Gox happened. And then I realized. Anarchy is idiocy. Because human beings are dicks. Quite a few of us, if allowed to do whatever we want, would do horrible things to eachother.
Bottom line is this: Skype and Bitcoin are a poor comparison. Worst thing that happens with unregulated Skype is someone drops a call.
Bitcoin is money. Worst thing that happens with money? Life savings are lost. Lives are ruined.
That's why regulation is more of a topic with Bitcoin.
If you want Bitcoin to continue to be ignored by the public because month after month, some new asshole is stealing mass volumes of them from people, then by all means, keep ranting that there should be "NO REGULATION".
Otherwise, realize that human beings are corrupt. And third party services (not bitcoin itself) need to be regulated, or the disasters will continue to happen. Regulation, done right, saves us from losers who don't know right from wrong. Or don't care. The key is responsible regulation that doesn't overstep its bounds or stifle innovation. Assholes need to be restricted, hindered, and monitored. I think everyone here agrees with that. Except maybe Amir Taaki.
Anarchists and Libertarians love Bitcoin because it restricts institutional corruption. Yet they push an ideology that involves "no rules" (freedom) for the general public. The institution itself must be corrupt. Yet apparently the general public is made up of angels. And people with jobs are the only dicks. The logic escapes me. I think most of these folks just hate authority in general. As children, someone in authority abused their power. Now they're adults, and they hate anyone who makes any rules. About anything. They'll sit at a border patrol checkpoint in AZ for 2 hours like a tool, because they refuse to say "American" when asked their citizenship (John Bush - Lets Talk Bitcoin / Sovereign BTC Podcast host).
Simply put, because people like Mark Karpeles exist, we need someone to stop them from ruining people's lives. That doesn't mean Bitcoin has to suffer. If Bitcoin has a reputation for being safe, reliable, and welcoming, it wont suffer. It will flourish. Leave the 3rd party services unregulated, and your stash of coins will never be worth more than $500. And nobody's going to fucking use it.
Caveat: If regulation can be "recreated" by mathematical algorhythms, then I am all for that too. It doesn't always have to come from institutions. A big part of what the Bitcoin paradigm is introducing, is the possibility of a self-regulating environment. I am excited to see if this is even possible, because it *will* be superior to institutional regulation. Not because institutions are corrupt. But because human beings in general are often corrupt. Even Libertarians.
-B-
Taking issue with the bold statement, quite literally.
That observation is true but it doesn't have anything to do with anarchism and never did nor should you conclude, based on this observable fact, that anarchism is the problem and shouldn't be "allowed".
It suggests maybe you don't understand the full principle of anarchism...it's always been misunderstood as lack of rules causing chaos, and that would be revolt, not anarchy. Anarchism means "serve no masters" in the context that we are not slaves and we don't bow and kneel to rulers. Anarchism is the only platform that is about personal responsibility and self governance. Meaning get off your knees, pull your head out of your ass, stop looking to someone else to "let" you and do what you need to do for your own well being and best interests...and THAT is why anarchists are drawn to bitcoin. It's another tool that provides self accountability.
What's at issue here is the reason people, when left to their own devices, sometimes go off the deep end and that has nothing to do with anarchism and everything to do with the state of mind of that person's own "operating system". No serial killer has ever been "allowed" to murder. Serial killers aren't practicing anarchism when they take lives. They're not Anarchists. They're psychopaths. Two entirely unrelated, different things.
The rules of society have deemed serial murder a bad thing and serial killers and mass murderers and killers ignore that rule. It doesn't mean the killer's motives are anarchist in nature, he refuses to be told what to do by society. It means there is something wrong with this person who places no value on human existence and no political philosophy will make a damn bit of difference.
Anarchists embrace self governance, leading self, personal accountability, personal responsibility, and hands on, DIY policy. We do not feel you, with all your human frailties, flaws, intellect and choices in life are the best authority to determine what's right for us. We are "allowed" this choice by virtue of our own backbones. Anarchists aren't against rules, regulations and policies. Not even against laws. We recognize some regulation needs to be in place so society can operate peacefully. What Anarchists DON'T agree with is YOU deciding for us what's in our best interests. You can suggest this and that rule or law and if we agree it's a good idea, we'll abide by it. If we don't, we won't and fuck you.
The rest are still emotionally stunted children who arrogantly presume they're the masters of the universe, while living on their knees, terrified of everything and everyone around them, wanting to "outlaw" something whenever they feel the slightest hint of threat and fear.
They cry out to someone ELSE to fix their problems instead of doing the word to fix the problems for themselves.
But the chaos involved in no rules isn't about anarchy outside a rock concert. That's a problem with the perception and paradigm of the one acting out.
Only cowards perceive anarchists as an audacious, arrogant bunch.
