:: Re: [unSYSTEM] oh fuck it's really …
Página superior
Eliminar este mensaje
Responder a este mensaje
Autor: Chris
Fecha:  
A: System undo crew
Asunto: Re: [unSYSTEM] oh fuck it's really happening... bitcoin is under attack
Property rights outside items of use and occupancy is not Anarchist,
unless one believes that the contradictory retardation of
anarcho-capitalism really is a thing.


On 29.04.14 19:06, Chris Pacia wrote:
> I would just clarify. Many (most?) US libertarians are anarchists and
> also believe in property rights.
>
> And to say libertarians would suggest bitcoin should be owned I think
> misunderstands what we stand for. We oppose violence and coercion in
> human relations. We support "anything peaceful" be it property based,
> communal, open source or what have you.
>
> -Chris
>
> On Apr 29, 2014 12:23 PM, "John Hebert" <johnalexhebert@???
> <mailto:johnalexhebert@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Interesting point about "If bitcoin was libertarian it would have
>     been owned by someone from the beginning.". However, not all
>     libertarians believe in individual property rights. That seems to be
>     an interpretation of US libertarians. Others associate
>     libertarianism with anarchism.[1]

>
>     Bitcoin mining was a weak point in the design though I can't think
>     of a better solution. I think Satoshi underestimated Moore's Law and
>     the impact of innovation driven by greed publicly justified by an
>     intent for wide-spread adoption. I predict the 21 million bitcoin
>     limit will be reached much sooner than 2140. Prepare now for the
>     bitcoin cults predicting the end of the world. 

>
>     I've always considered bitcoin to be a currency allowing for the
>     private exchange of goods. I don't think it was intended to be used
>     for speculation. More people are speculating bitcoins to cash out
>     than using them for the exchange of goods. 

>
>     [1] http://goo.gl/vG3GvH

>
>     John

>
>
>
>     On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Tomer Kantor <pollenator@???
>     <mailto:pollenator@gmail.com>> wrote:

>
>         IMO this comes down to 'what is bitcoin?'

>
>         If bitcoin was libertarian it would have been owned by someone
>         from the beginning.
>         It is commonly understood that it is Anarcho (Cap/Syn). The
>         'rules' are anarchic, but with the formation of mining
>         guilds/foundation we get structural power.
>         To Amir's point that the foundation is financing the development
>         team; that's the beginning of centralisation, no doubt.

>
>         The protocol doesn't have strong property rights that allows for
>         top down control of the system, it was written in an anarchist
>         form, so there could/should be no owner of bitcoin.

>
>         TK

>
>
>         On 28 April 2014 12:34, Joerg Platzer <joerg@???
>         <mailto:joerg@room77.de>> wrote:

>
>             @Luke

>
>             Now i don't even call myself a 'libertarian' as I know too
>             many weird people labeling themselves libertarian.

>
>             But as clear as the window I cleaned this morning:

>
>             of course Bitcoin _is_ anarchism as it has no leader as long
>             as we don't designate one and change the protocol in ways
>             that allow to control it and hand that over to the leader.

>
>             Of course Bitcoin _is_ volanteerism as long as it is
>             everybody's free desicion to use it or not, volantarily.

>
>             And of course Bitcoin _is_ a movement for financial freedom,
>             what else could it possibly be? You are one hell of a coder
>             and do not understand that?

>
>             When I read this Circle guy's comments like "Bitcoin is
>             absolutely moving away from its libertarian roots." I'm like
>             yeah, sure, and bacon and eggs is absolutely moving away
>             from the bacon or what!? What a nonsense. These people are
>             screaming for government regulation in order to save me from
>             identity theft through Bitcoin. They wish to protect me and
>             'de-risk' Bitcoin. The most hilarious statement is that the
>             reason for banks not getting involved is that they are
>             scared to have to go to jail. As if one banker ever was sent
>             to jail.

>
>             Whoever wants to adopt Bitcoin is free to do so or not and I
>             don't care about their political views as long as they leave
>             me alone. But the people we are talking about do not simply
>             want to adopt it, they want to coopt it and turn it into
>             your usual financial product which they can control so they
>             can keep on committing their crimes.

>
>             'Free money first' is what Benjamin Tucker said 100 years
>             ago already. And he was right when he said that without free
>             money there will be no freedom whatever we do.

>
>             Financial freedom is hammered into the code in a much more
>             resiliant way than anything ever written in stone and with
>             financial freedom comes the rest.

>
>             ++jp

>
>
>             ________________________________________
>             Von: unSYSTEM [unsystem-bounces@???
>             <mailto:unsystem-bounces@lists.dyne.org>]&quot; im Auftrag
>             von &quot;Luke-Jr [luke@??? <mailto:luke@dashjr.org>]
>             Gesendet: Samstag, 26. April 2014 20:11
>             An: Amir Taaki
>             Cc: unsystem@??? <mailto:unsystem@lists.dyne.org>
>             Betreff: Re: [unSYSTEM] oh fuck it's really happening...
>             bitcoin is under       attack

>
>             Amir, I think you contribute much to bitcoin, and I value
>             that. But Bitcoin is
>             *not* libertarianism. Bitcoin is *not* anarchism. Bitcoin is
>             *not*
>             "volunteerism". Bitcoin is *not* a movement for financial
>             freedom - or any
>             political movement at all. Bitcoin is a technology, which
>             can and should be
>             embraced by people of any political affiliation. Adoption by
>             people with views
>             contrary to your own is not an attack on Bitcoin, it is growth.

>
>             On Saturday, April 26, 2014 5:33:48 PM Amir Taaki wrote:
>             > I get what you're doing, but we both know that really
>             isn't the case.
>             > Allaire speaks from his heart, and they hired Mike Hearn.
>             > I don't think we'll ever know the whole truth as that's
>             not how these
>             > proprietary cultures work.
>             > Check this quote by him:
>             >
>             > "A lot of the safeguards that businesses and consumers
>             take for granted
>             > in their everyday interactions and payments don’t exist in
>             bitcoin [...]"

>             >
>             > or

>             >
>             > "if your goal is to ensure widespread adoption of bitcoin,
>             there needs
>             > to be rules around its use, he says, arguing that it’s not
>             good enough
>             > to imagine bitcoin can exist above society."

>             >
>             > This doesn't sound like descriptions of systems that
>             empower users to
>             > self-regulate. This is the exact speech used behind many
>             surveillance
>             > and censorship tools to push them on us. Things like
>             "anti-fraud"
>             > blacklists or researching correlation techniques on
>             consumer activity.

>             >
>             > If this tech is developed it will be deployed or pushed
>             upon places like
>             > Coinbase. Coinbase is the only business (or US?) in the
>             valley with a
>             > banking relationship which they have due to a special
>             relationship with
>             > JP Morgan and one of their bankers on their board.
>             > And that's where these products that work against their
>             users will come
>             > into play. Maybe the industry doesn't have enough balls,
>             and big Bitcoin
>             > businesses with a large following (CoinBase, BitPay, ...
>             whoever) start
>             > "self-regulating" by spying, tracking and censoring their
>             users.

>             >
>             > On 26/04/14 06:31, Peter Todd wrote:
>             > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 10:37:11AM +0100, Amir Taaki wrote:
>             > >> reducing the risk is newspeak for censorship

>             > >>
>             > >> protection against fraud is codeword for surveillance.

>             > >
>             > > Maybe it is; maybe it isn't.

>             > >
>             > > I hope Circle is just implementing all the decentralized
>             technologies
>             > > we've been talking about for ages that let people chose
>             on their own
>             > > terms how to reduce the risks involved in their
>             transactions; best case
>             > > is all this talk about moving Bitcoin away from its
>             libertarian roots is
>             > > just PR material. After all, Dark Market is an example
>             of that approach,
>             > > yet could also be marketted as "bringing Bitcoin into
>             the mainstream
>             > > with anti-fraud, lower costs, greater privacy safeguard,
>             and protection
>             > > against identity theft".

>             > >
>             > > I'm not very hopeful that's the case, but lets hold off
>             on the torches
>             > > and tar until they publish hard details on what exactly
>             they are doing.

>             > >

>             > >

>             > >
>             > > _______________________________________________
>             > > unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net

>             > >
>             https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>             _______________________________________________
>             unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>             https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>             _______________________________________________
>             unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>             https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem

>
>
>
>
>         -- 
>         Tomer Kantor

>
>         Development|Production|Post
>         OneName - IamSatoshi <https://www.onename.io/iamsatoshi>

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>         Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>         https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem

>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>     https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem

>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>