[Cryptography] Krugman blockchain currency skepticism

[grarpamp]

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 2:16 PM, Benjamin Kreuter <brk7bx at virginia.edu> wrote:
>> > beginning of this thread was a proposal that the problem is that
>> > the
>> > government might target an activist group's finances.  Now it
>> > sounds
>> > like you are talking about the government trying to attack the
>> > entire
>> > payment system.
>>
>> That is indeed a valid problem.
>> Among many others in many sectors and applications.
>
> What is your point?

Someone made one point above, that many failed to grasp...
Old world fiat and fiat systems are vulnerable to attack,
in ways that are not possible to fix, because the failures
are intrinsic to and result from the system they reside in
and spawn from.

Decentralized cryptocurrencies are newborn from an alien
mother and delivered by the great dropship Satoshi.
Don't expect them to look the same, or to confom,
or to share even a fraction of the same vulnerability space.


> The question, again, is what problem are you
> trying to solve with cryptocurrency?  Can you give a clear and specific
> answer to that question?

The documentary links provided in thread contain a rather
large number of problems and answers. Please consult them
rather than asking for them to be transcribed in full herein.


>> For so long as free speech, encryption, and overlay networks exist,
>> cryptocurrency and the internet cannot be shutdown.
>
> How has that worked out for the citizens of North Korea?
> Encryption
> and overlay networks get you nowhere when the government refuses to
> allow something like the Internet to exist.

Exactly. DPRK has never had freedom since its founding, so
of course DPRK will never willingly give that to its subjects.

Funny that Anti cryptocurrency people always end up
making Pro arguments.

How is that working out you ask?...

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=smuggling+into+north+korea

Let's just say that any freedom in the world is a result of being able
to deploy freedom faster and harder than governments and corporations
can react and resist.

Push harder my friends, mush mush mush!!!


> It is not at all hard to
> imagine regulations on telecom companies that would make
> cryptocurrencies impossible.  The government could require telecoms to
> drop any packets that are not used to interact with a properly licensed
> service (no peer-to-peer networking allowed, no experimentation on the
> public Internet, etc.).

They could.

Or you could get up off your ass, go visit with the telecoms,
and require them to stand up with your sales dollars, with you,
for both of your freedom. If they refuse, they're not your friends
or in your best interest, they're your enemies... so remove your funds,
crash their silly parties and go start your own that are. Same with your
govenment.

Also, taking candy from babies is *really hard*, and all
you Westerners are a bunch of seriously addicted babies.

It's not at all hard to imagine the amount of crying and resisting
you will do then they try to take your sweet sweet internet, and
your free and happy research experimentation, away from you,
and replace it with Woobie TV, or how about just good old fashioned
State run TV broadcast over loudspeakers like DPRK.

That's what you're "imagining", arguing, and accepting with
all your Anti comments.


Or you could do the right thing and stand up against it...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qa8SRN86V8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nl88J8KOLlY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIvt9snFQig


>>  If you accept,
>> either personally or as a populace, the shutting of your connection
>
> Most people would not complain about heavy-handed licensing of Internet
> applications because most people would not perceive themselves as being
> affected by it.  All the popular services and applications will be
> licensed and will do whatever the government says they need to do to
> stay in business.


More apologist suggestions and pre programming by
the state to get people to quietly accept your overtures.
Disgusting.


> Funny, because people from unstable countries with weak governments
> that do not effectively enforce the law seem to want to live in
> countries with effective law enforcement and stable governments.  Maybe
> they are tired of having bands of lawless brigands rob them at
> gunpoint, or they have seen too many murderers go unpunished, or they
> would rather settle disputes peacefully in a courtroom than with
> bullets.

As you just said, Government is not the source of such peaceful advances.
It is the people who have changed their own thinking, away from
being assholes to each other, to being good, and seeking a place
to develop and excercise it. They are the ones who either revolt
such obscenely intolerable situations, or move, to achieve that.
You *never* see such extant governments just wake up, sans dire
protest and threat from subjects, and transform themselves.

Now with all the Earth's land titled, what exactly do you think
folks like Musk in Space and the Free Stater's are trying to do
peacefully under such intolerable confines...


> The fact of the matter is that markets have never worked without a
> government of some kind.  Here is a basic question for you:  if there
> is no government, why should I respect the blockchain?  You pay me for
> some goods, and then I fail to deliver.  Now what are you going to do?

False.

People engage in transactions based on reputation, risk,
profitability, due diligience, as is where is, insurance, and many
other factors and metrics. Those doing that analysis will have
good results, and nowhere was, or need be, govenment in that.

When you hear 'not worth going after', that means the
analysis worked to contain losses within acceptable limits.

When you hear 'they scammed me', that means the
analysis wasn't performed. It's your fault. And the odds of
getting any whole back are commensurately slim.

Furthermore, the blockchain is self respecting by design.

When everyone is educated about the blockchain, decentralized
cryptocurrencies, which they should be, at minimum by their
wallet introducers, to the the philosophical and operating space
and the requirements of them therein, it works. Else yes, you'll
lose value, same as with fiat.


> Most
> people are happy to live under a government as long as the government
> does not bother them too much.  Most people are willing to pay taxes,
> and some people are proud to do so and
> consider any effort to evade taxes to be stealing.

Taxes are theft upon those who do not both voluntarily and explicitly
agree to it, nor to the great many line items of tax expenditure.

There are many excellent resources on this subject...

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=taxation+is+theft

Please become well informed by watching the videos on
that page before attempting to make further arguments.

"Most people" haven't done that, let alone ever heard about it,
due of course to the fake news you clamor for and permit
and "license"...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TqgQd1cLl8


>> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=banks+fear+bitcoin
>
> Banks do not fear Bitcoin.  In fact, a growing list of banks and
> payment processors are paying for blockchain and cryptocurrency R&D,
> and some are starting to trade in cryptocurrencies (Goldman Sachs is
> one example).  I have heard mixed opinions on cryptocurrencies from
> people in that industry, but I have yet to hear anyone express any
> fear.

You have to qualify what they're doing deeper...
- Decentralized cryptocurrencies... fear. Nothing but lowly retail
servicers, wallet curation and payment order taking companies,
easily ditched when someone learns and wishes to do it on their own.
- Centralized cryptocurrencies... no fear. Partners, in control, of the
entire system, fiat, fees, usury, inflation, forfeiture, arbitrary, "custodial"
"brokerage", as usual.


>> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=governments+fear+bitcoin
>
> Maybe some governments are afraid, but the US government has been
> fairly open minded so far -- other than regulating cryptocurrencies the
> way other tradeable assets are regulated, the US government has allowed
> people to experiment with cryptocurrencies, to use cryptocurrencies for
> various kinds of businesses, and even pays for research on how to
> protect the privacy of blockchain transactions.  The regulation effort
> is mostly motivated by the growing number of scams in cryptocurrency
> markets, and in the end those regulations will actually make
> cryptocurrency markets stronger and more accessible to "ordinary"
> people.

Again, you have to dig deeper very closely into what exactly
they're banning, promoting, and being [coyly] agnostic about,
and why.

"Scams" were addressed above.


> -- [Whoever]

It's no secret that those who derive their salaries from taxation
by force of government, do and will continue to promote the same.
For example, certain of you might be found here...

https://www.ccis.northeastern.edu/people-view-all/
http://www.virginia.edu/cs/people/grads/

And until each and every one of all the Anti cryptocurrency
punditry, regulators, lawmakers, lobbies, naysayers, and so on...
has actually installed a decentralized cryptocurrency wallet,
and received and sent decentralized cryptocurrency in transaction
for goods and services... actually experiencing the potential new
models and philosophies firsthand... their words are both laughably
hypocritical and shamefully uninformed.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2018/08/15/23-fascinating-bitcoin-and-blockchain-quotes-everyone-should-read/#43914c477e8a


What's in your wallet?

For those who haven't had,
get the experience for a while,
then come talk.

Preferably also as part of your local cryptocurrency meetup.