Cryptocurrency Dark Side, Voting, Anarchism, Government with McAfee, Rose, Passio and more

[juan]

On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 01:17:38 -0500
grarpamp <grarpamp at gmail.com> wrote:

> But in a way, they are all bringing forth the
> message that truly new things, wholesale
> changes, for the better, are possible. Is
> that not good.

	Changes for the better are always possible. But there is a downside to baseless optimism.  People who think that "blockchain can't be stopped" "bitcoin can't be censored" etc are playing into the hands of their enemies. 

	As to mcafee he probably isn't that naive regarding the weak points of the state but he isn't to be trusted anyway. Mcafee brags about his bodyguards being US military empire child murderers. Think about that. What kind of person would hire the scum of the earth, the americunt soldier-child-mutderer as 'bodyguard'.

> One should know roughly where one came from,
> and consider where one has evolved to today.

	Indeed. And I always wondered what stornetta had to say but was too lazy to look him up so thanks for the link. 


> > ledger  
> 
> Ledgers are unfortunate, currently in many regards, indeed.
> Yet how does one expect to get off the planet
> by trading chickens, eggs, and shiny things
> around in person.	


	heh - you seem to be missing the same point stornetta missed? Right, eggs are not a good "medium of exchange". 	However, shiny things made of copper, silver and gold, which are called, you know, coins, are vastly superior to any 'crypto currency' in many aspects. 

	Also, being a libertarian I DO NOT give a flying fuck about 'getting off the planet' or 'technology' per se. Or I guess I should say I care about 'technology' because it's the most dangerous enabler of totalitarianism ever.

	Anyway, it should be painfully obvious that sound money in the form of something like a 'gold standard' helps 'technical development' so your comment goes against pretty much the history of 'civilization'.

	Bottom line :  you cannot beat the 'decentralization' and privacy of trading metals in person, not to mention the fact that metals can't be counterfeited or 51% attacked and trading gold coins doesn't require NSA-backdoored microelectronics. 

	
> Distributed technology is and will continue to disrupt
> and evaporate legacy power structures.


	That's mostly backwards. Distributed technology REQUIRES decentralized political power. If power is centralized (as it obviously is) then 'technology' is controlled by a small corrupt technocratic mafia, as it is today. 
	


> > volatility  
> 
> It's greenfield, any fuck that speaks of this as
> a nonintrinsic negative is a complete statist
> closed market control freak fuck.

	well, that's yet another problem with 'money' based on a 'ledger'. These ledger based systems are NOT commodity money so their units don't have any 'intrinsic' price. Now, if bitcoin was widely used, then its price would be more stable but at the moment bitcoin isn't really a 'currency'(it's not widely accepted or 'current'), and it's used by gambler assholes who call themselves 'traders' for gambling.

	so not sure what you mean by 'nonintrinsic negative'? Volatility is intrinsic and is negative...