scenarios if US Govt tried to take down bitcoin?

[crumbs]

All you have done thus far is critique.  As they say, the most dispensable person in the theater is the critic

Ought I leave that role to you alone?

The notion that something is perfect, or even best, simply because it succeeded is the death of innovation.

The notion of success being an indicator of worth is the fundament of every attempt to validate the unregulated free market & similar socio-Darwinian baloney

[stash]

What about fed created the bitcoin system itself. Being promoted as anonymous but instead can be tracked easily by them with their own ready tracking system. Bitcoin use SHA256 which is endorsed by NSA. What a stupid move by satoshi to create currency that would revolutionize world from banking slave but using algo that been control by fed gang.

[Lauda]

What about fed created the bitcoin system itself. Being promoted as anonymous but instead can be tracked easily by them with their own ready tracking system. Bitcoin use SHA256 which is endorsed by NSA. What a stupid move by satoshi to create currency that would revolutionize world from banking slave but using algo that been control by fed gang.

This is why we have alts.

[NewLiberty]

All you have done thus far is critique.  As they say, the most dispensable person in the theater is the critic

Ought I leave that role to you alone?

The notion that something is perfect, or even best, simply because it succeeded is the death of innovation.

The notion of success being an indicator of worth is the fundament of every attempt to validate the unregulated free market & similar socio-Darwinian baloney

Even if your goal were validate the unregulated free market & similar socio-Darwinianism with your fundament, the panglossian monadology of "it is, therefore it is good", is thin gruel.

[crumbs]

All you have done thus far is critique.  As they say, the most dispensable person in the theater is the critic

Ought I leave that role to you alone?

The notion that something is perfect, or even best, simply because it succeeded is the death of innovation.

The notion of success being an indicator of worth is the fundament of every attempt to validate the unregulated free market & similar socio-Darwinian baloney

Even if your goal were validate the unregulated free market & similar socio-Darwinianism with your fundament, the panglossian monadology of "it is, therefore it is good", is thin gruel.

Of course it is.  What survives is what survives  "What is best" is a predicate without a subject (Best for (what???)).
The free market is guaranteed to give us simply that which survives (succeeds), nothing more or less.

"Panglossian monadology"? Leibniz's "everything that is, exists according to reason, and thus this world is the best of all *possible* worlds"?  The sage words of Killdozer further clarified that metaphysical stance for us, the modern scholars:

Let me tell you something my friend
In the best of all possible worlds
That is to say
In this world as well as all other worlds
Why i'm the best of all short-order fry cooks!

[NewLiberty]

All you have done thus far is critique.  As they say, the most dispensable person in the theater is the critic

Ought I leave that role to you alone?

The notion that something is perfect, or even best, simply because it succeeded is the death of innovation.

The notion of success being an indicator of worth is the fundament of every attempt to validate the unregulated free market & similar socio-Darwinian baloney

Even if your goal were validate the unregulated free market & similar socio-Darwinianism with your fundament, the panglossian monadology of "it is, therefore it is good", is thin gruel.

Of course it is.  What survives is what survives  "What is best" is a predicate without a subject (Best for (what???)).
The free market is guaranteed to give us simply that which survives (succeeds), nothing more or less.

"Panglossian monadology"? Leibniz's "everything that is, exists according to reason, and thus this world is the best of all *possible* worlds"?  The sage words of Killdozer further clarified that metaphysical stance for us, the modern scholars:

Let me tell you something my friend
In the best of all possible worlds
That is to say
In this world as well as all other worlds
Why i'm the best of all short-order fry cooks!

Is your premise that the free market produced all the governments, and because they are here is why they are good?  Or is this a reductio ad absurdum of someone else's straw man?

[crumbs]

All you have done thus far is critique.  As they say, the most dispensable person in the theater is the critic

Ought I leave that role to you alone?

The notion that something is perfect, or even best, simply because it succeeded is the death of innovation.

The notion of success being an indicator of worth is the fundament of every attempt to validate the unregulated free market & similar socio-Darwinian baloney

Even if your goal were validate the unregulated free market & similar socio-Darwinianism with your fundament, the panglossian monadology of "it is, therefore it is good", is thin gruel.

Of course it is.  What survives is what survives  "What is best" is a predicate without a subject (Best for (what???)).
The free market is guaranteed to give us simply that which survives (succeeds), nothing more or less.

"Panglossian monadology"? Leibniz's "everything that is, exists according to reason, and thus this world is the best of all *possible* worlds"?  The sage words of Killdozer further clarified that metaphysical stance for us, the modern scholars:

Let me tell you something my friend
In the best of all possible worlds
That is to say
In this world as well as all other worlds
Why i'm the best of all short-order fry cooks!

Is your premise that the free market produced all the governments, and because they are here is why they are good?  Or is this a reductio ad absurdum of someone else's straw man?

Lol no.  I simply pointed out that your claim of governments having "...monopoly on the right to kill, steal and imprison and impoverish" is absurd. 

If you would like me to take a position on this, i'd point out that "the governments" may be good for some (things/people) and bad for others.  The word "good" needs context, or at least a subject to be meaningful.
(Is killing "good"?  A meaningless question.  It's good for the killer, ideal when there's killing to be done.  For the victim, not so much.)

[User705]

The people with the brightest ignore buttons are the most interesting to read.

[NewLiberty]

Lol no.  I simply pointed out that your claim of governments having "...monopoly on the right to kill, steal and imprison and impoverish" is absurd.  

If you would like me to take a position on this, i'd point out that "the governments" may be good for some (things/people) and bad for others.  The word "good" needs context, or at least a subject to be meaningful.
(Is killing "good"?  A meaningless question.  It's good for the killer, ideal when there's killing to be done.  For the victim, not so much.)

OK, I'll bite.  Maybe today is the day you teach me something.  Who besides the governments have these rights?  Or is it that governments don't have them?
You have heard of Max Weber, yes?

[beetcoin]

government isn't incompetent. those politicians and bureaucrats know exactly what they're doing - it's just that they don't care enough to do anything about it.. because they are self serving sycophants.

they have all these "backdoor" deals with corporations and interest groups, all while smiling in front of the camera, espousing how they are such willing "public servants."

the difference between a politician and a prostitute is that.. the prostitute can still have some dignity.

[crumbs]

Lol no.  I simply pointed out that your claim of governments having "...monopoly on the right to kill, steal and imprison and impoverish" is absurd.  

If you would like me to take a position on this, i'd point out that "the governments" may be good for some (things/people) and bad for others.  The word "good" needs context, or at least a subject to be meaningful.
(Is killing "good"?  A meaningless question.  It's good for the killer, ideal when there's killing to be done.  For the victim, not so much.)

OK, I'll bite.  Maybe today is the day you teach me something.  Who besides the governments have these rights?  Or is it that governments don't have them?
You have heard of Max Weber, yes?

You have a curious way of misunderstanding things.  Possibly due to getting wasted on your own Kool-Aid.  Not sure how much good my teaching would do in your condition, but i suppose it doesn't hurt to try, so here goes:

No one has the right to kill*, steal** or impoverish***, including the government.  That's where your logic begins to stray.

Let's take killing.
By killing, i assume you don't mean poisoning rats or slaughtering cows, but rather unjustly murdering human beings.  Why "unjustly"?  Simply because, under many circumstances, in my beloved land of the free, *you* have the right to murder people.  You know this, and own guns designed specifically for that purpose.  You have bragged about it on this forum.  So i'm surprised you would ask me now who else has the right to kill.  *You do.

If my goal was to simply win an argument, the above would be enough.  But my goal is to educate and enlighten, so i will address your other claims.

Stealing.
Let's google us up a definition:
"Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it."
By "stealing," i assume you are referring to taxation, a subject addressed by a large body of law & to which your government has explicit legal rights.  And which you have explicit legal duty to pay.  **Taxation is not theft, it is your government's legal right and your legal duty.

Impoverishment.
Your government wants to impoverish you as much as a cattle rancher wants his cattle to get skinny & sickly -- not at all.
Just like the rancher, you government wants you to be fat, happy and healthy.  It wants you to be fruitful and multiply, giving it moar willing milkers to milk and plump beefs to slaughter.  If you become impoverished, the whole subject of taxation becomes moot -- collecting taxes on nothing is a fool's errand.  ***Your government loves and protects you silly bovines.

The Government is your shepherd; you shall not want.
I make thee to lie down in green pastures:
I leade thee beside the still waters of Money River.
I restore thine credit rating:
I leade thee in the paths of sound business practices for fair taxation's sake.
Yea, though thee walketh through the valley of scammy BTC-denominated securities,
Thee shall fear no evil: for thou art with me;
My rod and my staff they comfort thee.

/lesson

[NewLiberty]

So on crumb world, no one has these rights, except that everyone has them, and they are administered by the psalm 23 government?
Your Kool-aide is very strong stuff my friend.

[crumbs]

So on crumb world, no one has these rights, except that everyone has them, and they are administered by the psalm 23 government?
Your Kool-aide is very strong stuff my friend.

This world is your world, NewLiberty.  I don't wish you to feel left out.
Drink deep of sweet nectar that is my prospectus.
I anoint thine refineries with light sweet crude; thine tank runneth over.

[uMMcQxCWELNzkt]

US have no intention to take it down.

They cannot take it down. Can you take down Internet ?

Actually the internet can be taken down, it is very unlikely but it is possible even by a small group of hackers. There is also an interesting TED talk where one of the early adopters of the internet was warning of a potential take down, and the need for a backup options.

[NewLiberty]

So on crumb world, no one has these rights, except that everyone has them, and they are administered by the psalm 23 government?
Your Kool-aide is very strong stuff my friend.

Drink deep of sweet nectar that is my prospectus.
I anoint thine refineries with light sweet crude; thine tank runneth over.

Nay, that drought is too strong for me, it has you imagining me bragging about my owning guns and the right to kill, I suspect hallucinogens or some other paranoia inducing substance.  You might want to get yourself checked out before you get checked in.

[crumbs]

So on crumb world, no one has these rights, except that everyone has them, and they are administered by the psalm 23 government?
Your Kool-aide is very strong stuff my friend.

Drink deep of sweet nectar that is my prospectus.
I anoint thine refineries with light sweet crude; thine tank runneth over.

Nay, that drought is too strong for me, it has you imagining me bragging about my owning guns and the right to kill, I suspect hallucinogens or some other paranoia inducing substance.  You might want to get yourself checked out before you get checked in.

You do not own a handgun?

[NewLiberty]

So on crumb world, no one has these rights, except that everyone has them, and they are administered by the psalm 23 government?
Your Kool-aide is very strong stuff my friend.

Drink deep of sweet nectar that is my prospectus.
I anoint thine refineries with light sweet crude; thine tank runneth over.

Nay, that drought is too strong for me, it has you imagining me bragging about my owning guns and the right to kill, I suspect hallucinogens or some other paranoia inducing substance.  You might want to get yourself checked out before you get checked in.

You do not own a handgun?

I have never said whether I do, or do not, and with great certainty have never bragged about it either way.
Seriously, seek therapy. Trying to make this about me is not going to help you find yourself.

[Johanna]

So on crumb world, no one has these rights, except that everyone has them, and they are administered by the psalm 23 government?
Your Kool-aide is very strong stuff my friend.

Drink deep of sweet nectar that is my prospectus.
I anoint thine refineries with light sweet crude; thine tank runneth over.

Nay, that drought is too strong for me, it has you imagining me bragging about my owning guns and the right to kill, I suspect hallucinogens or some other paranoia inducing substance.  You might want to get yourself checked out before you get checked in.

You do not own a handgun?

Cant buy a handgun in my country.....

[crumbs]

So on crumb world, no one has these rights, except that everyone has them, and they are administered by the psalm 23 government?
Your Kool-aide is very strong stuff my friend.

Drink deep of sweet nectar that is my prospectus.
I anoint thine refineries with light sweet crude; thine tank runneth over.

Nay, that drought is too strong for me, it has you imagining me bragging about my owning guns and the right to kill, I suspect hallucinogens or some other paranoia inducing substance.  You might want to get yourself checked out before you get checked in.

You do not own a handgun?

I have never said whether I do, or do not, and with great certainty have never bragged about it either way.
Seriously, seek therapy. Trying to make this about me is not going to help you find yourself.

After i have refuted each one of your claims, point-by-point, on this very page, you *tried to make this about me* by derailing this thread and suggesting i seek therapy.  One notch above "NO U!"

Refusing to be educated, ignoring facts, flinging ad hominems after being corrected by your betters and then forgetting to thank them ... Why, that's what brought about your sorry state in the first place.  I'm afraid therapy can't help you now.
Not even industrial strength Obamacare.

Regarding the handgun tangent:  I was confusing you with the user MoonShadow.  The two of you, posting in the same thread, were difficult to distinguish for those unversed in the finer points of teabaggery.

[crumbs]

...
Cant buy a handgun in my country.....

Hey, come on over to ours -- we got enough for everyone!