Topic: Economics of greed (Read 5828 times)
I don't think I'm alone when I say I'd like to see early adopters working to get an exchange that is everything that Gox was not... I think that is one of the main things that is and has been hurting Bitcoin and now is the time for this to be addressed IMO. Not calling anybody greedy but maybe they have forgotten or are out of touch with what really matters when it comes to the mass adoption of BTC.
progressive tax + greed is necessary to get the most from progressive taxes to begin with.
"There is enough for everybody’s need, but not enough for anybody’s greed.”
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Now we are getting somewhere. You understand that compassion and fairness is inate in our species, yet you don't see the goodness and fairness in behaviour that is denounced as "greedy" (which is just another world for economic self-interrest).
Who denies the compassion and fairness expect those who want a welfare state and control? They DENY that we can have fairness and compassion while being free, while in fact it's the freedom that allows humans to feel this way.
This greed is what created the surplus in the first place. Only when a problem is getting closed to being solved by the freemarket the statist come to talk about the moral implications of it and ask for intervention to feed their own sense of being do-gooders. But in reality the create nothing but poverty, but that is of course mostly what they want. Can't have any more of them evil rich people.
Oh, you mean that insatbile hunger that created the very computer you sit by to type this? The hunger that made sure we had medicine and comfort enugh to live beyond the teenages.
compassion and fairness have been outsourced to the State, for the sole purpose to free the individuals of this moral obligation, and to act greedy not only without guilt but also as a way to soul salvation.
Capitalism would not be/(is?) possible without a Welfare state
It has not been oursourced, as outsourcing requires the act to be volountary. The state is not volountary
On the contrary, capitalism is not possible with the walfare state, as the welfare state can't stand the burden of it's own weight and requires state control of the money to slow the inevitable collaspe. We are not in the last days of the longest experiment of the welfare state ever, with both record debts and inflation aswell as rampant poverty and unemployment.
Financial burdens are nothing like social and moral burdens. You really need a trip down the history lane on how capitalism came to be.
Welfare state has not always been you know. It came to be by Protestant thinking, tending to the poor was the community's ( the forerunner of the state) obligation for them. So since the community handled all the wrong things, it freed the the individual from such moral burdens. Protestant thinking also assumed that those that were rich were favoured by God, so by exchanging/confusing a couse and effect getting rich is a way to get Gods favour/Salvation. The above combination justified in christian terms the creed that "Greed is Good/Gods Will", and this is how Capitalism came to be.
So Welfare state balances individual Greed so that it can not create moral burdens on a christian soul.
Now if you discard the importance of the moral code christian religion has etched into the western world, and instead accept greed as a prime motive you are just wrong, wrong, wrong.
The above also explains why Catholics, and Orthodox christian population have a problem to "internalize" Capitalism and Individualism, they are incompatible with their dogma. example Russian, Greek, Italian, Spain, Ireland etc. It is no wonder why those countries cannot play this game nor why for example Russia gave rise to Communism.
Back on track another example of welfare state helping Capitalism is Public education.
The idea behind public education came by Capitalists wanting more technically proficient staff, and also a children pen to keep the workforce undistracted by the whereabouts of their children. Yes because people hold the welfare of their children more important than Greed.
Having said all that, I do not exclude deviant speciments in any tradition that depart from moral codes and internalize whatever laws they feel more apt to.
EDIT: Greed as a motivation? guess again: http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
In a free world one is allowed to spread the doctrine of "Greed is good" and it is the right of others to pose against this. Nobody argued about regulation or opposed the free market. We all understand that Bitcoin won't abide if the number of participants does not increase; iow greed will bite its own tail at the far end.
The other side of a coin?
The other side of a coin?
"There is enough for everybody’s need, but not enough for anybody’s greed.”
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Now we are getting somewhere. You understand that compassion and fairness is inate in our species, yet you don't see the goodness and fairness in behaviour that is denounced as "greedy" (which is just another world for economic self-interrest).
Who denies the compassion and fairness expect those who want a welfare state and control? They DENY that we can have fairness and compassion while being free, while in fact it's the freedom that allows humans to feel this way.
This greed is what created the surplus in the first place. Only when a problem is getting closed to being solved by the freemarket the statist come to talk about the moral implications of it and ask for intervention to feed their own sense of being do-gooders. But in reality the create nothing but poverty, but that is of course mostly what they want. Can't have any more of them evil rich people.
Oh, you mean that insatbile hunger that created the very computer you sit by to type this? The hunger that made sure we had medicine and comfort enugh to live beyond the teenages.
compassion and fairness have been outsourced to the State, for the sole purpose to free the individuals of this moral obligation, and to act greedy not only without guilt but also as a way to soul salvation.
Capitalism would not be/(is?) possible without a Welfare state
It has not been oursourced, as outsourcing requires the act to be volountary. The state is not volountary
On the contrary, capitalism is not possible with the walfare state, as the welfare state can't stand the burden of it's own weight and requires state control of the money to slow the inevitable collaspe. We are not in the last days of the longest experiment of the welfare state ever, with both record debts and inflation aswell as rampant poverty and unemployment.
Financial burdens are nothing like social and moral burdens. You really need a trip down the history lane on how capitalism came to be.
Either adress what I say, or don't, but don't sit there and assume EVERYONE who read the history of capitalism would come to the same conlusion as you. That just makes you look silly.
"There is enough for everybody’s need, but not enough for anybody’s greed.”
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Now we are getting somewhere. You understand that compassion and fairness is inate in our species, yet you don't see the goodness and fairness in behaviour that is denounced as "greedy" (which is just another world for economic self-interrest).
Who denies the compassion and fairness expect those who want a welfare state and control? They DENY that we can have fairness and compassion while being free, while in fact it's the freedom that allows humans to feel this way.
This greed is what created the surplus in the first place. Only when a problem is getting closed to being solved by the freemarket the statist come to talk about the moral implications of it and ask for intervention to feed their own sense of being do-gooders. But in reality the create nothing but poverty, but that is of course mostly what they want. Can't have any more of them evil rich people.
Oh, you mean that insatbile hunger that created the very computer you sit by to type this? The hunger that made sure we had medicine and comfort enugh to live beyond the teenages.
compassion and fairness have been outsourced to the State, for the sole purpose to free the individuals of this moral obligation, and to act greedy not only without guilt but also as a way to soul salvation.
Capitalism would not be/(is?) possible without a Welfare state
It has not been oursourced, as outsourcing requires the act to be volountary. The state is not volountary
On the contrary, capitalism is not possible with the walfare state, as the welfare state can't stand the burden of it's own weight and requires state control of the money to slow the inevitable collaspe. We are not in the last days of the longest experiment of the welfare state ever, with both record debts and inflation aswell as rampant poverty and unemployment.
Financial burdens are nothing like social and moral burdens. You really need a trip down the history lane on how capitalism came to be.
"There is enough for everybody’s need, but not enough for anybody’s greed.”
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Now we are getting somewhere. You understand that compassion and fairness is inate in our species, yet you don't see the goodness and fairness in behaviour that is denounced as "greedy" (which is just another world for economic self-interrest).
Who denies the compassion and fairness expect those who want a welfare state and control? They DENY that we can have fairness and compassion while being free, while in fact it's the freedom that allows humans to feel this way.
This greed is what created the surplus in the first place. Only when a problem is getting closed to being solved by the freemarket the statist come to talk about the moral implications of it and ask for intervention to feed their own sense of being do-gooders. But in reality the create nothing but poverty, but that is of course mostly what they want. Can't have any more of them evil rich people.
Oh, you mean that insatbile hunger that created the very computer you sit by to type this? The hunger that made sure we had medicine and comfort enugh to live beyond the teenages.
compassion and fairness have been outsourced to the State, for the sole purpose to free the individuals of this moral obligation, and to act greedy not only without guilt but also as a way to soul salvation.
Capitalism would not be/(is?) possible without a Welfare state
It has not been oursourced, as outsourcing requires the act to be volountary. The state is not volountary
On the contrary, capitalism is not possible with the walfare state, as the welfare state can't stand the burden of it's own weight and requires state control of the money to slow the inevitable collaspe. We are not in the last days of the longest experiment of the welfare state ever, with both record debts and inflation aswell as rampant poverty and unemployment.
Oh, you mean that insatbile hunger that created the very computer you sit by to type this? The hunger that made sure we had medicine and comfort enugh to live beyond the teenages.
Error here: Keep in mind that most of the increases in "lifespan" are due to kids not dying before age 16 or so. Even in Roman times if you made it to 20 you were pretty much set to live into your 60's.Nowadays, life after 70 isn't all that great. So you can live into your 80's, but how much additional fun really is there?
C
That is exactly what I said.
"There is enough for everybody’s need, but not enough for anybody’s greed.”
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Now we are getting somewhere. You understand that compassion and fairness is inate in our species, yet you don't see the goodness and fairness in behaviour that is denounced as "greedy" (which is just another world for economic self-interrest).
Who denies the compassion and fairness expect those who want a welfare state and control? They DENY that we can have fairness and compassion while being free, while in fact it's the freedom that allows humans to feel this way.
This greed is what created the surplus in the first place. Only when a problem is getting closed to being solved by the freemarket the statist come to talk about the moral implications of it and ask for intervention to feed their own sense of being do-gooders. But in reality the create nothing but poverty, but that is of course mostly what they want. Can't have any more of them evil rich people.
Oh, you mean that insatbile hunger that created the very computer you sit by to type this? The hunger that made sure we had medicine and comfort enugh to live beyond the teenages.
compassion and fairness have been outsourced to the State, for the sole purpose to free the individuals of this moral obligation, and to act greedy not only without guilt but also as a way to soul salvation.
Capitalism would not be/(is?) possible without a Welfare state
Oh, you mean that insatbile hunger that created the very computer you sit by to type this? The hunger that made sure we had medicine and comfort enugh to live beyond the teenages.
Error here: Keep in mind that most of the increases in "lifespan" are due to kids not dying before age 16 or so. Even in Roman times if you made it to 20 you were pretty much set to live into your 60's.Nowadays, life after 70 isn't all that great. So you can live into your 80's, but how much additional fun really is there?
C
"There is enough for everybody’s need, but not enough for anybody’s greed.”
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Now we are getting somewhere. You understand that compassion and fairness is inate in our species, yet you don't see the goodness and fairness in behaviour that is denounced as "greedy" (which is just another world for economic self-interrest).
Who denies the compassion and fairness expect those who want a welfare state and control? They DENY that we can have fairness and compassion while being free, while in fact it's the freedom that allows humans to feel this way.
This greed is what created the surplus in the first place. Only when a problem is getting closed to being solved by the freemarket the statist come to talk about the moral implications of it and ask for intervention to feed their own sense of being do-gooders. But in reality the create nothing but poverty, but that is of course mostly what they want. Can't have any more of them evil rich people.
Oh, you mean that insatbile hunger that created the very computer you sit by to type this? The hunger that made sure we had medicine and comfort enugh to live beyond the teenages.
"There is enough for everybody’s need, but not enough for anybody’s greed.”
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
Why would anyone deny what mother nature gave to us; compassion and fairness? One day a scientific analysis will prove that the "Greed is good" doctrine produces nothing more than insatiable hunger, only.
No Jungian, I think we're good.
Quote
We must have achieved cross communication from parallel universes? Take 5 minuets to google the guy before smack talking him. BTW the "theory" or belief is that he is his predecessors.
Yes, that is a silly theory that goes to show the dumb that belief is.
Please show me to the googlesearch that contradicts anything I said. Where does he speak out against his predecessors violence and tyranny over their country? Where does he speak out against taxation and the violence of the state?
"Yes, some people think these tibetan popes reek of wisdom and insight, but I want to look at the end results. Sure, a few western intellectuals might feel good about themselves for meditating and feeling sorry for the poor, whilst we see the nation they ruled over for centuries still left in poverty and corruption.
Where is his actions for the free market? Where does he speak about taxation? Against the United Nations? Against statism?"
14th is the keyword here. He is just the latest in a long line of little popes. Why would he be any better than his line of predecessors?
We must have achieved cross communication between parallel universes? Take 5 minuets to google the guy before smack talking him. BTW the "theory" or belief is that he is his predecessors.
Where is his actions for the free market? Where does he speak about taxation? Against the United Nations? Against statism?"
Jungian, do you know how far off you are? The 14 D.L. lives in exile as a guest in India. China rules Tibet. WT_ are you even talking about?
14th is the keyword here. He is just the latest in a long line of little popes. Why would he be any better than his line of predecessors?
We must have achieved cross communication between parallel universes? Take 5 minuets to google the guy before smack talking him. BTW the "theory" or belief is that he is his predecessors.
Jungian, do you know how far off you are? The 14 D.L. lives in exile as a guest in India. China rules Tibet. WT_ are you even talking about?
14th is the keyword here. He is just the latest in a long line of little popes. Why would he be any better than his line of predecessors?
"Yes, some people think these tibetan popes reek of wisdom and insight, but I want to look at the end results. Sure, a few western intellectuals might feel good about themselves for meditating and feeling sorry for the poor, whilst we see the nation they ruled over for centuries still left in poverty and corruption.
Where is his actions for the free market? Where does he speak about taxation? Against the United Nations? Against statism?"
Jungian, do you know how far off you are? The 14 D.L. lives in exile as a guest in India. China rules Tibet. WT_ are you even talking about?
You have caught the great society delusion.
I think i know what you are getting at;
the benefit to society in my eyes, is actualy a benefit to me, and the people i care about, (my society). But it will be a detriment to others i dont identify with as closely , i'm hapy to take that off them on put it where i see it as more important.
We all have our own oppinion of what is moraly acceptable, and i am consider the subjugation (think thats the word i'm after) of anyone just fucking dispicable. If can help the subjugated reclaim some freedom i will help, I know it can improve the level of life and happiness massively, reclaiming our civil liberties it's a benefit to my society (we the subjugated masses).
You might that the societal structure that exsits is structured so that anyone who is part of it is subjugating those who the societ structure says is "under" them.
I am part of it,
You are part of it.
We are part of it.
Well running away to namecoin code doesnt work forver, i'll help where i can anyway; I would end apathy if if i could be bothered ;.
My thoughts are well expressed by my own words. Your words make them look silly, because you did not understand.
They look silly all by themselves.
Quote
Wrong. It's your misinterpretation about the essence of cause and effect. Creativity comes before production. Always. It's a mental process. Take for instance Bitcoin, first there is design, and then there will be coding and at the far end there is implementation and ... producing (aka mining).
Thinking is not creation. Creation is doing. There might aswell been a hundred hypothetical Satoshis before him, but only one who created something.
Quote
So far, I do not have the impression your words produce any good nor admiration. You're trying to be a smart alec and sprout a lot of mishmash from your doctrine "greed is good."
Grow up and gain some mental fitness.
Quote
You seem to stretch the meaning of "production" to an extreme extent, which gives reason to describe the contribution by the Dalai Lama as the production of mental and spiritual health, and ... it costs (you) nothing and benefits all.
Yes, some people think these tibetan popes reek of wisdom and insight, but I want to look at the end results. Sure, a few western intellectuals might feel good about themselves for meditating and feeling sorry for the poor, whilst we see the nation they ruled over for centuries still left in poverty and corruption.
Where is his actions for the free market? Where does he speak about taxation? Against the United Nations? Against statism?
You have caught the great society delusion.
Yes the whole cryptocoin trading community really is a chilling example of what happens when the rewards of greed become the main social drive of a (what i'd think are) reasonably intellectual community of people. How easily 'their' ethics and morality just degenerate into into the rotton host of cuorruption, breeding parasites viciously feeding upon anything they car, and that is the norm.
I see another complete scam, and watch 'them' swarm to join, watch 'them' actualy help build the trap (leeching of anything that comes near, including each other if 'they' can, luring in any victims 'they' can, seeming not even considering the victims, only thinking of 'thier' own gain. Sometimes 'they' will think about how disguisting that realy is, but 'they' are not like that themself, 'they' just observe it happening, and try to profit off of them, not hurting anyone themself, just haing fun trying to profit off it.
'They' is 'Me'.
'They' is 'You'.
'They' is 'We'
Sometimes i'd like to just walk the away and meditate on the namecoin sourcecode (and only the code) see if i can contribute to freeedom from repression and control. Working towards a goal which benefits society.
I see another complete scam, and watch 'them' swarm to join, watch 'them' actualy help build the trap (leeching of anything that comes near, including each other if 'they' can, luring in any victims 'they' can, seeming not even considering the victims, only thinking of 'thier' own gain. Sometimes 'they' will think about how disguisting that realy is, but 'they' are not like that themself, 'they' just observe it happening, and try to profit off of them, not hurting anyone themself, just haing fun trying to profit off it.
'They' is 'Me'.
'They' is 'You'.
'They' is 'We'
Sometimes i'd like to just walk the away and meditate on the namecoin sourcecode (and only the code) see if i can contribute to freeedom from repression and control. Working towards a goal which benefits society.
Did I touch a nerve here?
Yes, attacking virtue and degrading it should touch everyones nerves, so I sure hit my spot.
Sorry to hear that, but I was just using the word "just". Grow up, or even better, gain some mental and spiritual fitness.
Quote from: Jungian
Quote
The word "just" as in "no more than". Sure, I've reason to believe you, greedy cookie-monster, reduce mankind to "just" production units. It is completely on your own account that you assign the word "just" to "horrible" and "boring".
This is not a new converstation with statists, they always some up with the same question - and always imply the same thing. That people who think that productivity is something good actually want humans to be robotesque units in a technologial dystopi. If that is not what you meant - you'd be the first.
My thoughts are well expressed by my own words. Your words make them look silly, because you did not understand.
Quote from: Jungian
Quote
Moreover you confuse the meaning of the word "production" with something beautiful as "creation".
Nope. All creation requires productivity.
Wrong. It's your misinterpretation about the essence of cause and effect. Creativity comes before production. Always. It's a mental process. Take for instance Bitcoin, first there is design, and then there will be coding and at the far end there is implementation and ... producing (aka mining).
Quote from: Jungian
Quote
On top of that, you seem very afraid of people getting something for free, or in exchange for sharing insightful thoughts and intentions for a change to create a better world.
No, I'm just highly unimpressed by people who use cheap words that sound great but create horrible situations. Intentions are as useful as dirt, only results matter. Would you go to a doctor that worn the most beatiful dresses and talked of creating a glourious utopia and yet performed surgery with a wooden spoon? Sure, the doctor probably had good intentions, but the patient died.
So far, I do not have the impression your words produce any good nor admiration. You're trying to be a smart alec and sprout a lot of mishmash from your doctrine "greed is good."
Quote from: Jungian
Quote
Let me ask you a very simple question. What's the value of your health? Any idea what a physician produce? Now, eat your cookies, and stay fit.
It's highy valuable. (Good) Physicians produce good health. Cookies taste good and I stay fit thank you very much.
You seem to stretch the meaning of "production" to an extreme extent, which gives reason to describe the contribution by the Dalai Lama as the production of mental and spiritual health, and ... it costs (you) nothing and benefits all.
Erdogan, great image with that entrance, eye of the needle.
Makes you think how you really need to learn Greek and Hebrew if you want to study Bible. As well as some history. Too many words get interpreted. I knew that phrase for a long time and made me thinking since I first read it.
The fact is, that sentence with the rich guy is showing something impossible: for a camel to go through the eye of a (sewing) needle.
Logically, that's not only not restrictive but impossible. And by saying that rich people are denied to enter His Kingdom, Jesus would contradict himself with all the preaches saying everybody can be saved.
So, we could go with something more like
It would be easier for a/the (alone?) camel to enter the eye of the needle (gate) than the rich to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
I might be wrong but we also need to see if the original word for camel has the same form for plural, we need to check history to see if camels were allowed through those entrances and many things. Lot's of work.
Makes you think how you really need to learn Greek and Hebrew if you want to study Bible. As well as some history. Too many words get interpreted. I knew that phrase for a long time and made me thinking since I first read it.
The fact is, that sentence with the rich guy is showing something impossible: for a camel to go through the eye of a (sewing) needle.
Logically, that's not only not restrictive but impossible. And by saying that rich people are denied to enter His Kingdom, Jesus would contradict himself with all the preaches saying everybody can be saved.
So, we could go with something more like
It would be easier for a/the (alone?) camel to enter the eye of the needle (gate) than the rich to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
I might be wrong but we also need to see if the original word for camel has the same form for plural, we need to check history to see if camels were allowed through those entrances and many things. Lot's of work.
Great post OP, I don't think this is what Satoshi wanted...
The gate known as the eye of the needle is in a wall which was built during the crusades, so Jesus could not have been referring to it at the time, unless you assume that he wanted us to infer from his knowledge of the future that he was in fact omniscient, at least at will. Okay, my scenario analysis is getting out of hand here. Whatevs.
I was thinking of the overstock.com reports, while listening to Nixon in China, and I could have sworn I heard him singing:
"the geeks, the geeks, the geeks begin to buy the sheets"
I was thinking of the overstock.com reports, while listening to Nixon in China, and I could have sworn I heard him singing:
"the geeks, the geeks, the geeks begin to buy the sheets"
So does this mean that its actually quite easy for a camel to get through the "eye of the needle" then ?
Because if it does, what was JC talking about ? - I mean, if its actually easy for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle (as pictured above) then his whole statement doesn't make much sense does it ?
Or did he mean that its pretty easy for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven ? (but even then, his whole sentence/utterence/statement wouldn't have been very well structured in order to have conveyed that meaning
).
That would certainly not seem to be his meaning, given the context from which the statement was taken - and given also JC's views on material posessions being counterproductive to achieving spiritual enlightenment, which he emphatically and unequivocally makes very clear throughout the gospels.
No - if you ask me he's saying that a rich man has about as much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven as I have of bedding Juliette Binoche. Simple as that
.
However, I'm not a theologian or Biblical scholar, so I could be wrong here.
Because if it does, what was JC talking about ? - I mean, if its actually easy for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle (as pictured above) then his whole statement doesn't make much sense does it ?
Or did he mean that its pretty easy for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven ? (but even then, his whole sentence/utterence/statement wouldn't have been very well structured in order to have conveyed that meaning
).That would certainly not seem to be his meaning, given the context from which the statement was taken - and given also JC's views on material posessions being counterproductive to achieving spiritual enlightenment, which he emphatically and unequivocally makes very clear throughout the gospels.
No - if you ask me he's saying that a rich man has about as much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven as I have of bedding Juliette Binoche. Simple as that
.However, I'm not a theologian or Biblical scholar, so I could be wrong here.
Difficult, but not impossible. I guess these small gates were created to make it possible for the daily life to go on, but they still protect against hundreds of alien soldiers to enter.
I don't know the implications for bitcoin.
It could be a guard, denying passage to camels. Like no pets allowed within
It would be difficult to get a lamborghini in, but not impossible. (sideways, with a sufficiently powerful winch).
So does this mean that its actually quite easy for a camel to get through the "eye of the needle" then ?
Because if it does, what was JC talking about ? - I mean, if its actually easy for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle (as pictured above) then his whole statement doesn't make much sense does it ?
Or did he mean that its pretty easy for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven ? (but even then, his whole sentence/utterence/statement wouldn't have been very well structured in order to have conveyed that meaning).
That would certainly not seem to be his meaning, given the context from which the statement was taken - and given also JC's views on material posessions being counterproductive to achieving spiritual enlightenment, which he emphatically and unequivocally makes very clear throughout the gospels.
No - if you ask me he's saying that a rich man has about as much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven as I have of bedding Juliette Binoche. Simple as that.
However, I'm not a theologian or Biblical scholar, so I could be wrong here.
Because if it does, what was JC talking about ? - I mean, if its actually easy for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle (as pictured above) then his whole statement doesn't make much sense does it ?
Or did he mean that its pretty easy for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven ? (but even then, his whole sentence/utterence/statement wouldn't have been very well structured in order to have conveyed that meaning
).That would certainly not seem to be his meaning, given the context from which the statement was taken - and given also JC's views on material posessions being counterproductive to achieving spiritual enlightenment, which he emphatically and unequivocally makes very clear throughout the gospels.
No - if you ask me he's saying that a rich man has about as much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven as I have of bedding Juliette Binoche. Simple as that
.However, I'm not a theologian or Biblical scholar, so I could be wrong here.
Difficult, but not impossible. I guess these small gates were created to make it possible for the daily life to go on, but they still protect against hundreds of alien soldiers to enter.
I don't know the implications for bitcoin.
It could be a guard, denying passage to camels. Like no pets allowed within
So does this mean that its actually quite easy for a camel to get through the "eye of the needle" then ?
Because if it does, what was JC talking about ? - I mean, if its actually easy for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle (as pictured above) then his whole statement doesn't make much sense does it ?
Or did he mean that its pretty easy for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven ? (but even then, his whole sentence/utterence/statement wouldn't have been very well structured in order to have conveyed that meaning).
That would certainly not seem to be his meaning, given the context from which the statement was taken - and given also JC's views on material posessions being counterproductive to achieving spiritual enlightenment, which he emphatically and unequivocally makes very clear throughout the gospels.
No - if you ask me he's saying that a rich man has about as much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven as I have of bedding Juliette Binoche. Simple as that.
However, I'm not a theologian or Biblical scholar, so I could be wrong here.
Because if it does, what was JC talking about ? - I mean, if its actually easy for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle (as pictured above) then his whole statement doesn't make much sense does it ?
Or did he mean that its pretty easy for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven ? (but even then, his whole sentence/utterence/statement wouldn't have been very well structured in order to have conveyed that meaning
).That would certainly not seem to be his meaning, given the context from which the statement was taken - and given also JC's views on material posessions being counterproductive to achieving spiritual enlightenment, which he emphatically and unequivocally makes very clear throughout the gospels.
No - if you ask me he's saying that a rich man has about as much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven as I have of bedding Juliette Binoche. Simple as that
.However, I'm not a theologian or Biblical scholar, so I could be wrong here.
Difficult, but not impossible. I guess these small gates were created to make it possible for the daily life to go on, but they still protect against hundreds of alien soldiers to enter.
I don't know the implications for bitcoin.
So does this mean that its actually quite easy for a camel to get through the "eye of the needle" then ?
Because if it does, what was JC talking about ? - I mean, if its actually easy for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle (as pictured above) then his whole statement doesn't make much sense does it ?
Or did he mean that its pretty easy for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven ? (but even then, his whole sentence/utterence/statement wouldn't have been very well structured in order to have conveyed that meaning).
That would certainly not seem to be his meaning, given the context from which the statement was taken - and given also JC's views on material posessions being counterproductive to achieving spiritual enlightenment, which he emphatically and unequivocally makes very clear throughout the gospels.
No - if you ask me he's saying that a rich man has about as much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven as I have of bedding Juliette Binoche. Simple as that.
However, I'm not a theologian or Biblical scholar, so I could be wrong here.
Because if it does, what was JC talking about ? - I mean, if its actually easy for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle (as pictured above) then his whole statement doesn't make much sense does it ?
Or did he mean that its pretty easy for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven ? (but even then, his whole sentence/utterence/statement wouldn't have been very well structured in order to have conveyed that meaning
).That would certainly not seem to be his meaning, given the context from which the statement was taken - and given also JC's views on material posessions being counterproductive to achieving spiritual enlightenment, which he emphatically and unequivocally makes very clear throughout the gospels.
No - if you ask me he's saying that a rich man has about as much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven as I have of bedding Juliette Binoche. Simple as that
.However, I'm not a theologian or Biblical scholar, so I could be wrong here.
Some brilliant person said "no one is free until we are all free" I believe that to my core.
Yes - someone also said "What you do unto the least of my brethren, you do also unto me"
Same bloke also said " Its easier for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven"
He didn't say anything about the benefits to society of greed - or the individuals regard of their own self interest (as far as I am aware) being some kind of moral prerequisite to entry to the Kingdom of God.
In fact, while we are on the subject - when Jesus Christ refused to sell out to Pilate and so gave himself up to the inevitability of his own death - was he acting with regard to his own self interest ?
Was Jesus Christ greedy ?
Eye of the needle, somewhere in Jerusalem:
Bitcoin's creator(s) still nowhere to be find, so we don't really know who designed it.
It doesn't matter. The source-code is all that matters, and it's open for everyone to view. What in it is it you dislike?How is that argument shit?
where does shit come from ?
From an arsehole?
do u know that some buddhists believe that the intestine is our second brain ... and indeed ( non holistic view) after the brain is the 2nd place holds much neurons ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enteric_nervous_system )
Sorry did not mean no disrespect to enteric nervous system...
but seeing is not understanding
Bitcoin's creator(s) still nowhere to be find, so we don't really know who designed it.
It doesn't matter. The source-code is all that matters, and it's open for everyone to view. What in it is it you dislike?How is that argument shit?
where does shit come from ?
From an arsehole?
do u know that some buddhists believe that the intestine is our second brain ... and indeed ( non holistic view) after the brain is the 2nd place holds much neurons ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enteric_nervous_system )
Bitcoin's creator(s) still nowhere to be find, so we don't really know who designed it.
It doesn't matter. The source-code is all that matters, and it's open for everyone to view. What in it is it you dislike?How is that argument shit?
where does shit come from ?
From an arsehole?
Bitcoin's creator(s) still nowhere to be find, so we don't really know who designed it.
It doesn't matter. The source-code is all that matters, and it's open for everyone to view. What in it is it you dislike?How is that argument shit?
where does shit come from ?
Bitcoin's creator(s) still nowhere to be find, so we don't really know who designed it.
It doesn't matter. The source-code is all that matters, and it's open for everyone to view. What in it is it you dislike?How is that argument shit?
Did I touch a nerve here?
Yes, attacking virtue and degrading it should touch everyones nerves, so I sure hit my spot.
Quote
The word "just" as in "no more than". Sure, I've reason to believe you, greedy cookie-monster, reduce mankind to "just" production units. It is completely on your own account that you assign the word "just" to "horrible" and "boring".
This is not a new converstation with statists, they always some up with the same question - and always imply the same thing. That people who think that productivity is something good actually want humans to be robotesque units in a technologial dystopi. If that is not what you meant - you'd be the first.
Quote
Moreover you confuse the meaning of the word "production" with something beautiful as "creation".
Nope. All creation requires productivity.
Quote
On top of that, you seem very afraid of people getting something for free, or in exchange for sharing insightful thoughts and intentions for a change to create a better world.
No, I'm just highly unimpressed by people who use cheap words that sound great but create horrible situations. Intentions are as useful as dirt, only results matter.
Would you go to a doctor that worn the most beatiful dresses and talked of creating a glourious utopia and yet performed surgery with a wooden spoon? Sure, the doctor probably had good intentions, but the patient died.
Quote
Let me ask you a very simple question. What's the value of your health? Any idea what a physician produce? Now, eat your cookies, and stay fit.
It's highy valuable. (Good) Physicians produce good health. Cookies taste good and I stay fit thank you very much.
Bitcoin's creator(s) still nowhere to be find, so we don't really know who designed it.
It doesn't matter. The source-code is all that matters, and it's open for everyone to view. What in it is it you dislike?I'm in here for quite a while, both in this forum and this planet so I got the chance to study some persons, including myself. I have studied the behavior, beliefs and needs both in pleasant and unpleasant situations. And I have found out that we're ultimately driven by greed. And that's very difficult to control.
Now, to be short. My issue is that greed wasn't in the bitcoin ecosystem from the begging. No. First people here, the early adopters (including CPU miners), we're regular people, most of them with no significant wealth. They, we, were here because wanted and needed a change, needed freedom. At those times people would trade 10,000 BTC for a pizza and be happy. But now, things have changed, most early adopters are now rich and they are rich even if they have been scammed for some, lost some while speculating or spent some. They are rich because this thing, greed, came into this system and new people wanted also to be part of this new thing. This made price to go up, and while it goes up, the very early and early users are now filthy rich.
But things don't stop here... The first ones or the ones that had lots of fiat and were able to buy thousands, are now the most richest 500 owners, controlling about 35% of all bitcoins. Let's leave the ones that bought many coins just recently, they were already rich. Let's focus on the first ones, the ones that "traded" in the single digits, the early adopters and miners. Most of them have been corrupted in such way they forgot that they found about bitcoin because of passion and desire for better and not for money, they forgot that they were poor (or at least not wealthy) when they started. And the problem with that, is that we have lost good men in favor of speculative business and fade businesses that bring nothing in the world, but only take.
And now, new people, driven out of greed, hope prices of 10,000 dollars this year, because they own a few coins and thus would have more dollars. But, think of the few-tens-of-thousands owners. They'll be even richer but without any direction, because most of their wealth is won not worked. They now started businesses (exchanges, precious metals, shops) to gather more wealth. Some of them got into mind-twisting schemes, taking advantage from other people, manipulating markets and doing such maneuvers.
I'm not being philosophical about the taste of the bread you worked in the mine for but I'm trying to point out that with great power, really comes great responsibility. And not the responsibility of feeding children of Africa but the responsibility of not feeding your ego.
In the end, my opinion is that wealth distribution in this ecosystem is too concentrated in a few hands and needs more dispersion before we move to higher levels. We need a solid economy, based on goods and services and not on speculation. Speculation is pure greed and brings nothing.
Now, to be short. My issue is that greed wasn't in the bitcoin ecosystem from the begging. No. First people here, the early adopters (including CPU miners), we're regular people, most of them with no significant wealth. They, we, were here because wanted and needed a change, needed freedom. At those times people would trade 10,000 BTC for a pizza and be happy. But now, things have changed, most early adopters are now rich and they are rich even if they have been scammed for some, lost some while speculating or spent some. They are rich because this thing, greed, came into this system and new people wanted also to be part of this new thing. This made price to go up, and while it goes up, the very early and early users are now filthy rich.
But things don't stop here... The first ones or the ones that had lots of fiat and were able to buy thousands, are now the most richest 500 owners, controlling about 35% of all bitcoins. Let's leave the ones that bought many coins just recently, they were already rich. Let's focus on the first ones, the ones that "traded" in the single digits, the early adopters and miners. Most of them have been corrupted in such way they forgot that they found about bitcoin because of passion and desire for better and not for money, they forgot that they were poor (or at least not wealthy) when they started. And the problem with that, is that we have lost good men in favor of speculative business and fade businesses that bring nothing in the world, but only take.
And now, new people, driven out of greed, hope prices of 10,000 dollars this year, because they own a few coins and thus would have more dollars. But, think of the few-tens-of-thousands owners. They'll be even richer but without any direction, because most of their wealth is won not worked. They now started businesses (exchanges, precious metals, shops) to gather more wealth. Some of them got into mind-twisting schemes, taking advantage from other people, manipulating markets and doing such maneuvers.
I'm not being philosophical about the taste of the bread you worked in the mine for but I'm trying to point out that with great power, really comes great responsibility. And not the responsibility of feeding children of Africa but the responsibility of not feeding your ego.
In the end, my opinion is that wealth distribution in this ecosystem is too concentrated in a few hands and needs more dispersion before we move to higher levels. We need a solid economy, based on goods and services and not on speculation. Speculation is pure greed and brings nothing.
Very well said! The first post beneath this made me groan and I lost the will to read any further into this thread.
Bitcoin is a pyramid shaped pile of rats. When no new rats are piling into the pyramid, they are all trying to devour each other to get or keep themselves as high up the pile as possible. I hate Bitcoin, I hate watching blatant manipulation play out in the market (unless it makes me win) and I hate the mode of thought and behaviour that it demands of me as I trade it in order to sometimes turn profits that I would never get for actually working or being otherwise productive. It might be fair to suggest that the ethos of Bitcoin reflects that of the community that has adopted it, but the fact that 'Satoshi' holds 12% of all Bitcoins in existence tells you all you need to know about the Bitcoin ethos right from the start.
Bitcoin is the crypto-spawn of Satan.
Let's ask the Dali Lama about it, since he can answer us directly 
Quote from: Dalai Lama
“I believe all suffering is caused by ignorance. People inflict pain on others in the selfish pursuit of their happiness or satisfaction. Yet true happiness comes from a sense of inner peace and contentment, which in turn must be achieved through the cultivation of altruism, of love and compassion and elimination of ignorance, selfishness and greed.”
What have Dalai Lama brought to the world? These tibetanian popes sit on high horses and do nothing productive but ride their titles and fame.
No wonder collectivists love them.
Are all people for you just production units?
What do you mean - just production units? That's just rhetoric to try and make one of the finest human virtues sound like something boring and horrible.
"Oh, they bring wonderful inventions, trying making the world abundant in food, technology and art whilst fulfilling themselvs - what horrible prodution units"
Did I touch a nerve here? The word "just" as in "no more than". Sure, I've reason to believe you, greedy cookie-monster, reduce mankind to "just" production units. It is completely on your own account that you assign the word "just" to "horrible" and "boring". Moreover you confuse the meaning of the word "production" with something beautiful as "creation". On top of that, you seem very afraid of people getting something for free, or in exchange for sharing insightful thoughts and intentions for a change to create a better world. Let me ask you a very simple question. What's the value of your health? Any idea what a physician produce? Now, eat your cookies, and stay fit.
[
JC isn't real.
This really inpoints the communist viewpoints to it's core.
JC isn't real.
Quote
Same bloke also said " Its easier for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven"
This really inpoints the communist viewpoints to it's core.
So basically, Jesus Christ wasn't real - but if he had been he'd have been a commi loving rat ?
Well, at least we have established one thing - whatever morality unrestrained capitalism is supposed to be underpinned by, it certainly can't claim to be Christian.
So what is Gordon Gekko then ? I'm guessing he'll be some sort of a Nietschean Superman - intellectually and physically superior, without fear, enterprising, unflappable etc.
Amoral - and completely selfish
To each his own.
Yes, unless you support government and represenatives of the ruling class, such as Dalai Lama who wants to push their policies with laws, then it is "To each, my will".
To each his own.
Let's ask the Dali Lama about it, since he can answer us directly
Quote from: Dalai Lama
“I believe all suffering is caused by ignorance. People inflict pain on others in the selfish pursuit of their happiness or satisfaction. Yet true happiness comes from a sense of inner peace and contentment, which in turn must be achieved through the cultivation of altruism, of love and compassion and elimination of ignorance, selfishness and greed.”
What have Dalai Lama brought to the world? These tibetanian popes sit on high horses and do nothing productive but ride their titles and fame.
No wonder collectivists love them.
C'mon Jungian, don't let the shadow overtake you.
It was nice to see another fan of the Dalai Lama and I was trying to lighten things up a bit since you can literally ask him his thoughts on his web page, he's reputed to be a tinkerer and fan of technology.
He also has many things to say about attachment and suffering and as a monk owns nothing. Gandhi sort of touches on the subject when he pointed out that there were many wealthy people supporting (funding) his vow of poverty.
"Collectivists" I had to look up the word. The idea of interdependence is talked about in the 7 Habits and struck a cord but the rest of it's definition...not so much.
He owns nothing - yet flies all over the world and eats and drinks every day, yet not having to worry for a second about creating, protecting or expanding the very wealth that allows him to do this. Welfare program to the extreme.
To me, it's hight unimpressive to come from a lineage of pops with a trac record not that much better than those of their western counterparts who made a living from extracting money from the people whilst paying lipservice to fine ideals. Because talk is cheap, so that is why every enforced authority depend on them.
If i want to hear some eastern spiritualit entertainment I perfer to hear them from someone who is actually funny - like Alan Watts.
Let's ask the Dali Lama about it, since he can answer us directly
Quote from: Dalai Lama
“I believe all suffering is caused by ignorance. People inflict pain on others in the selfish pursuit of their happiness or satisfaction. Yet true happiness comes from a sense of inner peace and contentment, which in turn must be achieved through the cultivation of altruism, of love and compassion and elimination of ignorance, selfishness and greed.”
What have Dalai Lama brought to the world? These tibetanian popes sit on high horses and do nothing productive but ride their titles and fame.
No wonder collectivists love them.
Are all people for you just production units?
What do you mean - just production units? That's just rhetoric to try and make one of the finest human virtues sound like something boring and horrible.
"Oh, they bring wonderful inventions, trying making the world abundant in food, technology and art whilst fulfilling themselvs - what horrible prodution units"
Let's ask the Dali Lama about it, since he can answer us directly
Quote from: Dalai Lama
“I believe all suffering is caused by ignorance. People inflict pain on others in the selfish pursuit of their happiness or satisfaction. Yet true happiness comes from a sense of inner peace and contentment, which in turn must be achieved through the cultivation of altruism, of love and compassion and elimination of ignorance, selfishness and greed.”
What have Dalai Lama brought to the world? These tibetanian popes sit on high horses and do nothing productive but ride their titles and fame.
No wonder collectivists love them.
C'mon Jungian, don't let the shadow overtake you.
It was nice to see another fan of the Dalai Lama and I was trying to lighten things up a bit since you can literally ask him his thoughts on his web page, he's reputed to be a tinkerer and fan of technology.
He also has many things to say about attachment and suffering and as a monk owns nothing. Gandhi sort of touches on the subject when he pointed out that there were many wealthy people supporting (funding) his vow of poverty.
"Collectivists" I had to look up the word. The idea of interdependence is talked about in the 7 Habits and struck a cord but the rest of it's definition...not so much.
Let's ask the Dali Lama about it, since he can answer us directly
Quote from: Dalai Lama
“I believe all suffering is caused by ignorance. People inflict pain on others in the selfish pursuit of their happiness or satisfaction. Yet true happiness comes from a sense of inner peace and contentment, which in turn must be achieved through the cultivation of altruism, of love and compassion and elimination of ignorance, selfishness and greed.”
What have Dalai Lama brought to the world? These tibetanian popes sit on high horses and do nothing productive but ride their titles and fame.
No wonder collectivists love them.
Are all people for you just production units?
Let's ask the Dali Lama about it, since he can answer us directly
Quote from: Dalai Lama
“I believe all suffering is caused by ignorance. People inflict pain on others in the selfish pursuit of their happiness or satisfaction. Yet true happiness comes from a sense of inner peace and contentment, which in turn must be achieved through the cultivation of altruism, of love and compassion and elimination of ignorance, selfishness and greed.”
What have Dalai Lama brought to the world? These tibetanian popes sit on high horses and do nothing productive but ride their titles and fame.
No wonder collectivists love them.
Was Jesus Christ greedy ?
JC isn't real. Is the tooth fairy greedy? Why not talk about the real world
Quote
Same bloke also said " Its easier for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven"
This really inpoints the communist viewpoints to it's core. How they want people to be poor, so they have someone to pity and be able to feel good about themselves.
Ever notice what these people think about rich people? Nothing but envy and hate. They want people to be poor and they love poor countries and the leaders who make them poor. Hugo Chavez and the likes of him are heroes to people who want others to be poor.
Quote
In fact, while we are on the subject - when Jesus Christ refused to sell out to Pilate and so gave himself up to the inevitability of his own death - was he acting with regard to his own self interest ?
Yeah, it's so hard to face death when you don't really have to die, isn't it?
Let's ask the Dali Lama about it, since he can answer us directly
Quote from: Dalai Lama
“I believe all suffering is caused by ignorance. People inflict pain on others in the selfish pursuit of their happiness or satisfaction. Yet true happiness comes from a sense of inner peace and contentment, which in turn must be achieved through the cultivation of altruism, of love and compassion and elimination of ignorance, selfishness and greed.”
Some brilliant person said "no one is free until we are all free" I believe that to my core.
Yes - someone also said "What you do unto the least of my brethren, you do also unto me"
Same bloke also said " Its easier for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven"
He didn't say anything about the benefits to society of greed - or the individuals regard of their own self interest (as far as I am aware) being some kind of moral prerequisite to entry to the Kingdom of God.
In fact, while we are on the subject - when Jesus Christ refused to sell out to Pilate and so gave himself up to the inevitability of his own death - was he acting with regard to his own self interest ?
Was Jesus Christ greedy ?
I was failing to make my opinion clear: to balance it out perhaps I should have included that in some cultures, to have an entire house and garden to oneself might be considered "excessive". ("greedy")
When we start deciding what people should be satisfied with and what they should be doing, altruism inverts on itself and become just as self serving as greed.
Why we gotta bring Jesus into it? I certainly don't want to be responsible for speculating on what Jesus thinks of bitcoin. Let's ask the Dali Lama about it, since he can answer us directly
Was Jesus Christ greedy ?
Precisely. I would like to get an answer to this one too.
Better yet, is Cap Kirk (from StarTrek) greedy? He's not working for salary (as I've never seen that he is paid for what he does) nor do they show any kind of money in any of the movies. How about Scotty? Why is he showing up for work every day, risking his life repairing the space ship that always seems to break down in the worst possible moment?
In fact StarTrek crew are by evidence communists: they work for government, no money or possession (Federation = government owns starship Enterprise), no private sector or private enterprise (there are no companies), health care is free, so is food ( and drinks ) in starhip caffe. They do not trade except where they perform trading on behalf of Federation = government. There are no courts except for the military tribunals and no lawyers.
I know these are fictional characters but we all dreamed to "go where no man has gone before" when we were kids right? So we approve of their life style and intuitively understand their motivation. But are they doing all that out of greed?
Certainly we (as kids) did not see their actions as a result of greed. I would go further and say that they seem to do it out of curiosity.
One can't just say every human motive stems from greed. That is greed is not synonymous with motive.
Yes, OP nails it. There is some mystique kind of contradiction going on in the Bitcoin environment. Its technology is based upon something called a P2P-network. Now, take your time and read this Peer to Peer Network once again. Connection is the keyword here, and decentralization.
So what? Doesn't change anything about greed or not. People who benefit from P2P will use it. That is the very definition of greed.
They use something to get MORE out of it. They don't use it because they get LESS out of it.
Quote
The strength comes from the connections, just like the Internet.
Still greed.
Quote
Does it really require a huge leap for mankind to understand that society is based on a similar underlying structure; we, human beings, form a network - we are connected in many ways.
Yes, that's greed. Wanting something from humans.
Quote
The biggest lie ever spread is "Greed is good.", because it denies this fundamental innate connection, it denies compassion.
Doesn't change anything. If what you value is compassion, then you are greedy for compassion.
Quote
Frans de Waal studies the behavior of primates and it stands to reason that primates expose "our" true nature; Moral behavior in animals.
Exactly. When there is a profit motive for primates to be compassionate they will be. P2P networks give incentive to be moral and thus people express more "compassion" in them. So, greed here again.
Quote
Anyway, this whole decentralized idea of Bitcoin heads toward its own contradiction, because a very limited group of people (ergo, centralized) already have the power (coins) to regulate this new currency. Are these people our new bankers and Feds? Are they any better? Do they posses more of these o so needed properties like, empathy, compassion, care, affection, and so on ...?
If you give them incentive to express these emotions they will.
Apparently sometimes the "greed is good" doctrine preoccupies a brain to such extent that it disables normal communication. Anyway, for people suffering from these kind of handicaps there is Wallstreet, JP Morgan and fiat money. BTW the incentive to express the above mentioned properties for the big owners of BTC would be a boost in the Popsicle Index; we all benefit from that; even you, you naughty greedy cookie-monster. Also, and I've said this before, the success of the Bitcoin-network depends on spreading; if everyone hoards then Bitcoin as a currency fails and the value will implode rapidly. At some moment in time a rival digital currency might take over and create a larger network of sharing and caring people gaining more positive interest and popularity. It's not greed that conquers, albeit connectivity, which happened to be one of the fundamentals of Bitcoin itself.
Some brilliant person said "no one is free until we are all free" I believe that to my core.
Yes - someone also said "What you do unto the least of my brethren, you do also unto me"
Same bloke also said " Its easier for a camel to climb through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven"
He didn't say anything about the benefits to society of greed - or the individuals regard of their own self interest (as far as I am aware) being some kind of moral prerequisite to entry to the Kingdom of God.
In fact, while we are on the subject - when Jesus Christ refused to sell out to Pilate and so gave himself up to the inevitability of his own death - was he acting with regard to his own self interest ?
Was Jesus Christ greedy ?
Interesting discussion.
I'll bring my 2 satoshi, a wikipedia citation af max stirner:
Individual self-realization rests on each individual's desire to fulfill their egoism. The difference between an unwilling and a willing egoist, is that the former will be 'possessed' by an empty idea and believe that they are fulfilling a higher cause, but usually being unaware that they are only fulfilling their own desires to be happy or secure, and the latter, in contrast, will be a person that is able to freely choose its actions, fully aware that they are only fulfilling individual desires.
I'll bring my 2 satoshi, a wikipedia citation af max stirner:
Individual self-realization rests on each individual's desire to fulfill their egoism. The difference between an unwilling and a willing egoist, is that the former will be 'possessed' by an empty idea and believe that they are fulfilling a higher cause, but usually being unaware that they are only fulfilling their own desires to be happy or secure, and the latter, in contrast, will be a person that is able to freely choose its actions, fully aware that they are only fulfilling individual desires.
Interesting indeed.
It goes well with that idea that people do good things, altruistic, for example someone saving a dog stranded on a piece of ice, because one could not bear the pain of not doing anything. So to avoid this pain, he comes to the rescue. Out of egocentricity
Yep. And, more than that, means it's all up to your will.
The "pain" you're talking about is really a social thing i think, strongly related with "shame" (not necessarely shame in respect to others) or something like that.
Besides that, my butt hurt a lot too, like OP, because i was not an early adopter, and me too wish in a better world where people who owns a lot of moneypower will use this power to improve the world and not for selfish desires like coke, hookers, a diamond collection and a gold w.c. etc (you can really buy a lot of things with 10000 btc nowdays i suppose - anyway everytime you buy you're decentralizing a little the storage of wealth). One can have the will and the desire to do something good for the world with his money, in the case we have to adorate him like a god because that's how it works, but this is not about the nature of bitcoin but the human nature
"Having a few million dollars (2-5), a nice home, garden and all is more than one can want. The issue is, what do you do with the excess? How do you use it?"
No. It seems like you're saying "all one should" want. Depending on location, lifestyle, children and how close the people in that scenario are to retirement; they may not even be financially secure.
That is nowhere near the aspirations I have for my life.
Do I hope that a person of intelligence, wealth and means decides to put those resources to "a greater good"? Yes, but they are not obligated to and should not be. I do feel obligated, compelled, driven to participate and contribute to causes that I find to be the "greater good" and I also do my best to understand that what I may consider to be "a greater good" is only my opinion and my duty to carry out as I see fit; no one else's . I am not a person of means, I have no formal education nor do I posses a brilliant mind but I have an unusual set of life experiences (as most do) that have educated me and presented me with certain beliefs, knowledge and perspectives.
I don't think that "greed is good" but it has it's place and it is far from the only force here.
I also feel that we are failing while other people are failing. Some brilliant person said "no one is free until we are all free" I believe that to my core.
So those with abundance are free to do with it what they will, and those of us that don't believe that way should be thankful that they are taking care of themselves and continue to reach out beyond ourselves and encourage others to the same.
No. It seems like you're saying "all one should" want. Depending on location, lifestyle, children and how close the people in that scenario are to retirement; they may not even be financially secure.
That is nowhere near the aspirations I have for my life.
Do I hope that a person of intelligence, wealth and means decides to put those resources to "a greater good"? Yes, but they are not obligated to and should not be. I do feel obligated, compelled, driven to participate and contribute to causes that I find to be the "greater good" and I also do my best to understand that what I may consider to be "a greater good" is only my opinion and my duty to carry out as I see fit; no one else's . I am not a person of means, I have no formal education nor do I posses a brilliant mind but I have an unusual set of life experiences (as most do) that have educated me and presented me with certain beliefs, knowledge and perspectives.
I don't think that "greed is good" but it has it's place and it is far from the only force here.
I also feel that we are failing while other people are failing. Some brilliant person said "no one is free until we are all free" I believe that to my core.
So those with abundance are free to do with it what they will, and those of us that don't believe that way should be thankful that they are taking care of themselves and continue to reach out beyond ourselves and encourage others to the same.
Interesting discussion.
I'll bring my 2 satoshi, a wikipedia citation af max stirner:
Individual self-realization rests on each individual's desire to fulfill their egoism. The difference between an unwilling and a willing egoist, is that the former will be 'possessed' by an empty idea and believe that they are fulfilling a higher cause, but usually being unaware that they are only fulfilling their own desires to be happy or secure, and the latter, in contrast, will be a person that is able to freely choose its actions, fully aware that they are only fulfilling individual desires.
I'll bring my 2 satoshi, a wikipedia citation af max stirner:
Individual self-realization rests on each individual's desire to fulfill their egoism. The difference between an unwilling and a willing egoist, is that the former will be 'possessed' by an empty idea and believe that they are fulfilling a higher cause, but usually being unaware that they are only fulfilling their own desires to be happy or secure, and the latter, in contrast, will be a person that is able to freely choose its actions, fully aware that they are only fulfilling individual desires.
Interesting indeed.
It goes well with that idea that people do good things, altruistic, for example someone saving a dog stranded on a piece of ice, because one could not bear the pain of not doing anything. So to avoid this pain, he comes to the rescue. Out of egocentricity
Interesting discussion.
I'll bring my 2 satoshi, a wikipedia citation af max stirner:
Individual self-realization rests on each individual's desire to fulfill their egoism. The difference between an unwilling and a willing egoist, is that the former will be 'possessed' by an empty idea and believe that they are fulfilling a higher cause, but usually being unaware that they are only fulfilling their own desires to be happy or secure, and the latter, in contrast, will be a person that is able to freely choose its actions, fully aware that they are only fulfilling individual desires.
I'll bring my 2 satoshi, a wikipedia citation af max stirner:
Individual self-realization rests on each individual's desire to fulfill their egoism. The difference between an unwilling and a willing egoist, is that the former will be 'possessed' by an empty idea and believe that they are fulfilling a higher cause, but usually being unaware that they are only fulfilling their own desires to be happy or secure, and the latter, in contrast, will be a person that is able to freely choose its actions, fully aware that they are only fulfilling individual desires.
Quote
Sacred things exist only for the egoist who does not acknowledge himself, the involuntary egoist ... in short, for the egoist who would like not to be an egoist, and abases himself (combats his egoism), but at the same time abases himself only for the sake of "being exalted", and therefore of gratifying his egoism. Because he would like to cease to be an egoist, he looks about in heaven and earth for higher beings to serve and sacrifice himself to; but, however much he shakes and disciplines himself, in the end he does all for his own sake... [on] this account I call him the involuntary egoist.
...As you are each instant, you are your own creature in this very 'creature' you do not wish to lose yourself, the creator. You are yourself a higher being than you are, and surpass yourself ... just this, as an involuntary egoist, you fail to recognize; and therefore the 'higher essence' is to you – an alien essence. ... Alienness is a criterion of the "sacred".
— Ibidem, Cambridge edition, pp. 37–8
[/i] ...As you are each instant, you are your own creature in this very 'creature' you do not wish to lose yourself, the creator. You are yourself a higher being than you are, and surpass yourself ... just this, as an involuntary egoist, you fail to recognize; and therefore the 'higher essence' is to you – an alien essence. ... Alienness is a criterion of the "sacred".
— Ibidem, Cambridge edition, pp. 37–8
Yes, OP nails it. There is some mystique kind of contradiction going on in the Bitcoin environment. Its technology is based upon something called a P2P-network. Now, take your time and read this Peer to Peer Network once again. Connection is the keyword here, and decentralization.
So what? Doesn't change anything about greed or not. People who benefit from P2P will use it. That is the very definition of greed.
They use something to get MORE out of it. They don't use it because they get LESS out of it.
Quote
The strength comes from the connections, just like the Internet.
Still greed.
Quote
Does it really require a huge leap for mankind to understand that society is based on a similar underlying structure; we, human beings, form a network - we are connected in many ways.
Yes, that's greed. Wanting something from humans.
Quote
The biggest lie ever spread is "Greed is good.", because it denies this fundamental innate connection, it denies compassion.
Doesn't change anything. If what you value is compassion, then you are greedy for compassion.
Quote
Frans de Waal studies the behavior of primates and it stands to reason that primates expose "our" true nature; Moral behavior in animals.
Exactly. When there is a profit motive for primates to be compassionate they will be. P2P networks give incentive to be moral and thus people express more "compassion" in them. So, greed here again.
Quote
Anyway, this whole decentralized idea of Bitcoin heads toward its own contradiction, because a very limited group of people (ergo, centralized) already have the power (coins) to regulate this new currency. Are these people our new bankers and Feds? Are they any better? Do they posses more of these o so needed properties like, empathy, compassion, care, affection, and so on ...?
If you give them incentive to express these emotions they will.
I went for a piss half an hour back - do you know what motivated me ? Greed
A couple of years back, local to me, not one, but two men died trying to save a girl that had fallen through the ice (they were unrelated to the girl - one of the men was a fireman and so fully aware of the risk). But do you know what really motivated these men - not altruism or compassion - it was the regard for their own self interest. It was greed
According to Chomsky our language acquisition is facilitated by our "universal grammar" - but it only flourishes by virtue of the social nature of language and in its practical application. But guess what - we only communicate through our innate greed
I'm alright Jack keep your hands off my stash - greed.
I know you are trying to be funny, but it is greed - rational self interest - in all cases. Greed is just giving the word self interest a bad name. Like calling someone a slut for going after sex. It's all a shame game , trying to make others look bad.
Yes, these men on the ice were also acting in self interrest. Their "greed" for glory/morals was good, and in a sound money economy the same greed for money is good.
Yes, OP nails it. There is some mystique kind of contradiction going on in the Bitcoin environment. Its technology is based upon something called a P2P-network. Now, take your time and read this Peer to Peer Network once again. Connection is the keyword here, and decentralization.
So what? Doesn't change anything about greed or not. People who benefit from P2P will use it. That is the very definition of greed.
They use something to get MORE out of it. They don't use it because they get LESS out of it.
Quote
The strength comes from the connections, just like the Internet.
Still greed.
Quote
Does it really require a huge leap for mankind to understand that society is based on a similar underlying structure; we, human beings, form a network - we are connected in many ways.
Yes, that's greed. Wanting something from humans.
Quote
The biggest lie ever spread is "Greed is good.", because it denies this fundamental innate connection, it denies compassion.
Doesn't change anything. If what you value is compassion, then you are greedy for compassion.
Quote
Frans de Waal studies the behavior of primates and it stands to reason that primates expose "our" true nature; Moral behavior in animals.
Exactly. When there is a profit motive for primates to be compassionate they will be. P2P networks give incentive to be moral and thus people express more "compassion" in them. So, greed here again.
Quote
Anyway, this whole decentralized idea of Bitcoin heads toward its own contradiction, because a very limited group of people (ergo, centralized) already have the power (coins) to regulate this new currency. Are these people our new bankers and Feds? Are they any better? Do they posses more of these o so needed properties like, empathy, compassion, care, affection, and so on ...?
If you give them incentive to express these emotions they will.
I went for a piss half an hour back - do you know what motivated me ? Greed
A couple of years back, local to me, not one, but two men died trying to save a girl that had fallen through the ice (they were unrelated to the girl - one of the men was a fireman and so fully aware of the risk). But do you know what really motivated these men - not altruism or compassion - it was the regard for their own self interest. It was greed
According to Chomsky our language acquisition is facilitated by our "universal grammar" - but it only flourishes by virtue of the social nature of language and in its practical application. But guess what - we only communicate through our innate greed
I'm alright Jack keep your hands off my stash - greed.
Just thinking now a litebit about greedy algorithm to solve pathway problems such as networking routing, traffic and congestion, etc and how it could be applied to algorithm trading ... 
here's a video about Prim's algorithm ( it is a greedy algorithm that finds a minimum spanning tree )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxXScDY2Q0U
here's a video about Prim's algorithm ( it is a greedy algorithm that finds a minimum spanning tree )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxXScDY2Q0U
Becoming financially stable/wealthy is not always greedy and not only wealthy people have greedy habits.
Having a few million dollars (2-5), a nice home, garden and all is more than one can want. The issue is, what do you do with the excess? How do you use it?
Quote
Certain components of greed have served us well, such as wanting more...more innovation, more information, more?
And...Yes I want more bitcoin. Greedy is not a word my friends would associate with me.
And...Yes I want more bitcoin. Greedy is not a word my friends would associate with me.
That's the good aspect of greed. One could also be greedy to make more money so to have more leverage / power for his projects. If you are implicated in medical research, you'd need shitload of money to continue so you have to want more.
Becoming financially stable/wealthy is not always greedy and not only wealthy people have greedy habits.
I feel as though bitcoin has the potential to empower more people and I want to be part of that, the technology is interesting, the social psychology of it. The way money "works" right now is not working. This is history in the making, I feel lucky to get to participate.
Some people who end up with wealth through bitcoin may not be financial savvy. They could end up with nothing or worse; in a hole because they knew everything about how bitcoin worked but not enough about money.
Certain components of greed have served us well, such as wanting more...more innovation, more information, more?
And...Yes I want more bitcoin. Greedy is not a word my friends would associate with me.
I feel as though bitcoin has the potential to empower more people and I want to be part of that, the technology is interesting, the social psychology of it. The way money "works" right now is not working. This is history in the making, I feel lucky to get to participate.
Some people who end up with wealth through bitcoin may not be financial savvy. They could end up with nothing or worse; in a hole because they knew everything about how bitcoin worked but not enough about money.
Certain components of greed have served us well, such as wanting more...more innovation, more information, more?
And...Yes I want more bitcoin. Greedy is not a word my friends would associate with me.
Yes, OP nails it. There is some mystique kind of contradiction going on in the Bitcoin environment. Its technology is based upon something called a P2P-network. Now, take your time and read this Peer to Peer Network once again. Connection is the keyword here, and decentralization.
So what? Doesn't change anything about greed or not. People who benefit from P2P will use it. That is the very definition of greed.
They use something to get MORE out of it. They don't use it because they get LESS out of it.
Quote
The strength comes from the connections, just like the Internet.
Still greed.
Quote
Does it really require a huge leap for mankind to understand that society is based on a similar underlying structure; we, human beings, form a network - we are connected in many ways.
Yes, that's greed. Wanting something from humans.
Quote
The biggest lie ever spread is "Greed is good.", because it denies this fundamental innate connection, it denies compassion.
Doesn't change anything. If what you value is compassion, then you are greedy for compassion.
Quote
Frans de Waal studies the behavior of primates and it stands to reason that primates expose "our" true nature; Moral behavior in animals.
Exactly. When there is a profit motive for primates to be compassionate they will be. P2P networks give incentive to be moral and thus people express more "compassion" in them. So, greed here again.
Quote
Anyway, this whole decentralized idea of Bitcoin heads toward its own contradiction, because a very limited group of people (ergo, centralized) already have the power (coins) to regulate this new currency. Are these people our new bankers and Feds? Are they any better? Do they posses more of these o so needed properties like, empathy, compassion, care, affection, and so on ...?
If you give them incentive to express these emotions they will.
Keep in mind that the "rich" people tend to be more visible than the "not rich" ones. I went through the dot.com thing in the late 80's, and the late 90's. A few of my friends are "rich", but most are *not* even though they put in every bit as much time and effort.
One of the rich ones is a complete moron, BLAST (Butt like a steel trap). However he did something I would not do; he quit his job, lived in his car, and answered the fucking telephone at one of the first ISP's. Yes, that is worth millions oddly enough because his chances of success at the time were flat-assed zero.
Me? I'm not rich, but I'm comfortable. What makes someone rich, or comfortable, or whatnot is a matter of debate and personal opinion. But keep in mind that the nature of something like bitcoin as a zero-sum game means that for someone to be filthy rich, there are plenty of early adopters who have nothing. The 10,000 btc pizza sounds like a big loss, but if it didn't happen then maybe bitcoin would never have made a newspaper and it would all be worthless. In which case the 10k pizza was the greatest investment of all time.
Go ahead and build something new. But way more than 99% of those new things fail, so do it for something other than money. Like for fun.
C
One of the rich ones is a complete moron, BLAST (Butt like a steel trap). However he did something I would not do; he quit his job, lived in his car, and answered the fucking telephone at one of the first ISP's. Yes, that is worth millions oddly enough because his chances of success at the time were flat-assed zero.
Me? I'm not rich, but I'm comfortable. What makes someone rich, or comfortable, or whatnot is a matter of debate and personal opinion. But keep in mind that the nature of something like bitcoin as a zero-sum game means that for someone to be filthy rich, there are plenty of early adopters who have nothing. The 10,000 btc pizza sounds like a big loss, but if it didn't happen then maybe bitcoin would never have made a newspaper and it would all be worthless. In which case the 10k pizza was the greatest investment of all time.
Go ahead and build something new. But way more than 99% of those new things fail, so do it for something other than money. Like for fun.
C
Don't knock the people who, in their desire for personal gain start businesses and hire people like you. They run the risks and take the chances.
What many people want to do is end this desire for personal gain. Stop rewarding hard work, insight, and innovation. Good. Excellent. The farmers stop farming, the workers leave the oil fields (who, after all, are working for personal gain) ..... and you starve.
No go to sleep and dream up something better. Nobody owes anyone else a living.
What many people want to do is end this desire for personal gain. Stop rewarding hard work, insight, and innovation. Good. Excellent. The farmers stop farming, the workers leave the oil fields (who, after all, are working for personal gain) ..... and you starve.
No go to sleep and dream up something better. Nobody owes anyone else a living.
The biggest lie ever spread is "Greed is good.", because it denies this fundamental innate connection, it denies compassion.
I would like to shake your hand on the strength of that comment - couldn't agree more.
Anyway, this whole decentralized idea of Bitcoin heads toward its own contradiction, because a very limited group of people (ergo, centralized) already have the power (coins) to regulate this new currency. Are these people our new bankers and Feds? Are they any better? Do they posses more of these o so needed properties like, empathy, compassion, care, affection, and so on ...?
Surely everyone has their price though - I mean, over time would not these large holders of BTC slowly have their holdings eroded one way or another.
There's an old Chinese saying - wealth carries forward no further than three generations.
Yes, OP nails it. There is some mystique kind of contradiction going on in the Bitcoin environment. Its technology is based upon something called a P2P-network. Now, take your time and read this Peer to Peer Network once again. Connection is the keyword here, and decentralization. There is no control centered in one place. The strength comes from the connections, just like the Internet. Does it really require a huge leap for mankind to understand that society is based on a similar underlying structure; we, human beings, form a network - we are connected in many ways.
The biggest lie ever spread is "Greed is good.", because it denies this fundamental innate connection, it denies compassion. Frans de Waal studies the behavior of primates and it stands to reason that primates expose "our" true nature; Moral behavior in animals.
Anyway, this whole decentralized idea of Bitcoin heads toward its own contradiction, because a very limited group of people (ergo, centralized) already have the power (coins) to regulate this new currency. Are these people our new bankers and Feds? Are they any better? Do they posses more of these o so needed properties like, empathy, compassion, care, affection, and so on ...?
The biggest lie ever spread is "Greed is good.", because it denies this fundamental innate connection, it denies compassion. Frans de Waal studies the behavior of primates and it stands to reason that primates expose "our" true nature; Moral behavior in animals.
Anyway, this whole decentralized idea of Bitcoin heads toward its own contradiction, because a very limited group of people (ergo, centralized) already have the power (coins) to regulate this new currency. Are these people our new bankers and Feds? Are they any better? Do they posses more of these o so needed properties like, empathy, compassion, care, affection, and so on ...?
Reminds me .. that old article about psychology of greed ( I do not complete agree with that vision since the pleasure/reward area can be connected to almost all human types of behaviors ( altruism included )) ...
Are human beings “naturally” greedy? Is greed so much a part of human biology that it will always shape human social life?
This age-old question came up once again in an article circulated by Bloom berg News, the big business news service. (bloomberg.com)
The article highlights the work of Stanford University psychology professor Brian Knutson who has used modern brain-imaging technology to try to associate regions of the brain with specific behaviors. In experiments by Knutson and colleagues, volunteers pretend to buy and sell stocks while the imaging machine called a functional MRI (FMRI) records the brain areas activated.
The findings suggest a connection bet ween activity in “pleasure center” areas of the brain and the action of making a profitable stock sale and even risk-taking behavior in anticipation or hope of gain, such as gambling. (Brain areas considered pleasure centers have been linked to activities such as sexual orgasm and cocaine use.)
In the experiments, losses and fear of loss activated a different area of the brain— one that has been associated with painful experiences.
The researchers believe their findings may help explain why investors, like gamblers, often take irrational risks in the same way that people will often carry out what they know is risky and even dangerous behavior for a pleasurable high from sex or drugs.
The Bloomberg business editor commented: “At a neurological level, our species’ desire for money may resemble our desire for sex…” and “our brains lust after money, just like they crave sex.”
In this interpretation, capitalist greed is biological—-“hard-wired” by our brains neural circuits. But this view is just a high-tech version of the very old, and mistaken, notion that greed is part of “human nature.”
Full article
http://www.workers.org/2006/us/greedy-0223/
Are human beings “naturally” greedy? Is greed so much a part of human biology that it will always shape human social life?
This age-old question came up once again in an article circulated by Bloom berg News, the big business news service. (bloomberg.com)
The article highlights the work of Stanford University psychology professor Brian Knutson who has used modern brain-imaging technology to try to associate regions of the brain with specific behaviors. In experiments by Knutson and colleagues, volunteers pretend to buy and sell stocks while the imaging machine called a functional MRI (FMRI) records the brain areas activated.
The findings suggest a connection bet ween activity in “pleasure center” areas of the brain and the action of making a profitable stock sale and even risk-taking behavior in anticipation or hope of gain, such as gambling. (Brain areas considered pleasure centers have been linked to activities such as sexual orgasm and cocaine use.)
In the experiments, losses and fear of loss activated a different area of the brain— one that has been associated with painful experiences.
The researchers believe their findings may help explain why investors, like gamblers, often take irrational risks in the same way that people will often carry out what they know is risky and even dangerous behavior for a pleasurable high from sex or drugs.
The Bloomberg business editor commented: “At a neurological level, our species’ desire for money may resemble our desire for sex…” and “our brains lust after money, just like they crave sex.”
In this interpretation, capitalist greed is biological—-“hard-wired” by our brains neural circuits. But this view is just a high-tech version of the very old, and mistaken, notion that greed is part of “human nature.”
Full article
http://www.workers.org/2006/us/greedy-0223/
I am happy myself to see more and more people get rich and out of poverty. I see Bitcoin as a way to bring emancipation and wealth to many unfortunate people that would otherwise not have the chance to get anywhere in this economic system. Tjose that lost their blue and white collar jobs, young unemployed, single and married mothers, pensioners..You name it many will benefit from Bitcoin and a little greed is healthy and motivating. Of course becoming corrupted by it and hurting others that is a different story but if getting some bitcoin and hoarding it for your kids is considered greedy when otherwise you may never have a chance to set your kids up or live out a pension then I would feel deeply sad. Yes I love the freedom element of it best of all but we have to be realistic here that the speculation aspect is going to bring many mainstream people in and we want that. 
Interesting perspective by the OP, but I have to clarify something: it's not only greed, but also aversion and delusion.
If you would only rely on greed, you can't explain all the market movements.
As for bitcoin being adopted on a global scale by a global government, IMO that's not going to happen.
Such a government might issue it's own cryptocurrency that it would control. Currently bitcoin is tolerated by democratic governments
and on the road to being banned by totalitarian ones. Problem is, even democratic governments can be corrupt, or just under the influence
of large corporations. Once bitcoin will grow too big, those corporations could feel threatened and lobby against bitcoin.
If you would only rely on greed, you can't explain all the market movements.
As for bitcoin being adopted on a global scale by a global government, IMO that's not going to happen.
Such a government might issue it's own cryptocurrency that it would control. Currently bitcoin is tolerated by democratic governments
and on the road to being banned by totalitarian ones. Problem is, even democratic governments can be corrupt, or just under the influence
of large corporations. Once bitcoin will grow too big, those corporations could feel threatened and lobby against bitcoin.
Quote
Yeah, im sure they would force global goverment by brining extreme amounts of value to a free market they cannot control. What will be their first step? World war three by disbanding all armies?
No. A global goverment won't be pushed by war but by peace. They don't need to control the free market, they need to make you want use bitcoin. It's like the wolf disguised as sheep. You think you are free, but you aren't.
Bitcoin's creator(s) still nowhere to be find, so we don't really know who designed it.
It doesn't matter. The source-code is all that matters, and it's open for everyone to view. What in it is it you dislike?
So, they will force me to use a non forceful, free market currency. Not that would be able to do that, but it's still way better than being forced to use fiat.
So, free market money, world peace. What was the downside compared to now?
Quote
Yeah, im sure they would force global goverment by brining extreme amounts of value to a free market they cannot control. What will be their first step? World war three by disbanding all armies?
No. A global goverment won't be pushed by war but by peace. They don't need to control the free market, they need to make you want use bitcoin. It's like the wolf disguised as sheep. You think you are free, but you aren't.
Bitcoin's creator(s) still nowhere to be find, so we don't really know who designed it.
Obviously a few early adopters are technically rich, but I wouldn't say I resented any of them. Satoshi has apparently never touched any of those coins which is pretty puzzling to me and either means he is already very rich, very principled or there is another game in town. Laszlo - the pizza guy, sold all his remaining coins for $1 which is actually a bit sad to me, I hoped he would be visiting Domino's in a Ferrari these days, but he is positive about it and then there is Hal Finney who fate rewarded with both bitcoins and ALS. He still posts occasionally and keeps his bitcoins in the bank for his children. Other early adopters probably have similar stories, so live and let live.
I'm sure many others would share your sentiments. The early adopters have been handsomely rewarded for speculating in a technology with very uncertain outcomes, I think it's fair they are rewarded...it's pretty much the basis of any free market economy. I know many Bitcoin critics secretly resent these early adopters and many form opinions before taking the time to understand Bitcoin and the utility it can provide beyond a speculative commodity. Personally I don't care! I can see the unbelievable potential in Bitcoin not as a commodity but as a means of exchanging value. You're right Bitcoin needs to be an economy in itself, but we're seeing this on a daily basis with businesses accepting Bitcoin all over the world! It's happening, and it's happening fast!!
Of course they resent them. It's the same people who resent all rich people because they are envious. It's good to be resented by those people.
Quote
All this mass hysteria could lead to so many issues, including a forced adoption of bitcoin as global currency and acceleration towards a global goverment. What was designed for freedom can be changed for enslavement.
It could be the case in a few years that nobody could buy or sell without bitcoin.
It could be the case in a few years that nobody could buy or sell without bitcoin.
Yeah, im sure they would force global goverment by brining extreme amounts of value to a free market they cannot control. What will be their first step? World war three by disbanding all armies?
All this mass hysteria could lead to so many issues, including a forced adoption of bitcoin as global currency and acceleration towards a global goverment. What was designed for freedom can be changed for enslavement.
It could be the case in a few years that nobody could buy or sell without bitcoin.
It could be the case in a few years that nobody could buy or sell without bitcoin.
I'm sure many others would share your sentiments. The early adopters have been handsomely rewarded for speculating in a technology with very uncertain outcomes, I think it's fair they are rewarded...it's pretty much the basis of any free market economy. I know many Bitcoin critics secretly resent these early adopters and many form opinions before taking the time to understand Bitcoin and the utility it can provide beyond a speculative commodity. Personally I don't care! I can see the unbelievable potential in Bitcoin not as a commodity but as a means of exchanging value. You're right Bitcoin needs to be an economy in itself, but we're seeing this on a daily basis with businesses accepting Bitcoin all over the world! It's happening, and it's happening fast!!
I'm in here for quite a while, both in this forum and this planet so I got the chance to study some persons, including myself. I have studied the behavior, beliefs and needs both in pleasant and unpleasant situations. And I have found out that we're ultimately driven by greed. And that's very difficult to control.
Why would you want to control it? Greed is the simple emotion of wanting more than you have. It's something good.
Quote
Now, to be short. My issue is that greed wasn't in the bitcoin ecosystem from the begging.
Yes it was. As the ecosystem was made by humans.
Quote
No. First people here, the early adopters (including CPU miners), we're regular people, most of them with no significant wealth.
That's still the case.
Quote
They, we, were here because wanted and needed a change, needed freedom.
Still need and want that
Quote
At those times people would trade 10,000 BTC for a pizza and be happy.
People still trade the economic equivalent of what used to be the value of 10k BTC for a pizza. In fact, they to that a hundreds and hundreds of time more than they used to, with many new shops accepting bitcoins.
Quote
But now, things have changed, most early adopters are now rich and they are rich even if they have been scammed for some, lost some while speculating or spent some.
Yes, like with all good things, people who get in early get bigger increase of thier wealth.
Quote
They are rich because this thing, greed, came into this system and new people wanted also to be part of this new thing. This made price to go up, and while it goes up, the very early and early users are now filthy rich.
Yes, people want to be part of a good thing. That increases the value of that thing. It's a GOOD thing!
Quote
But things don't stop here... The first ones or the ones that had lots of fiat and were able to buy thousands, are now the most richest 500 owners, controlling about 35% of all bitcoins.
Good for them! They took a big risk and deserve it
Quote
Let's leave the ones that bought many coins just recently, they were already rich.
Nope. Most of them aren't and weren't rich.
Quote
Let's focus on the first ones, the ones that "traded" in the single digits, the early adopters and miners. Most of them have been corrupted in such way they forgot that they found about bitcoin because of passion and desire for better and not for money, they forgot that they were poor (or at least not wealthy) when they started. And the problem with that, is that we have lost good men in favor of speculative business and fade businesses that bring nothing in the world, but only take.
No we haven't. I see nothing but people who wake up to the economic reality and want to opt out of fiat.
Quote
And now, new people, driven out of greed, hope prices of 10,000 dollars this year, because they own a few coins and thus would have more dollars. But, think of the few-tens-of-thousands owners. They'll be even richer but without any direction, because most of their wealth is won not worked. They now started businesses (exchanges, precious metals, shops) to gather more wealth. Some of them got into mind-twisting schemes, taking advantage from other people, manipulating markets and doing such maneuvers.
Of course you hope for more of a good thing. You don't want the nodes of the internet to incrase? Or the users on your social media? That's what creates value for EVERYONE in the network. Will you make this thread again in 5 years and say "Oh, back then people spent 0.01BTC" on a pizza and were happy with that.
Quote
I'm not being philosophical about the taste of the bread you worked in the mine for but I'm trying to point out that with great power, really comes great responsibility. And not the responsibility of feeding children of Africa but the responsibility of not feeding your ego.
No, no one was born here with the responsibility to feed African children. They are born free and thus are free to spend their life in a the way the find most valuable.
Quote
In the end, my opinion is that wealth distribution in this ecosystem is too concentrated in a few hands and needs more dispersion before we move to higher levels. We need a solid economy, based on goods and services and not on speculation.
That's what we get the more people who use it
Quote
Speculation is pure greed and brings nothing.
It brings value to the market.
I'm in here for quite a while, both in this forum and this planet so I got the chance to study some persons, including myself. I have studied the behavior, beliefs and needs both in pleasant and unpleasant situations. And I have found out that we're ultimately driven by greed. And that's very difficult to control.
Now, to be short. My issue is that greed wasn't in the bitcoin ecosystem from the begging. No. First people here, the early adopters (including CPU miners), we're regular people, most of them with no significant wealth. They, we, were here because wanted and needed a change, needed freedom. At those times people would trade 10,000 BTC for a pizza and be happy. But now, things have changed, most early adopters are now rich and they are rich even if they have been scammed for some, lost some while speculating or spent some. They are rich because this thing, greed, came into this system and new people wanted also to be part of this new thing. This made price to go up, and while it goes up, the very early and early users are now filthy rich.
But things don't stop here... The first ones or the ones that had lots of fiat and were able to buy thousands, are now the most richest 500 owners, controlling about 35% of all bitcoins. Let's leave the ones that bought many coins just recently, they were already rich. Let's focus on the first ones, the ones that "traded" in the single digits, the early adopters and miners. Most of them have been corrupted in such way they forgot that they found about bitcoin because of passion and desire for better and not for money, they forgot that they were poor (or at least not wealthy) when they started. And the problem with that, is that we have lost good men in favor of speculative business and fade businesses that bring nothing in the world, but only take.
And now, new people, driven out of greed, hope prices of 10,000 dollars this year, because they own a few coins and thus would have more dollars. But, think of the few-tens-of-thousands owners. They'll be even richer but without any direction, because most of their wealth is won not worked. They now started businesses (exchanges, precious metals, shops) to gather more wealth. Some of them got into mind-twisting schemes, taking advantage from other people, manipulating markets and doing such maneuvers.
I'm not being philosophical about the taste of the bread you worked in the mine for but I'm trying to point out that with great power, really comes great responsibility. And not the responsibility of feeding children of Africa but the responsibility of not feeding your ego.
In the end, my opinion is that wealth distribution in this ecosystem is too concentrated in a few hands and needs more dispersion before we move to higher levels. We need a solid economy, based on goods and services and not on speculation. Speculation is pure greed and brings nothing.
Now, to be short. My issue is that greed wasn't in the bitcoin ecosystem from the begging. No. First people here, the early adopters (including CPU miners), we're regular people, most of them with no significant wealth. They, we, were here because wanted and needed a change, needed freedom. At those times people would trade 10,000 BTC for a pizza and be happy. But now, things have changed, most early adopters are now rich and they are rich even if they have been scammed for some, lost some while speculating or spent some. They are rich because this thing, greed, came into this system and new people wanted also to be part of this new thing. This made price to go up, and while it goes up, the very early and early users are now filthy rich.
But things don't stop here... The first ones or the ones that had lots of fiat and were able to buy thousands, are now the most richest 500 owners, controlling about 35% of all bitcoins. Let's leave the ones that bought many coins just recently, they were already rich. Let's focus on the first ones, the ones that "traded" in the single digits, the early adopters and miners. Most of them have been corrupted in such way they forgot that they found about bitcoin because of passion and desire for better and not for money, they forgot that they were poor (or at least not wealthy) when they started. And the problem with that, is that we have lost good men in favor of speculative business and fade businesses that bring nothing in the world, but only take.
And now, new people, driven out of greed, hope prices of 10,000 dollars this year, because they own a few coins and thus would have more dollars. But, think of the few-tens-of-thousands owners. They'll be even richer but without any direction, because most of their wealth is won not worked. They now started businesses (exchanges, precious metals, shops) to gather more wealth. Some of them got into mind-twisting schemes, taking advantage from other people, manipulating markets and doing such maneuvers.
I'm not being philosophical about the taste of the bread you worked in the mine for but I'm trying to point out that with great power, really comes great responsibility. And not the responsibility of feeding children of Africa but the responsibility of not feeding your ego.
In the end, my opinion is that wealth distribution in this ecosystem is too concentrated in a few hands and needs more dispersion before we move to higher levels. We need a solid economy, based on goods and services and not on speculation. Speculation is pure greed and brings nothing.
Jump to: