My comments inline:

On Thursday, January 9, 2020, 02:38:17 PM PST, \0xDynamite <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:


>> I will recant AP when, and only when, the world figures out a way to solve
>> ALL of its problems that AP would otherwise solve.  Which will NEVER occur.


>But you are possibly missing out on a problem AP *would* cause:  mob
slander of an innocent man.

You must not be thinking very hard.  First, I will point out that your comment is ambiguous:  WHICH "innocent man"?  An, why would AP CAUSE that slander?

If we assume you are talking about the innocent person described in the Reddit message I quoted, you seem to forget that he was given "mob slander" due to a corrupt and lying detective, not due to some not-yet-existent AP system.  And that lying detective knew he was enabled by a crooked judge, who had never given any policement worse than probation.   And if an AP system existed, that detective would have certainly been 'donated to death'.  
So, why are you now saying that AP would CAUSE that slander?  Slightly more accurately, you might speculate that an AP system would not necessarily PREVENT that slander.   

And, I notice that you are carefully avoided quoting the large majority of my original post (and I'm not referring to my quote of the Reddit posting), which would easily disprove what you are saying.  I addressed these issues; you edited those points out.  Should I accuse you of dishonesty for removing them?  I will re-post that material I wrote, below.  

 > Your AP has to be *perfectly* accurate of its indictments.  How will you do this without re-inventing "the
System"?

I would ask you to check all the discussion in the 1995 CP archives, BUT SOME CORRUPT PEOPLE TAMPERED WITH THE ARCHIVES!!!

The reality is that after a couple of years post-AP, there will be a series of VOLUNTARY courts implemented, to resolve these disputes.  They will have juries, and juries will do what juries have done best, find facts.  I could go on, but you would ignore it.  




>That's why I propose the Headline Target technique:  more likely to
get results, and more-or-less harmless if wrong.

>marxos

It looks to me like you just wanted to flog YOUR idea, so you chose to criticize MY idea, but to disguise your dishonesty you deleted a key part of my comment to make it look like you made a point, and make it look like I omitted a point.  Stop that.  

                      Jim Bell



--------------- the following is what I, Jim Bell, originally posted, minus the Reddit posting quoted --------------------

My Assassination Politics   https://cryptome.org/ap.htm   proposal has been extensively mistreated and unfairly opposed by people, even early on the Cypherpunks list, based on very false and especially incomplete analyses.  Specifically, people write as if you can consider AP 'good' based only on it, rather than in comparison with what it will certainly replace. And yes, many people have had the opportunity, for about 25 years now, to do these comparisons.  They have utterly failed to do that.
 
Economists have a term called "opportunity cost", the costs of NOT choosing a particular course of action.  Making a decision requires an analysis of not merely choosing, but also choosing NOT, to do something.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost   

I just read the following, from Reddit.  It is a seemingly small, but virtually perfect, example of what happens when you DON'T choose to implement my Assassination Politics system.


I will quote all of this below, the relevant message, in case it disappears.   But I will say that in an AP world this kind of event could not occur.  Why do I say that?   In an AP world, this crooked detective wouldn't expect to be protected by an equally-crooked judge.  In an AP world, this crooked detective would be 'donated to death', very quickly, and there would be nothing at all that anybody could do to stop this.  And if a crooked judge tried to help him get away with this amazing perjury, that judge too would be 'donated to death', just as quickly.  And anyone who supported him, or them.  Mostly, the deterrent value of AP would make such actions unthinkable, and impossible in practice.  

One reason that my AP idea should be considered so good is that it must be judged in comparison with the existing world, all the bad things like this.  Anybody who criticizes AP needs to explain why it would somehow be worse than today's amazing world.  

When I do a Google-search for things like ' "Assassination Politics" "bell" '  I occasionally read comments about how 'Bell has not recanted', or 'Bell still believes in his AP idea'.  As if, they are somehow shocked to discover that I really still support my AP idea.  Why should I recant?   Why should I abandon my discovery/invention?   Does our world still have injustice, in the way this current Reddit item describes?   Does our world still have militaries, taxation to fund them, wars, and nuclear weapons?  Does anybody (else) have a credible idea to solve these problems?

I will recant AP when, and only when, the world figures out a way to solve ALL of its problems that AP would otherwise solve.  Which will NEVER occur.  

Jim Bell