So, I apologize ahead of time if this is a bit of a tangent, but I just got
into this discussion and there are a few times where this thread went into
some philosophical ideas I like to think about.

So first of all, Peter Thiel is just a human. I would say, with the
exception of some mentally unstable individuals, you can't classify anyone
as good or bad. Peter Thiel is an opportunist and an entrepreneur. So I
think any good or bad he has done is just a bi-product of his opportunism.
Sure he has his ideologies, priorities, and schemes. The same can be said
about everyone. Simply because we don't agree with him doesn't mean he's
evil. I think it's unhealthy to attempt to oppress those who you don't
agree with. Even if you knew for a fact he was evil and you could make the
world more peaceful by getting rid of him you still can't control the
zeitgeist.

Which brings me to my next point. Ray Kurzweil talks about Moore's Law and
how it actually applies to all advancements in technology throughout human
history. Even as far back as the stone age, advancements in technology
follow a relatively smooth exponential curve. It only really becomes
noticeable when we apply Moore's Law to computing power. And even though
it happens right in front of our eyes we don't understand it. How is it
possible that new technologies can be discovered in such a predictable way?
To what extent are we actually in control?

This reminds me of Michael Pollan's book, Botany of Desire. He has a
theory that plants are conscious beings and they're constantly competing
for real estate and survival. So from a plant's perspective one of the
most effective ways to achieve domination is to become the most useful
resource for human beings. Some of the plants he uses as examples are:
Tulips, Corn, Apples, Potatoes, and Marijuana. I don't think he means for
anyone to take it too serious, but he makes the argument that the plants
are using people to survive and reproduce and not the other way around.

You can apply the same logic to the relationship between human beings and
technology. There are many instances where people have had the same
epiphany completely independent from each other. Probably the most famous
example is Leibniz and Newton both inventing Calculus at about the same
time. Josh Walker mentioned the Atom Bomb which could serve no other
function, but to destroy. Though, if not Robert Oppenheimer then someone
else. If not the United States then Russia or Germany.

It may be fair to assume that all technology and all technological
revolutions have always existed and human beings are just conduits or
creators. We bring them to life. So if we're simply slaves to this
exponential function and technology reveals itself to those who seek it
out, then how much credit does a person really deserve for their
discoveries? This is why the Intellectual Property debate is really a
philosophical one.

If we're all just a consequence of our environment, copies of each other,
pattern seeking slaves, then everything becomes a fog. Good and Evil
become illusory. In fact, you can't have one without the other. The only
way to survive is to relinquish control. The main philosophy in the Tao Te
Ching is that they say the world is perfect and it will always be perfect.
Good and Evil are the balance of life. We all play our part. Like
Sisyphus, peace is our giant boulder that we keep pushing up the hill. We
have to come to terms with the fact that we live in a material world and as
long as we are here there will always be destruction, murder, deceit,
etc... because they are simply consequences of materialism. And we'll
keep going war like good little soldiers.



On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Damian <i3inary@???> wrote:

> If he walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then he might be a
> duck...especially if he hangs out at powerful duck conferences.
>
> It is sad to realize, if the unSystem was actually the current U.S. System
> we would be gathering his phone tappings and emails/messaging from the
> unNSA reviewing them with the unCIA, launching a pedophilia smear campaign,
> and then kidnapping him for a nice vacation in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba where
> we could really pump him for information.
>
> If he is a wolf in sheep clothing maybe it is just a matter of exposing
> him so the community can decided how they would like to align themselves
> with him.
>
> I suspect this isn't the first or last case of this so having a simple
> protocol to bring light to any true intentions of powerful individuals
> trying to shape the future of crypto would be a good idea no?...a publicly
> available blockchain based list of wealthy jerks detailing their history
> and intentions...the "darklist" if I may.
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:20 AM, ben <colypse@???> wrote:
>
>> The people can be seen as chaos. And to control chaos will never work. It
>> can at best be guided, with humbleness.
>>
>> Too bad the greedy psycopaths dont take kindly to logic and reason ;)
>>
>>
>> 2014-06-01 1:12 GMT+02:00 Josh Walker <josh@???>:
>>
>> For liberty.
>>>
>>> For only through liberty can we achieve genuine equality, wealth, and
>>> peace (which is what most people really want―enforced personal safety―at
>>> the foundation of their nationalist thoughts).
>>>
>>> Along the way, we as a species will learn that equality is not
>>> equivalence, wealth is not riches, and peace is not protection.
>>>
>>> Great discussion, gentlemen. (And lady? I think the topic was started by
>>> one.) Like BCT/politics before the place went to shit.
>>>
>>>
>>> > On May 31, 2014, at 13:26, Amir Taaki <genjix@???> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Yeah but people are charismatic and people follow them because they
>>> > speak to human values.
>>> > To penetrate and understand why these concepts are able to speak to
>>> > something deep inside us, is to understand how and why we become
>>> > corrupted, and to more better make ethical decisions.
>>> >
>>> > Ethics is not about "being good". Ethics is about making the right
>>> > decisions when the right decision isn't always clear.
>>> > The decision to eliminate the Jews was called the "Final Solution" and
>>> > wasn't an overnight decision. It was a thousand small steps.
>>> >
>>> > Now we find ourselves in a new struggle between the old industrialists
>>> > (pyramids, verticalists, cathedrals) and the new technologists. The
>>> last
>>> > century was a power struggle over class warfare with the communists and
>>> > capitalists fighting over who should own the power.
>>> > Every power group in history that gains power, does it for some
>>> "greater
>>> > good" (whatever their objectives are) which many times involves
>>> > eliminating new rivals (old allies) and purges.
>>> > I don't believe in power sharing either.
>>> >
>>> > As a political force, we've been dispossessed and crushed throughout
>>> > history (at the first signs of success), but with the new technologies,
>>> > and new forms of organisation bringing untold utility through market
>>> > forces, time is ticking on central power.
>>> > For the first time in history, we as a free people are armed and
>>> empowered.
>>> > To stick it to the man.
>>> > And promote a new form of thinking.
>>> >
>>> > Not for equality, not for a nation, not for wealth.
>>> > But for liberty.
>>> >
>>> >> On 05/31/2014 07:09 PM, Kristov Atlas wrote:
>>> >> We all have core beliefs of about fundamental areas of philosophy,
>>> >> including morality and epistemology, whether acknowledged or not. For
>>> >> most of us, these beliefs are imposed by our families and society, and
>>> >> for most of us, these beliefs will go unexamined. I find it quite
>>> >> engaging to explore those beliefs, but so far I get that the majority
>>> of
>>> >> the list is not interested in those topics or doesn't care to explore
>>> >> them in this list, at least. With this consideration, I don't plan to
>>> >> discuss it more than this post.
>>> >>
>>> >> Charisma and talking from the heart do not make you a good guy. They
>>> may
>>> >> mean that you are charismatic or persuasive, but I do not accept your
>>> >> proposed moral relativism. Nor do I accept the label of "bad guy" for
>>> >> myself. I don't get the sense that you are a bad guy, either, Amir,
>>> but
>>> >> it's your call whether to accept it for yourself.
>>> >>
>>> >> Acknowledging someone's evil doesn't mean that I won't learn from him.
>>> >> On the contrary, I learn much from evil people. And the fact that I
>>> >> learn from someone doesn't make them good, or justify their behavior.
>>> >>
>>> >> Talking about virtuous topics at a conference is extremely different
>>> >> from what Hitler did or starting a company to data mine for the CIA.
>>> >> Suggesting otherwise strains the limits of credulity. "Systems of
>>> >> control" is a wonderfully morally ambiguous phrase that obscures the
>>> >> line between people who initiate violence those who do not. Government
>>> >> agencies, militaries, genocidal dictators... these are not morally
>>> >> opaque realms.
>>> >>
>>> >> Intentions are not always empirically observable, but behavior always
>>> is.
>>> >>
>>> >> -Kristov
>>> >>
>>> >>> On 05/31/2014 12:29 PM, Amir Taaki wrote:
>>> >>> Hitler was a good guy, and we're all bad guys too :) If you listen to
>>> >>> his speeches, so much charisma, talking from the heart.
>>> >>> We should never hand wave fascists as "that crowd" but try to
>>> understand
>>> >>> the logic so we can truly undermine it.
>>> >>> It's not so shallow as you think, and more pervasive than we realise.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Would you go to a Bilderburg meeting to advocate? It can be argued
>>> both
>>> >>> ways. In the end you manage to convince yourself of becoming a
>>> >>> Bilderburger consorting with aristocrats.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Peter Thiel seems like the guy doing one thing with the left hand,
>>> and
>>> >>> another with the right.
>>> >>> I will be sure to ask him about his reasoning simply to understand
>>> when
>>> >>> I meet him.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> How about all the people here that participated in the Bitcoin
>>> >>> Foundation conference? It's really not so different when you
>>> compare...
>>> >>> Cody said he'd love to go, and many of our friends attended.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Are you undermining a system of control, or are you justifying your
>>> >>> participation? The lines aren't so clear sometimes, and the road
>>> paved
>>> >>> good intentions.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> On 05/31/2014 02:24 PM, Kristov Atlas wrote:
>>> >>>>> On 05/31/2014 02:08 AM, Josh Walker wrote:
>>> >>>>> THIS. Exactly this. The thing we must not forget, is that in all
>>> >>>>> likelihood Hitler himself awoke believing he was doing good. The
>>> >>>>> capability for self-deception is a defining characteristic of our
>>> >>>>> sentience. It's scary, and we should never stop worrying that we
>>> could
>>> >>>>> become equally misguided.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> For this reason, I am very nervous around anyone who appoints
>>> >>>>> themselves judge and jury, declaring things black and white, with
>>> an
>>> >>>>> "I would never…". No offense intended, Kristoff: We've hung out,
>>> and I
>>> >>>>> like you very much. I just urge you to be careful, because as soon
>>> as
>>> >>>>> we assume to be the side of universal good, and stop seeking to
>>> >>>>> understand how others have arrived at their positions, we are just
>>> as
>>> >>>>> close and just as likely the bad guy as they are.
>>> >>>> I'm genuinely sorry to hear that, again.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> But no, there is no scenario in which my understanding of ethics and
>>> >>>> myself leads me to become like Hitler. There is no mystery about
>>> what
>>> >>>> Hitler led to his behavior -- childhood trauma leading to
>>> psychopathic
>>> >>>> behavior, and an utter lack of principles. Objective ethics (when
>>> >>>> correct and applied universally) do not lead you toward evil, but
>>> >>>> liberate you from it. It's understandably scary since ethics were
>>> >>>> invented for the purpose of and used for manipulation for vast
>>> swaths of
>>> >>>> human history, but the study has been remarkably refined by the
>>> exertion
>>> >>>> of *actual* philosophy in the last few decades. This study is not
>>> >>>> complete, but the principles are sound, just as we currently have a
>>> >>>> sound approach to building bridges that don't collapse.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> As modern abolitionists, I encourage allies to wield principled
>>> >>>> morality. Arguing about how the cotton will picked in the future is
>>> dumb.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> -Kristov
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> 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
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>