I am going to put you on ignore.
The technical details matter. Because you're refutation of BTC is rooted in your many misunderstandings of how it works. So I'm asking you to demonstrate a competency in its technical details. Because your economics are flawed by the fact that you seem to not understand the protocol, how it solves problems of double spending, how ownership of bitcoins actually works, how transactions are verified, etc.
I like that. Disengage, because you refuse to actually discuss with someone the ideas you disagree with. You haven't answered one question, not in any debate I've ever seen you in. But I do see you lecture an awful lot like Moses coming down from Mt. Sinai with all the answers. But I've never seen you engage with someone who disagrees with you save for simply telling them that they don't know anything. It's really very adorable. But it's completely discrediting.
Respect for what Luke? I've never seen him engage with actual disagreers. I've only seen him tell them that they don't know anything or to ignore their question and scoff which I find far ruder than me calling it like it is. I'm glad he's taught you something though. You seem to actually have a grasp on this stuff. I s'pose it's a case of the student becoming the master if you believe you've learned from guerilla.
The people who are in BTC now, are, for the most part, the kind of people that are inclined to say fuck the rules. So, you can assume that even if the rules said that this was illegal, BTC would be trading at somewhere between $7 and $15 and would be used to still make anonymous transactions. That would make it a very shallow market, but it would be transacting nevertheless.
samgeneric said:
It's transcendence has to do with the ease of movement. It gets rid of a lot of the problems that fiat currency has like ridiculous exchange rates. Look, call me names, saddle up next to guerilla, do whatever you want. But here's the reality of those of us who actually give a damn about this. Fiat money has been used to control all sorts of things throughout the centuries. Access to fiat, access to precious metals that back fiat, etc have started wars, have kept people who need food from getting food, and governments like it because their perception is that the money belongs to them rather than those who earn it. It's the federal reserve's note not your note. You borrow it from them, they let you borrow it. The effects of this mentality are obvious when you look this week in Cyprus where the government is confiscating its citizens money right from their bank accounts.
Oh he's done it before; plenty of times with me. I didn't start out very Anarchist here, I was a Paul voter when I arrived, with no interest in anarchy.
That's worked Oh-so well for torrents, don't you think?
Such as? This ought to be good...
BRING THEM ON. :2drinkspit:
I don't know if you do or don't pay taxes. Let's assume you do.
Currency is not like dope. You can smoke dope in privacy.
Explain. I thought you argued that it could never be money qua money because it was digital and not physical, so this point seems argumentative.
Most people are oblivious to sovereign risk. If there is one sovereign you don't want to fuck with, it's the USG.
Are they going to prosecute 256 bit encrypted numbers? Who are they going to prosecute? They have to tie a person to the ownership. You can't do that. They can trace me to a person who claims to use Bitcoins. It's awful hard to know preciesly which coins are mine. Moreover, do you think they'll prosecute and lock up 100,000 or 1million people however many users there are at that time? It's an impossibility. This is a jaugernaut, it's not easily stopped at this point. The best the government can do is politely ask you to report your income on your tax return.
That's destined to happen to pretty much all citizens of the USA who like freedom eventually. You know what I did.
Not Bitcoin. It exists because you can't stop it from existing. It creates it's own free market around it that cannot be regulated.
Please go read up on bitcoin security. Please. I beg you.
You don't know what you're talking about.
My understanding is that it is pretty untraceable, but the problem comes in two places.
First off, this isn't true. If you want a high degree of anonymity, you take your encrypted coins, and put them into your 256 bit encrypted wallet, or you print them out and put them in your safe and don't tell anyone about who owns them. That said, pray tell, how does having multiple wallets increase transaction costs?
What's your point? Who cares if it's anonymous or not? The transaction occurs regardless.
Transaction costs are infintessimal. Free mostly, in fact.
Pretty close; but there are now laundromats for inter-bitcoin sending as well!
