Topic: Is Bitcoin socialist dream come true ? - page 4. (Read 958 times)

So, I think you actually don't really understand how bitcoin operates as a technical level. While this is off-topic, it could be brought on-topic about actually using the implementation of Bitcoin as an example. However, I'm going to argue the merits because it's literally the thread, and you probably actually believe what you say is true from an socialist-economics standpoint rather than the actual technical implementation of bitcoin.

---

So, mining *bitcoin* is resource based, so economics can play a role into it, but at the technical core the concept was "proof-of-work".

Proof-of-work for Bitcoin is the sha256 hash. Which back when it came out, was pretty standard (and still good today).

In a large distributed system, the majority of the workers would control the the rules. This is done by all the workers sharing and collaborating, and distributing new rules.

From an ideological standpoint, that seems very socialist. However, in recent years, the sha256 hash really has been attacked. ASICs are literally purposely built devices to mine BTC. It's kinda crazy that people make chips to be the "best worker". The problem is because they're the overwhelming majority that has invested into this very specific purpose, they're going to continue this production.

In reality, the same could be said about socialism.

Well it is pretty clear in the literature that a communist society is stateless and classless.  I could pretend to be a surgeon, botch a surgery and it wouldn't be a "not a true scotsman" fallacy for someone to deny a claim that "surgeons have no idea what they are doing".

The "True Scotsman" logical fallacy.

Fascinating that someone posting pro communism doesn't even know what it is.

interesting article I read today which concerns this issue...

Cryptocurrency ‘More Centralized than North Korea’: NYU Economist

https://www.ccn.com/cryptocurrency-more-centralized-than-north-korea-nyu-economist/

It is never true Communism is it? I guess because your ideal of true Communism "never existed" then we can ignore the repeated failures that inevitably resulted in hell on Earth and the direct deaths of hundreds of millions of people. What is important is we keep trying!

When you see people define socialism and communism everything bad that has been done by "communist" parties throughout history, then it starts to make sense why people hate it and are afraid of it.  

If you actually use the real definitions and vast amounts of economic theory to properly define socialism and communism, you would end up with something most ethically operating humans agree with.  

This widespread misconception isn't an accident though.  In order to perpetuate an archaic system of capitalism, its necessary to muddy the water around the systems designed as an evolution of capitalism.  

Lets start to sort things out so people can see that they have the definitions all wrong.

Socialism-  a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Socialists are simply trying to put the means of production into the hands of the people and asserting that it should be democratically controlled.  "State socialists" such as the USSR perverted the ideology because they simply replaced capitalists with government officials instead of the actual workers. Soviet officials didn't bring workers to the table to make decisions.  It was top down and authoritarian.  State capitalism would be the best way to describe most of the societies you think were socialist. Worker cooperatives such as mondragon are the best examples of actual socialism.  

Communism: A term describing a stateless, classless, moneyless society with common ownership of the means of production
If the entire economy was socialist, over time, you would not need a state as all production is democratically controled by the workers, people live in complete liberty, and there is no class struggle.   Equality does not mean that everyone makes the same amount of money or gets the same amount of goods, it simply means equality in a democratic sense.  No one person has power over the masses.  In terms of company decisions, 1 person=1 vote.  


Kind of strange how anyone could associate an authoritarian state with communism when statelessness one of the key characteristics communism.


One of the driving factors is that political parties have identified themselves as communist and ran totalitarian regimes.  These authoritarian regimes of the past do not represent hundreds of years of economic theory in the same way that someone who calls themselves muslim or christian committing an act of terror does not mean their actions represent the ideology as a whole.  

A company agrees on what everyones fair share is by a democratic vote.  No one takes anything from anyone. There is no central authority as the elected board of directors is held accountable by the majority vote of the community (workers).

Perfect example of a socialist who doesn't know they are socialist because they don't know it literally means democratic control of the economy.
Perfect example of someone who thinks stalinist authoritarianism is socialism (its not).  Socialism requires distribution of resources agreed upon democratically, with no outside interference or force.  It is capitalism that requires the threat of force to protect capital from the workers.  (IE if foxconn workers walk out with all of the iphones, the state has to ensure the capitalists take the goods and surplus from the workers by force and give them to the capitalists)  
Of course its possible.  Look at any worker cooperative.  
No economic system produces anything.  It is always labor that produces goods and services.  The economic system just describes who makes the decisions and keeps the surplus.  Socialists believe democracy should be applied here while capitalists believe in a feudalistic approach.
Show me an example of a stateless, classless society. It probably has happened in some small commune of a few dozen people but I'm not sure.

Damn it feels good to get merits from Theymos..

That's what they want you to think

Then how is the central authority supposed to "give everyone their fair share" and take from those who have "too much" without tracking them and knowing what they have and don't have?

They WON, you lost, get over it.. You don't deserve it just because someone else has it.. They had the skill and the right timing..

Why? Because it can't compete? Does that mean you must destroy all capitalism in the world in order to achieve "true" communism?

Is that why you believe that...


Please do continue telling us all about how dangerous the slippery slope of Leftism actually is..

Socialism is fail movement all over the world. So called socialist empires are burried under the earth.  Communists are the originator of the word socialism.  No country except China could save this ideology.
 
But Bitcoin is succeeding day by day.  It is liberty which socialists (communists) will never allow others to enjoy.  Liberty can be enjoyed  under democracy only not under any other school of thought.

Which part of the dictionary and encyclopedia words/terms socialism and capitalism are you asking about? After all, a family is socialistic just to be a family. But it has to be capitalistic in some of its nature as the kids become independent as they grow up. And the parents need to keep both of these things, socialism and capitalism, in mind to grow mentally healthy kids.

So, both are different, both overlap, and at times, both are the same.

Of course its not possible, because voluntary sharing is called charity. Socialism requires the confiscation of private property by force, hence they require the government monopoly on violence to do so.

Are you trying to stretch the word socialism to include non-governmental forms of economic sharing?

I don't think that is possible.

well, all the glitters is not gold


Socialism is based on equality and social ownership. What economic equality (the one Engels wrote about in Anti-Dühring) can we say when significant production powers are in one wealthy hand, when the creator has such power, and capitalist banks accumulate funds through unfair income redistribution and playing on volatilities. When we talk about social order, we must take into account the question of power. the usual average worker (who somehow accumulated funds for an entrance ticket) cant exerting economic influence on bitcoin, while super large players have such an opportunity.
All that Bitcoin takes from socialism that is Marx parfume for libertarian core.

Socialism doesn't produce anything. It is capable only via parasitic attachment to Capitalism. Socialism can not exist independent of Capitalism. Bitcoin is based on mutual self interest an is about as Capitalist as you can get. Please do tell me about how Bitcoin fits within the 10 planks of Communism, it should be entertaining.

So the people who have the skills and do the work control the products of their work.  That sounds a lot like the socialism to me. 

Bitcoin functions on proof of work, so the workers technically own bitcoin

The one who has computational capabilities (i even may say significant capabilities).  They are not guaranteed to anyone. And bought on the market with a probability of more than 90%. Also luckers and architects. Besides, Satoshi had a stabilization fund (or i wrong?). Decentralized emission does not guarantee equality.

 "True Communism has never existed" HAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH

Thanks for exposing yourself so completely and so easily. Regarding your question, try opening any history book not printed in China.

TECSHARE: I'm nearly certain communism is responsible for zero deaths as it has never been implemented but this just demonstrates your lack of understanding of what communism actually is.  I would love to see you write out your definition of communism and explain how you think it has killed people.

--

Overall, BTC can be utilized as a currency for any community. The issue is that it's tied to fiat currency rather than actual resources.

Communism is a failure responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions. Furthermore it was specifically designed and cultivated by the banking elite as controlled opposition to Capitalism. Give it up.