I am very confused.

[Rarity]

No system of government is immune from mistakes. Thousands of years of civilization have taught us all we need to know of so-called "benevolent" dictatorship.  Democracy has the benefit of at least striving to enact the will of the people, instead of the whims of tyrants or oligarchs.  

[1714192521]

1714192521

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

Assume you have the payment system ready, convince me as a merchant to use your system without me exchange the coins back to fiat currency.

Possibility to receive remote payments with no VAT nor need to declare income or any other sales taxes, just like you'd do with cash payments. Not enough? You get zero credit card fees as a gift.

And there's no problem if you convert it back to cash to make your daily expenses, as long as you avoid the banking system which may track you down. But if you manage not to convert it and make your expenses in bitcoins as well, more profits to you. And even more profits if you manage to convince your suppliers to accept bitcoin payments as well.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

In the primal state bitcoin is not good for redistribution, but once you have a government that identifies the users by address it is perfect for it because of the transaction log.  

Holy crap! People like you are the reason totalitarian governments ever came to be.

[Red]

Democracy has the benefit of at least striving to enact the will of the people, instead of the whims of tyrants or oligarchs.  

I'm quite a fan of Democracy myself. I'm also one of those people with my own will. You, however, don't seem so interested in enacting the will of the people I know. That I find, troubling and a bit tyrannical.

Express a point of view and i'll tell you if I'm with your or against you.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the Wall Street bailouts. My sentiments are not, however, because bankers are evil. It is because any banker who needed to be bailed out, by definition "sucks at banking!" I think people who suck at their jobs should lose them.

However, for every banker that needed to be bailed out, there are 10 more who are actually good at their jobs. If you make a histogram of bailed out bankers vs the universities they attended a pattern will become clear. Those who sucked at their jobs, tended to go to very prestigious often liberal universities. (Harvard, Columbia, Yale) Very few went to Iowa State, University of North Dakota, or other random state universities. There are plenty of bankers doing a good job of managing, loaning, and stimulating the economy using other people's money. They went to go to universities you've never heard of where you are sure that only mediocre people must go.

To big to fail banks are a really bad concept to implement.
The same is true when it comes assigning power to governments. Smaller competing societies are better and more stable than ostensibly optimized large ones. I'll put my democracy up against your democracy any day.

[rainingbitcoins]

You, however, don't seem so interested in enacting the will of the people I know.

The will of the people you know is largely shaped by over 100 years of anti-leftist propaganda saturating every facet of American society.

[Red]

The will of the people you know is largely shaped by over 100 years of anti-leftist propaganda saturating every facet of American society.

So are you saying, enacting the will of the people is not so important. What is important is enacting the will of "the right people."  How would you differentiate that from tyranny?

[rainingbitcoins]

Enacting the will of the people is important if it's genuinely their will. If they don't even know what to believe after a lifetime of lies, omissions, and indoctrination, education is a more important first step.

[Red]

Enacting the will of the people is important if it's genuinely their will. If they don't even know what to believe after a lifetime of lies, omissions, and indoctrination, education is a more important first step.

I can assure you this is genuinely my will. It is genuinely the will of the people around me. Quite frankly, most of the people around me deliberately left the people around you. Not because life would be easier out in the wilderness, but because their life would be better without people like you. It is quite disingenuous to question their "education" because they don't agree with you. My people aren't asking to rule over you. They are asking to be left alone by you.

You certainly didn't address any of my above comments about "education" above. It sure seems like "the proper education" doesn't correlate to actually being successful at the job responsibilities those bankers asked for. Why do your presume the same education would lead to success in those you wish to rule over me?

[rainingbitcoins]

Enacting the will of the people is important if it's genuinely their will. If they don't even know what to believe after a lifetime of lies, omissions, and indoctrination, education is a more important first step.

I can assure you this is genuinely my will. It is genuinely the will of the people around me. Quite frankly, most of the people around me deliberately left the people around you. Not because life would be easier out in the wilderness, but because their life would be better without people like you. It is quite disingenuous to question their "education" because they don't agree with you. My people aren't asking to rule over you. They are asking to be left alone by you.

The thing about being left alone in today's society is that it's entirely impossible. And the things libertarians advocate in the name of being left alone are tremendously destructive to the rest of society.

And of course the person who readily consumes propaganda thinks it's his genuine will. It wouldn't be very effective propaganda if he didn't.

In American society's rush to the right, a lot has been left behind. For instance,

"College kids today are about 40 percent lower in empathy than their counterparts of 20 or 30 years ago, as measured by standard tests of this personality trait."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100528081434.htm

Was that their will? I'm sure every one of them would say yes, but does that make it so?

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

I found out about this currency two weeks ago. I acted on it because it will meet the needs of an idea of mine and now I am coming to realize it challenges the powers that be. I never expected much out of its current form since it is so young.

What is confusing is that people are declaring it dead because it can't maintain a constant price after an increase over 1000 times? I really don't understand this. Somebody please tell me how Bitcoin is suffering right now? From what I am seeing it has had great progress. I don't see anything to complain about.

Touché.

[Technomage]

The price will stabilize eventually, at least for a while. I see the next few months being fairly stable unless some big developments come up in the Bitcoin world that get us more demand. We're seeing a stabilization to $1 - $3 right now which is probably where it'll be until Bitcoin starts to fulfill its potential a little more.

This is a good thing for Bitcoin, now everyone sees it's extremely risky as an investment. It's better to focus on developing it as a currency and using it, instead of trying to get rich by investing in it.

Investing is fine but people need to understand it's very high risk, you need to know what you're doing.

[cbeast]

Enacting the will of the people is important if it's genuinely their will. If they don't even know what to believe after a lifetime of lies, omissions, and indoctrination, education is a more important first step.

I can assure you this is genuinely my will. It is genuinely the will of the people around me. Quite frankly, most of the people around me deliberately left the people around you. Not because life would be easier out in the wilderness, but because their life would be better without people like you. It is quite disingenuous to question their "education" because they don't agree with you. My people aren't asking to rule over you. They are asking to be left alone by you.

The thing about being left alone in today's society is that it's entirely impossible. And the things libertarians advocate in the name of being left alone are tremendously destructive to the rest of society.

And of course the person who readily consumes propaganda thinks it's his genuine will. It wouldn't be very effective propaganda if he didn't.

In American society's rush to the right, a lot has been left behind. For instance,

"College kids today are about 40 percent lower in empathy than their counterparts of 20 or 30 years ago, as measured by standard tests of this personality trait."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100528081434.htm

Was that their will? I'm sure every one of them would say yes, but does that make it so?

This is why I think bitcoin will succees as a currency.  It requires no trust. Our modern sociopathic culture will embrace bitcoin until they realize that money does not build a society.

[Rassah]

The thing about being left alone in today's society is that it's entirely impossible. And the things libertarians advocate in the name of being left alone are tremendously destructive to the rest of society.

Um, how so?

the government simply assigns an address to each citizen and these addresses are the only legal means of sending or receiving the coins.  Anything outside the whitelist is considered illegal by default.  This system does not interfere with the actual network at all, it just defines how the network is legally used in a country.

What about addresses owned by people in other countries? Would all of their addresses have to be whitelisted? And if not, what would prevent someone from receiving illegitimate money, sending it to an account overseas, and then having that money sent back to their own whitelisted address? (i.e. money laundering) You can't blame someone who doesn't even belong to our legal system for not keeping track of "legal" vs "illegal" money, can you?

[Revalin]

What is confusing is that people are declaring it dead because it can't maintain a constant price after an increase over 1000 times? I really don't understand this. Somebody please tell me how Bitcoin is suffering right now? From what I am seeing it has had great progress. I don't see anything to complain about.

There are several different groups here:

Miners: Hash power lags price, so when the price is rising, miners make money; when it's falling, they're unprofitable.  Right now mining is useful to people who want to acquire coins without exchanges, or who just want to support the network.  Bitcoin is dead to for-profit miners, and will stay dead unless the price surges again, in which case it'll be profitable briefly.

Speculative investors:  A few got in early and aren't about to complain.  Most bought in above $10, and they're in the middle of a bloodbath.  The ones who say it's dead lost it all; the ones who say it's alive are trying to catch a falling knife.  Most will grab too early and get a handful of blade, but a few will get lucky and grab the handle.

Trolls:  Bitcoin was stillborn, is dead, was always dead, will always be dead, and anything it ever does is because it's a fucking zombie and we need to shoot it in the head.

Cryptoconsumers (My camp): We want to buy and sell things and don't care much about the exchange rate.  For us, Bitcoin is still in its infancy: there are still far too few places accepting it, and volatility is a real drag on acceptance; in my opinion a more stable altchain may eventually win for this reason.  But it (Bitcoin proper, and cryptocurrency generally) is still very much alive, and I have no reason to run away.

[Red]

The thing about being left alone in today's society is that it's entirely impossible. And the things libertarians advocate in the name of being left alone are tremendously destructive to the rest of society.

If your society can't get along without the libertarians, well I think you aught to give them a little more respect.
My society, however, gets along fine without liberals

And of course the person who readily consumes propaganda thinks it's his genuine will. It wouldn't be very effective propaganda if he didn't.

In American society's rush to the right, a lot has been left behind. For instance,

Laughing my ass off at the use of propaganda phrases as if it's his genuine will!

"College kids today are about 40 percent lower in empathy than their counterparts of 20 or 30 years ago, as measured by standard tests of this personality trait."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100528081434.htm

Was that their will? I'm sure every one of them would say yes, but does that make it so?

They're autistic, fat and read Japanese comic books too. And when they gather in groups they tend to steal from one another as well. So what's your point? It has been no secret since the sixties that hippies don't know how to raise kids.

But now with all you've given them, you want to take away their "free" will too?

[Party Hard]

And we drink more beer and look for ways to beat the man just so we can spend less time working for the man. And we cavort. And we post inane things on Bitcoin forums. Guess I should sign up to be a libertarian. Where's the official form to do that?

[Red]

And we drink more beer and look for ways to beat the man just so we can spend less time working for the man. And we cavort. And we post inane things on Bitcoin forums. Guess I should sign up to be a libertarian. Where's the official form to do that?

There's no form. Just a little kool-aid. No wait... There is a form! Maybe they mail you the kool-aid.

But trust me, if really want to spend "less time working for the man." Then when you go to parties, stick to the tea.

[evoorhees]

I grew up wealthy and have done very well for myself in my own career, I'll be happy to see my money be taxed at a higher rate to support those in need.

Let's examine this.

Say you have $100,000 at the end of the year. You can either send it to the IRS, or your can make a tax-deductible donation to a charity of your choice. In one case, $100,000 of funding goes to the Government, in the other case $100,000 of funding goes to charity.

It seems you'd rather let the government have it, instead of the charity. Now, you'll argue that much of what the government does is valuable "charity" work. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that a whopping 90% of government funding goes to benevolent, wonderfully effective charity programs. The remaining 10% goes to war, bombs, killing people, subsidizing oil companies, paying massive farm corporations to sit on excess crops and burn them to raise prices, and paying foreign dictators to suppress and harm their people.

Alternatively, 100% of it could go to a wonderful private charity group, and 0% to war, bombs, killing people, and the myriad evils of government.  

Why is it that you choose to bomb and kill people with 10% of your money? And why do you think it's okay to force me to bomb and kill people? Please make the argument why that money isn't better given to the private charity that isn't killing people.

[rainingbitcoins]

If your society can't get along without the libertarians, well I think you aught to give them a little more respect.
My society, however, gets along fine without liberals

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, but your society includes quite a few liberals even if you live in the Deep South. I've lived there before, too, so I know.

So what's your point? It has been no secret since the sixties that hippies don't know how to raise kids.

I honestly have no idea how this line follows from what I wrote. Are you drunk? You went from assuming all of the protesters were overweight thieves based on a typically inflammatory article from the NY freaking Post and then took it a step further to assume that all college kids are like the protesters. Do I have that right? Also you seem to have assumed that the 18-year-olds today are the children of the 65-year-old hippies, which is... yeah. I give up.

[Rarity]

In the primal state bitcoin is not good for redistribution, but once you have a government that identifies the users by address it is perfect for it because of the transaction log.  

Holy crap! People like you are the reason totalitarian governments ever came to be.

You appear to be the one defending the totalitarian system of oligarchical rulership by financial centers and central banks.  I believe in the power of the people to rule themselves.

I'm quite a fan of Democracy myself. I'm also one of those people with my own will. You, however, don't seem so interested in enacting the will of the people I know. That I find, troubling and a bit tyrannical.

People not voting the way you want isn't tyranny. Did the people you know vote for Barack Obama and a Senate controlled by Democrats?  Those are the people you know?   The majority of the country will come around to the leftist point of view, conservative government and rulership by financial elites has not proven worthwhile.

What about addresses owned by people in other countries?

I've linked a thread where I get more in depth on the details, it would be silly to go all over it in another thread when there is one still open with all that discussed.

It seems you'd rather let the government have it, instead of the charity. Now, you'll argue that much of what the government does is valuable "charity" work. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that a whopping 90% of government funding goes to benevolent, wonderfully effective charity programs. The remaining 10% goes to war, bombs, killing people, subsidizing oil companies, paying massive farm corporations to sit on excess crops and burn them to raise prices, and paying foreign dictators to suppress and harm their people.

Alternatively, 100% of it could go to a wonderful private charity group, and 0% to war, bombs, killing people, and the myriad evils of government.  

Why is it that you choose to bomb and kill people with 10% of your money? And why do you think it's okay to force me to bomb and kill people? Please make the argument why that money isn't better given to the private charity that isn't killing people.

Defense of the nation is a duty a Democratic government cannot ignore.  I am also a fan of our efforts in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya to overthrow authoritarian governments and replace them with the power of the people.  One of the greatest strengths of Democratic governments is the ability to triumph over the weaker systems of government in military conflict.

As for private charity, it is great and I do give some of my income towards it but governments are much better at total coverage.  Healthcare charity doesn't produce universal coverage of everyone in any country on Earth, only socialism does that.