Topic: The contradictions of Bitcoin (Read 4815 times)

Right : what bitcoin changes most is the definition of banking and transaction processing.
I would add that bitcoin blurs the boundary between cash currency and electronic money: e.g. with bitbills

What point? I still only see a thinly veiled personal attack on libertarians. You may have removed the word, but your intent is still pretty clear.

You may have recognized some of your own personal traits in the descriptions I provided, and therefore felt inclined to leave this kind of comment. I understand, but I assure you that there is much more to human nature then what goes on in your confused head. I speak as a Buddhist.

I think you pre-derailed this thread by labeling those negative values as "libertarian".  (To restate the obvious: some assholes use libertarianism as a lame excuse for their behavior, but the reverse isn't true: few libertarians are going to claim those as virtues.)

Perhaps it's too late, but is it possible to just drop the word "libertarian" and discuss the push and pull between the scumballs who're using BC as a scam and the rest of us who're using it to improve the world?

Try this:  Read the OP again, but substitute "scumball" for "libertarian", and "money" for "BitCoin".

I have no idea what that has to do with libertarianism. Libertarianism is about freedom to be free of aggression. If I leave my windows open and you use a telescope to spy on me. That's compatible with libertarianism and as a libertarian I wouldn't want anyone else to use aggression, government or otherwise, to stop you. I wouldn't be happy with it either. Don't confuse what's legal with what's good. Being able to shoot heroin should be legal but it's definitely not good.

Excellent point

My opinion of Libertarians is NOT negative, I simply noted that selfish scammers tend to subscribe to libertarian views and use them to justify their behavior. X is a subset of Y, not the other way around.
As for the rest of your comment, it reminded me of the idea of "choice democracy" as proposed by Olivier Ledoit.

---

If Bitcoin as it is ever catches up, blockchain entries will be easily linked to average individuals. Even at this stage the anchor points are in this forum's donation signatures, in exchanges, in online orders for socks, coffee, t-shirts, and drugs. If libertarians are so bothered by big, evil government/IRS/Big Brother spying on them, I imagine they won't be happy with friends, neighbors, journalists, and everyone else added to this list.

I am a modern Socialist Democratic Liberal , with a Futurist Utopian influence.

I would agree with much on your post, but your opinion of Libertarians is a REALLY twisted one. And without knowing it you are contributing to the problem, instead of helping to solve it.

No not all Libertarians are scammers/drug dealers/anarchist/ radical people. Many tend to be doctors, lawyers, scientist, teachers, and some of the most respected people on our planet. I can pretty much guarantee you that 90% of the Libertarians on BTCTALK are good people, and they just have a totally different opinion of how life should be conducted.

Here is an interesting observation, if everyone subscribed to the SAME ideology, hypothetically they could ALL WORK. The problem is that we live in a world where different opinions/ideology's/sexes/ and cultures exists, and the best way to fix our problems is with BALANCE.

This is where the next part comes in and it's important. In order to keep this balance that we owe to eachother, we must continue to push the truth, no matter what side it benefits.

I have a problem when I come on here and I hear Libertarians and Republicans spouting about how our U.S.A corporations pay more taxes than anyone else in world, when that couldn't be farther away from the truth...

Corporations in the USA actually pay their CEO's more than they pay in total taxes!

http://rt.com/usa/news/corporations-ceos-lobbying-taxes-551/

We cannot get away from the truth, and extreme ideology's on both sides only takes us further away from the truth, and closer to chaos..

It's gotta stop.

P.S Bitcoin doesn't care what we are. Bitcoin is a money and nothing else, what we use it for has nothing to do with the ideology behind it. People really need to stop pegging ideology's to Bitcoin, cause it only makes the person doing so look REALLY stupid, especially since the currency isn't even out of BETA yet.. Anything can change in the economic model of Bitcoin, because maybe one thing isn't as practical as the other, so right now we really don't know where any of this is going to end up.

My guess will be a HEALTHY BALANCED currency when all this is said and done.

Bitcoin does not make better people who use it, but it does take central banks and government out of the loop.

This means these institutions and private banks do not have the possibility to profit from inflating the money supply anymore. Inflation of money supply has typically been used in the past to finance wars. The Vietnam war is one typical and well-proven example of this. After inflating the US$ to finance the Vietnam war Nixon had to close guaranteed gold exchange rate in 1971 because there were simply too many dollars around.

That is why I support Bitcoin.

Relax and read again. You are missing my points.

Multiple Personality Disorder? Or is this your way of telling us that you are a "self-centered, individualist, selfish, or plain greedy get rich fast, buy more dope, get your dick polished in Pattaya?"

How does a publicly available block chain conflict with being a libertarian or anti-statism (not all government is bad, just the involuntary kind known as states)? Also, you're confusing the Bitcoin protocol with the original Bitcoin client. There's nothing centralized about the protocol itself. You're free to implement your own client with your own bootstrapping mechanism. Others have done just that.

As for alienating people, I have more faith in my fellow humans. I think they can figure out that a tool and what it can be used for are separate issues. You can use a hammer to build a house or bludgeon someone to death. How you use it is up to you.

OP here. I am glad most of responses were not focused on categorizations that I used, and some of you pointed out the obvious: while you may consider yourself self-interested, you are nice folks and not irrational assholes that my post was describing.  For those who were staring at my finger while it was pointing to the Moon, I'll clarify that I consider myself in many ways a libertarian - not least because of the fact that that's where I fall in the Political Compass test.
  
In retrospect, my statement about the presumed "purpose" of Bitcoin was not justified, as political motifs of those who initiated the idea are not that clear at all. It all boils down to (among a few other things mentioned in the replies) this question: what kind of people are attracted to Bitcoin? This will define the sociopolitical impact of the idea. Bitcoin, like most other tools, is morally neutral - it's about how we use it.

The way things are now, there are too many  assholes who are either actively damaging the system for personal gains, or at best scaring away interested public with scam-sounding sales pitches.  One reason for this imbalance may be that public image of Bitcoin is often related to what is labeled as libertarian, anti-government, and such. Not only does this contradict certain technical aspects of bitcoin (for example, the accountability stemming from publicly available block chain, or the centralized software development), but it simply alienates many potentially interested folks who don't see themselves in that light.

 

Why are all you respondents feeding this giant troll? 

Its not really fair to blame libertarians for Greed, Fraud and all the evils of the world.  Bitcoin is a corrosive concept in that if it works, it will force a rethink of how society runs.  Naturally,  it will attract the type of person who bought the early Macs, who used the Internet in 1995 and generally is interested in new life-changing ideas.  But that is nothing to do with fraud. 

OP is right on the money.  Great post.  Bitcoin has become extremely ironic.

Yes, this was in the Genesis Block: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks".

It proves that the blockchain started on or after that date, and suggests that he disapproves of the current state of banking, but it's sort of a reach for anything else.

I'd love it if anyone could provide any more information.  It's mostly for my curiosity, but I did put in some time reading through all his history, so I'm not asking just 'cause I'm too lazy to look for myself.

Yes, I cant be bother to look for it though.

I remember, f.e., the initial prhase of the Bitcoin blockchain comes from a news announcing the UK bank bailouts.

I just skimmed through everything he wrote, and I didn't find anything like that.  Most of it's technical.  Here's most of what he said about other issues:

Other ecurrencies: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.807
Cornering markets: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2078
Microtransactions: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7524
Escrow: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7385
Power wasted by mining: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8114
Intrinsic value: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11405

Only at the very end did I see the slightest mention of politics:

WikiLeaks: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.26999
WikiLeaks 2: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.29280

And then the CIA executed him or whatever the current theory is.

So in all that reading, I found only two things that had any bearing on his intentions or goals:  #1, he supported anonymity (implicitly, by making TOR support a goal early on; I forgot to grab the link for that one); #2, he wanted BitCoin to stay in beta and out of the spotlight as long as possible (and promptly disappeared when the lights came on).

I can't find where he said anything about long-term goals or reasons he started the project.  Is there something I'm missing?