Pages:
Author

Topic: Bitcoin Island/City and More - page 2. (Read 26371 times)

legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
May 28, 2013, 07:35:09 AM

Right definitely you make some good points but i think you are making the mistake of assuming that what ever the definition of freedom is that freedom is a good thing. The truth is that freedom is very often a bad thing. So for example you can talk about an axe murderers freedom to axe murder. This freedom would be very bad indeed and should not be allowed.

this isnt a problem with the definition of freedom, we shouldnt be searching for a definition that covers all of the good forms of freedom and leaves out all of the bad forms, we should just accept that freedom is sometimes very bad indeed.
'your freedom to swing your fist stops where my nose starts.'

a) that isnt a definition
b) you cant use the word you are defining in its own definition
legendary
Activity: 1778
Merit: 1008
May 28, 2013, 06:04:08 AM
...you... i... but... i mean...

i give up.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
Google/YouTube
May 28, 2013, 02:25:39 AM
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
Google/YouTube
May 28, 2013, 02:23:37 AM
Libertarians [and/or juveniles] OTOH...there must be 50 threads about that on this forum.  

Before anyone thinks that FinShaggy's Bitcoin town idea is in any way libertarian, read this:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2269803

That's actually kind of hilarious.  At first, I was like, oh that sounds reasonable.  Then it just kind of went directly downhill.

Lol, way to read one thing from ONE guy that didn't even read the thread before forming an opinion.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
May 28, 2013, 02:01:28 AM
Libertarians [and/or juveniles] OTOH...there must be 50 threads about that on this forum.  

Before anyone thinks that FinShaggy's Bitcoin town idea is in any way libertarian, read this:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2269803

That's actually kind of hilarious.  At first, I was like, oh that sounds reasonable.  Then it just kind of went directly downhill.
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
May 28, 2013, 12:15:45 AM
Like it or not, humans are social beasts so there is also an obligation to be responsible within the context of a social structure.
Wow.

I'm really unsure if you're trolling now...

Nah.  I stopped when it seemed that someone wanted to try to have a rational conversation.

I find it impossible to believe that to define freedom there is someone on this planet who has to bring "obligation" into it.

You're either trolling hard or you don't understand... well, ....anything.

So take the null hypothesis then.  It explains why you guys are, and will continue to be, outcasts.  Until you mature a little bit anyway which most of you will eventually do.

Here's a great little vid that teaches the philosophy of liberty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9y6g0PU2OIc

My computer doesn't do flash.  But I've been pointed to countless snoozer documents and video which you guys seem to feel provides some sort of biblical enlightenment but which I find to be the same tired old tripe.  I don't figure I'm missing much here.

hero member
Activity: 526
Merit: 508
My other Avatar is also Scrooge McDuck
May 27, 2013, 11:56:07 PM
freedom: the ability to act without interference which would prevent or make more difficult the realization of ones goals.

tell me what do you think?
Not bad, but it says nothing about the fruit of your labors.

How can you be free if you're not allowed to keep your own property, such as things you bought and made?

Slavery is very specifically defined in economics as the lack of being able to keep the fruit of your production... So a cotton-picking slave on a 1700's plantation was easily defined as 0% free, since he kept 0% of the cotton he picked.

We like to think of ourselves as 100% free today, but as long as there is someone or something else taking the fruit of your labors from you, then you are a slave of the same percentage that your labors have been taken.

Taxation takes well over 50% of most American's income alone, and inflation takes another noticeable chunk. Land of the free, indeed.  Wink


Like it or not, humans are social beasts so there is also an obligation to be responsible within the context of a social structure.
Wow.

I'm really unsure if you're trolling now... I find it impossible to believe that to define freedom there is someone on this planet who has to bring "obligation" into it.

You're either trolling hard or you don't understand... well, ....anything.


Here's a great little vid that teaches the philosophy of liberty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9y6g0PU2OIc
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393
You lead and I'll watch you walk away.
May 27, 2013, 11:08:21 PM
ah ok, why not just start a city that uses gold as currency instead of being reliant on both electricity and internet to survive.

Stop being rational. That just pisses off people around here.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
May 27, 2013, 11:01:44 PM
ah ok, why not just start a city that uses gold as currency instead of being reliant on both electricity and internet to survive.
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
May 27, 2013, 10:31:40 PM

Right definitely you make some good points but i think you are making the mistake of assuming that what ever the definition of freedom is that freedom is a good thing. The truth is that freedom is very often a bad thing. So for example you can talk about an axe murderers freedom to axe murder. This freedom would be very bad indeed and should not be allowed.

this isnt a problem with the definition of freedom, we shouldnt be searching for a definition that covers all of the good forms of freedom and leaves out all of the bad forms, we should just accept that freedom is sometimes very bad indeed.

I don't think I am making that mistake.  It is plain to me that if there were only 'good freedom', the term itself would be useless and we would have no freedom at all.  Plus it would be a very boring world.

The definition I like best is 'your freedom to swing your fist stops where my nose starts.'

What drives me nuts about Libertarians is that some of them/you seem incapable of understanding 'risk' and why it is wrong to put someone else at risk against their will/knowledge even in the cases where nothing bad comes of it.

There was a protracted conversation about drunk driving some time back.  I was frankly aghast as what some of the Libertarians here seemed to actually believe in their heart of hearts about what is appropriate behavior in a world filled with other people besides themselves.

legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
May 27, 2013, 10:06:01 PM
I'd love to see you attempt to define freedom.

ooh im not tvbcof but i wanna give it a try, it sounds like a fund challenge.

freedom: the ability to act without interference which would prevent or make more difficult the realization of ones goals.

tell me what do you think?

I like it well enough, but it does seem slightly on the self-centered side.  Like it or not, humans are social beasts so there is also an obligation to be responsible within the context of a social structure.

If one a rare individual who is pretty self sufficient in most of their needs (e.g., Ted Kaczynski) then you should be free to life that lifestyle.  Without maiming innocent civilians of course.  If not, you have to act in a manner that allows society to exist in the form that most fellow humans find tolerable.



Right definitely you make some good points but i think you are making the mistake of assuming that what ever the definition of freedom is that freedom is a good thing. The truth is that freedom is very often a bad thing. So for example you can talk about an axe murderers freedom to axe murder. This freedom would be very bad indeed and should not be allowed.

this isnt a problem with the definition of freedom, we shouldnt be searching for a definition that covers all of the good forms of freedom and leaves out all of the bad forms, we should just accept that freedom is sometimes very bad indeed.
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
May 27, 2013, 09:39:50 PM
I'd love to see you attempt to define freedom.

ooh im not tvbcof but i wanna give it a try, it sounds like a fund challenge.

freedom: the ability to act without interference which would prevent or make more difficult the realization of ones goals.

tell me what do you think?

I like it well enough, but it does seem slightly on the self-centered side.  Like it or not, humans are social beasts so there is also an obligation to be responsible within the context of a social structure.

If one a rare individual who is pretty self sufficient in most of their needs (e.g., Ted Kaczynski) then you should be free to life that lifestyle.  Without maiming innocent civilians of course.  If not, you have to act in a manner that allows society to exist in the form that most fellow humans find tolerable.

legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
May 27, 2013, 09:22:03 PM
I'd love to see you attempt to define freedom.

ooh im not tvbcof but i wanna give it a try, it sounds like a fun challenge.

freedom: the ability to act without interference which would prevent or make more difficult the realization of ones goals.

tell me what do you think?
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
May 27, 2013, 03:29:52 AM
As best I can tell, the core belief of a Libertarian is if they can rip off someone, it means ipso-facto that they are superior and deserve to have the victims money by virtue of that alone.  In practice, at least.

Troll harder.

Fuck!  I'm going to have to.  I still only have '8-13' ignores.  I thought sure this would bump me up to the next level Smiley

---

In actual fact, I believe most everything I say here and think it is worthwhile that casual observers don't come to the conclusion that Bitcoin is a complete Libertarian mono-culture.  OTOH, I'm hardly a 'rah, rah, go-team' analyst of Bitcoin itself either, so I'm not sure how much good it does for the cause.  But I ramble...

hero member
Activity: 526
Merit: 508
My other Avatar is also Scrooge McDuck
May 27, 2013, 03:13:47 AM
As best I can tell, the core belief of a Libertarian is if they can rip off someone, it means ipso-facto that they are superior and deserve to have the victims money by virtue of that alone.
So you've never heard of the non-aggression principle?

You don't even know what it is to be free, do you? I'd love to see you attempt to define freedom.


Afterall, there are tons of CEOs of fortune 500 companies that are libertarians. Peter Thiel gives tons of money to libertarian causes every year.
So do the Koch bros.  Looks like they are cultivating an army of dopes to support they scheme of distributing the costs (air pollution, cancer, etc) and privatize the gains.
The Koch brothers are about as corporacratic as they come. Pretty much the embodiment of what libertarians are fighting against.

legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
May 27, 2013, 03:04:54 AM
As best I can tell, the core belief of a Libertarian is if they can rip off someone, it means ipso-facto that they are superior and deserve to have the victims money by virtue of that alone.  In practice, at least.

Troll harder.
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
May 27, 2013, 03:00:35 AM
As best I can tell, the core belief of a Libertarian is if they can rip off someone, it means ipso-facto that they are superior and deserve to have the victims money by virtue of that alone.  In practice, at least.

Hmm, about the only thing that I ever hear libertarians saying that the government needs to prevent is force and fraud.

Can someone be ripped off without fraud?

Ya, well, I'm not real versed in what Libertarian thinkers write, nor do I care alot about what they, or anyone else writes.  My comment is more directly related to observations in Bitcoinland which is rife with Libertarians and has a truly impressive level of fraud, theft, and all manner of unseemly things going on.  It also introduced me to the Laize Faire City thing which was both very entertaining and entirely predictable for such a structure.  That the then editor of their paper and current principle in ButterFly Labs was also involved in ripping of seniors for $25M (a so-called 'colorful history in off-shore Libertarianism' to quote ~inaba)  was completely non-surprising to me.

Now to be fair, a lot of my friends and neighbors are Libertarians and I would trust them with my life and a fair amount of my money.  And have.  But that's no fun on this forum Wink

legendary
Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386
Viva Ut Vivas
May 27, 2013, 02:38:50 AM
As best I can tell, the core belief of a Libertarian is if they can rip off someone, it means ipso-facto that they are superior and deserve to have the victims money by virtue of that alone.  In practice, at least.

Hmm, about the only thing that I ever hear libertarians saying that the government needs to prevent is force and fraud.

Can someone be ripped off without fraud?
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
May 27, 2013, 01:56:09 AM
It's pretty obvious that the big draw for a lot of you people is that you don't have any real money or a very good idea of how to get any. So getting rich on BTC is great fodder to go along with fantasies of life in some Libertarian commune.
No, It's obvious that you're referring to people who obviously don't understand free markets and entrepreneurship.

Since these are basic core beliefs among libertarians, it's pretty safe to say that you're talking about non-libertarians with that remark.

As best I can tell, the core belief of a Libertarian is if they can rip off someone, it means ipso-facto that they are superior and deserve to have the victims money by virtue of that alone.  In practice, at least.

Afterall, there are tons of CEOs of fortune 500 companies that are libertarians. Peter Thiel gives tons of money to libertarian causes every year.

So do the Koch bros.  Looks like they are cultivating an army of dopes to support they scheme of distributing the costs (air pollution, cancer, etc) and privatize the gains.  Unsurprisingly, putting money into your pocket is not really foremost on their list of priorities.

I wish it were not such a far-flung fantasy because the rest of us would be better off if we didn't have to support you.
What exactly is your problem with freedom bro?

I'm all about freedom.  I very much wish you to be free to spend $10k or whatever for some plot in some barren shithole wasteland, some part of a rock in the ocean, or fraction of a rusting barge.

hero member
Activity: 526
Merit: 508
My other Avatar is also Scrooge McDuck
May 27, 2013, 01:43:31 AM
It's pretty obvious that the big draw for a lot of you people is that you don't have any real money or a very good idea of how to get any. So getting rich on BTC is great fodder to go along with fantasies of life in some Libertarian commune.
No, It's obvious that you're referring to people who obviously don't understand free markets and entrepreneurship.

Since these are basic core beliefs among libertarians, it's pretty safe to say that you're talking about non-libertarians with that remark.

Afterall, there are tons of CEOs of fortune 500 companies that are libertarians. Peter Thiel gives tons of money to libertarian causes every year.


I wish it were not such a far-flung fantasy because the rest of us would be better off if we didn't have to support you.
What exactly is your problem with freedom bro?
Pages:
Jump to: