recall a specific promise of security. There is, however, an implied promise of security when you ask people to give you their money. |
|
|
|
benjamindees
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 21, 2011, 04:42:58 AM |
|
Nice trollish attempt to conflate libertarianism with anarcho-capitalism with this thread. Bravo.
|
Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
|
|
|
|
myrkul
|
|
June 21, 2011, 04:48:48 AM |
|
Nice trollish attempt to conflate libertarianism with anarcho-capitalism with this thread. Bravo.
Oh, untwist your panties. Ancap is just libertarianism taken to its logical conclusion. |
|
|
|
benjamindees
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 21, 2011, 05:08:24 AM |
|
Right so, since MT is going to revert all the fraudulent trades of stolen Bitcoins, because he owns the site they were made on and he thus has the ability to do so, that is somehow against the precepts of both anarcho-capitalism, which basically says that possession=ownership, and also libertarianism, which opposes theft through fraud or violence?
Once again, great thread, guys. Top notch logic, here.
|
Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
|
|
|
Tawsix
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
I have always been afraid of banks.
|
|
June 21, 2011, 06:01:34 AM |
|
Nice trollish attempt to conflate libertarianism with anarcho-capitalism with this thread. Bravo.
Oh, untwist your panties. Ancap is just libertarianism taken to its logical conclusion. Anarchism is the libertarian equivalent of the socialist's utopia. Both are equally likely to happen. |
|
|
|
caveden
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
|
|
June 21, 2011, 07:53:07 AM |
|
Anarchism is the libertarian equivalent of the socialist's utopia. Both are equally likely to happen.
You know what is even much less likely to happen than a free society? A world without intentional murders. I just can't imagine that happening... can you? And, just wondering, knowing that intentional murders will probably always happen, do you by conclusion support a minimum number of murders so everything keeps working fine, as we know it? |
|
|
|
|
|
myrkul
|
|
June 21, 2011, 08:03:46 AM |
|
Anarchism is the libertarian equivalent of the socialist's utopia. Both are equally likely to happen.
You know what is even much less likely to happen than a free society? A world without intentional murders. I just can't imagine that happening... can you? And, just wondering, knowing that intentional murders will probably always happen, do you by conclusion support a minimum number of murders so everything keeps working fine, as we know it? Couldn't have said it better. Especially not this late at night. |
|
|
|
|
DATA COMMANDER (OP)
|
|
June 22, 2011, 06:12:37 AM |
|
I find it extremely difficult to believe that if MtGox simply fixed the security issue but didn't reverse any transactions would just shrug and go, "Oh well, I guess it's their choice." Also, MtGox is responsible for their own negligence, regardless of their TOS. And by that I of course mean that they are responsible both to people who lost money due to the hack and people who they allowed to place bids which they are now not going to honor due to their own incompetence.
|
Tips are appreciated (very tiny tips are perfectly okay!) 13gDRynPfLH3NNAz3nVyU3k3mYVcfeiQuF
|
|
|
Tawsix
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
I have always been afraid of banks.
|
|
June 22, 2011, 01:53:50 PM |
|
Anarchism is the libertarian equivalent of the socialist's utopia. Both are equally likely to happen.
You know what is even much less likely to happen than a free society? A world without intentional murders. I just can't imagine that happening... can you? And, just wondering, knowing that intentional murders will probably always happen, do you by conclusion support a minimum number of murders so everything keeps working fine, as we know it? Nice straw man, I never said anything about a free society. I said that anarchism is a utopia, and it is. As long as you have idiots, you'll need laws, and a justice system to enforce them. A government that protects the rights of its people by enforcing laws that punish those who violate the NAP, either foreign or domestic, will be needed unless you live in a closed system full of really great people. Such governments would inevitably spring up under an anarchist society anyways as people found that letting people go 85 mph through residential areas isn't conducive to a safe neighborhood. Unless anarchism was enforced, at which point you would be a massive contradiction. |
|
|
|
caveden
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
|
|
June 22, 2011, 02:20:40 PM |
|
Anarchism is the libertarian equivalent of the socialist's utopia. Both are equally likely to happen.
You know what is even much less likely to happen than a free society? A world without intentional murders. I just can't imagine that happening... can you? And, just wondering, knowing that intentional murders will probably always happen, do you by conclusion support a minimum number of murders so everything keeps working fine, as we know it? Nice straw man, I never said anything about a free society. Anarchism (as in "no government") = free society, you should know. Like, if you're forced to work for others, you're not really free... I just avoid the word anarchism since it has been somehow hijacked by confused communists, and in many cultures it means "chaos". As long as you have idiots, you'll need laws, and a justice system to enforce them.
You don't need any sort of mafia to have laws and justice: http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=pt&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mises.org.br%2FArticle.aspx%3Fid%3D605A government that protects the rights of its people
That's a logical contradiction. Such governments would inevitably spring up under an anarchist society anyways as people found that letting people go 85 mph through residential areas isn't conducive to a safe neighborhood.
Sure! Only by stealing people and forcing them to abide to our decisions we can make them drive safely! Property rights and contracts are useless on that matter... how couldn't I see such a thing!? Seriously, man? That's all you've got? |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
