> 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>]" im Auftrag
> von "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
>
::
Re: [unSYSTEM] oh fuck it's really …
