Topic: Losing the High Moral Ground - page 2. (Read 2822 times)
Every victimless action is, or eventually will be made, a "crime". If you are a human, you are a "criminal" to some degree exceeding zero.
Are you ready to be personally extorted by anonymous bomb threats for anonymous payments in what you consider civilized society?
That has absolutely nothing to do with cryptos.
Nothing is "risk free", and extortion has existed long before cryptocurrency was invented.
Most people do not understand that there is no such thing as "selective" freedom: either everybody is free, or nobody is.
Freedom comes always with a cost, focusing on the "bad press" that black markets could give to Bitcoin is incredibly narrow minded (despite of one's opinion on "drugs" or this or that "illegal" thing), because the flourishing of "black" markets is just a blatant example of the incredible empowering force that Bitcoin constitutes.
Are you ready to be personally extorted by anonymous bomb threats for anonymous payments in what you consider civilized society?
That has absolutely nothing to do with cryptos.
Are you ready to be personally extorted by anonymous bomb threats for anonymous payments in what you consider civilized society?
That has absolutely nothing to do with cryptos.
Are you ready to be personally extorted by anonymous bomb threats for anonymous payments in what you consider civilized society?
Just because some people use something like Bitcoin for illegal purposes doesn't mean that YOU don't have the moral high ground. You might even make the case that fiat currencies don't have the moral high ground, either, because they're used to buy and sell drugs and you also get scammers, Ponzi schemes, and all the ills that come with having an overly centralized financial system.
And, guys, keep in mind that calling someone a hypocrite doesn't mean that he can't make your case for you.
And, guys, keep in mind that calling someone a hypocrite doesn't mean that he can't make your case for you.
But there was a snake in the garden. Silk Road created a black market that allowed criminals to become parasites to the Bitcoin development community. The bad press and negative impact of this crime wave hindered Bitcoin adoption. It wan't until Silk Road was closed down that Bitcoin adoption began to take hold and investment grew.
You are so close-minded. Black markets are the best thing that happened recently, thanks to crypto. Anyways, did you know there are already at least 2 markets that are bigger than SR1? Relation to SR1 closing is complete bullshit, black markets are stronger than ever.
Freedom, bud.
QFT.
Black markets and vices like gambling and alcohol are socially unpalatable but necessary parts of a robust economy. It is naive to think otherwise.
Prisons are one of the fastest growing industries in America. They are filled with folks that think like you. Be proud to be in the company of so many open minded people. I'm sure SR2 will join them as well.
But there was a snake in the garden. Silk Road created a black market that allowed criminals to become parasites to the Bitcoin development community. The bad press and negative impact of this crime wave hindered Bitcoin adoption. It wan't until Silk Road was closed down that Bitcoin adoption began to take hold and investment grew.
You are so close-minded. Black markets are the best thing that happened recently, thanks to crypto. Anyways, did you know there are already at least 2 markets that are bigger than SR1? Relation to SR1 closing is complete bullshit, black markets are stronger than ever.
Freedom, bud.
QFT.
Black markets and vices like gambling and alcohol are socially unpalatable but necessary parts of a robust economy. It is naive to think otherwise.
But there was a snake in the garden. Silk Road created a black market that allowed criminals to become parasites to the Bitcoin development community. The bad press and negative impact of this crime wave hindered Bitcoin adoption. It wan't until Silk Road was closed down that Bitcoin adoption began to take hold and investment grew.
You are so close-minded. Black markets are the best thing that happened recently, thanks to crypto. Anyways, did you know there are already at least 2 markets that are bigger than SR1? Relation to SR1 closing is complete bullshit, black markets are stronger than ever.
Freedom, bud.
I placed this in Politics and Society because I know most of the real idiots don't sub this board. I enjoyed the discussion. It will be interesting to see if society at large tolerates lawlessness created by this technology or bans it and imprisons its developers. They started a war with Iraq under the pretense that they had aluminum tubes. It doesn't take much to bring down the holy ban hammer.
I think you're confusing society with government here. You mention society, and at the same time ban and imprisonment but since society is not the one that decides neither to ban nor to imprison I think that government(s) is the proper word.
However, society's role is even more important than the one governments can play regarding cryptos simply by accepting them or not.
It is a mark of human nature that new technologies are always weaponized before they are developed for beneficial tools. Metal was forged into swords before plows. Volatile substances were used to make bombs for centuries before generating steam power. Technology scares people. Now we have stealth address technology that will make creating black markets easy.
Gunpowder were invented in China and used as firework.
As for metal:
http://neon.mems.cmu.edu/cramb/Processing/history.html
Technologies were weaponized by the government, not the population.
I placed this in Politics and Society because I know most of the real idiots don't sub this board. I enjoyed the discussion. It will be interesting to see if society at large tolerates lawlessness created by this technology or bans it and imprisons its developers. They started a war with Iraq under the pretense that they had aluminum tubes. It doesn't take much to bring down the holy ban hammer.
It seems we agree.
I didn't say an argument ad hominem isn't an argument (even if stupid), I said an insult isn't an argument, because it's a qualification of the author of the ideas. On the ideas, is neutral, unless the two are connected in some kind of logic by an argument.
To say A can't make an argument pro freedom because he don't have slaves would be absurd. So, argument ad hominem most have some logic. An insult is pure qualification of the author, only implicitly/indirectly can say anything on the ideas.
I didn't say an argument ad hominem isn't an argument (even if stupid), I said an insult isn't an argument, because it's a qualification of the author of the ideas. On the ideas, is neutral, unless the two are connected in some kind of logic by an argument.
To say A can't make an argument pro freedom because he don't have slaves would be absurd. So, argument ad hominem most have some logic. An insult is pure qualification of the author, only implicitly/indirectly can say anything on the ideas.
A pure insult isn't an argument ad hominem, because it isn't an argument. An argument most have some intrinsic logic directed against the ideas or have some support on facts. Like saying his arguments on freedom are irrelevant because he had slaves.
An insult, at most, might be a preparation for an argument ad hominem.
An insult is an opinion. An argument is an opinion. It's a statement of fact. Facts can be valid or invalid. An argument ad hominem is still an argument. If it is fallacious, then it weakens the argument because the facts they represent are invalid or irrelevant. Calling Jefferson a hypocrite about his opinions about freedom knowing he was a slave owner, doesn't necessarily invalidate his opinion, but it calls many things into question and should not be used to strengthen a contemporary modern argument about freedom on its own merit because it's cliche. An insult, at most, might be a preparation for an argument ad hominem.
I hear you bro. Crime and get-rich-quick speculation have certainly changed the mentality here. You used to get some cred for starting a new project. Now you get trolled; and success is only measured in how many BTCs you can convert to fiat. The extreme greed shown here is proof that bitcoin has become money.
I haven't even been around as long as a lot of people and I've already seen this change as well. It used to be about community and closeness. Now people screw over their own friends to get ahead and make a little extra money. The entire dynamic has completely gone downhill compared to where it once was.
For 95% of us it still is. When bit coin became truly valuable it began to attract some nefarious people. This kind of thing isn't unexpected and is a sign of how valuable it has become.
A pure insult isn't an argument ad hominem, because it isn't an argument. An argument most have some intrinsic logic directed against the ideas or have some support on facts. Like saying his arguments on freedom are irrelevant because he had slaves.
An insult, at most, might be a preparation for an argument ad hominem.
An insult, at most, might be a preparation for an argument ad hominem.
Gawd, someone let me talk to Stefan Molyneux about this. I'm sure he would try to champion this line of thinking.
Calling someone an hypocrite isn't an argument, is an insult, may or may not be justified. But of course, as all insults, it's ad hominem.
This makes no sense. Of course ad hominem is an argument, it may be a fallacious one, but it's still an argument. If it also serves to point out another fallacy, then it may be a valid argument. This is getting so sophomoric and nothing to do with my points about buying drugs from strangers. I would pay to see someone argue this in public in front of cameras. It would be worth the laughs you would get from (insert argument ad populum here).
Calling someone an hypocrite isn't an argument, is an insult, may or may not be justified. But of course, as all insults, it's ad hominem.
With freedom comes freedoms we do not agree with.
You hit the nail on the head.
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -Jefferson
Carry on.
Argumentum ad hominem
No, but claiming his opinion is invalid because he's a hypocrite, is.
I didn't use this quote to strengthen my case. He merely put it to words rather well (and just stealing it is bad)
I did not make an argument but merely shared my opinion. Elwar made the (valid) argument
Jump to: