3 ms·

> (there's a ton of lawsuits) Do the lawsuits actually lead to people going to jail? Does it stop them from concentrating more wealth and exploiting things fur

> (there's a ton of lawsuits) Do the lawsuits actually lead to people going to jail? Does it stop them from concentrating more wealth and exploiting things further? IOW, do these actions make the system less fragile? I guess not. That is the difference. > They care exactly as much about $GME as they do about $DOGE. That is not the point. The point is that there is no one to stop them. It's their risk, it should be their reward, and it should not depend on some referee that is pulling the card and calling the fouls only when it favors their friends. I personally have zero interest in getting into this fight, but I am thrilled with the idea of people realizing that the current game is rigged and that the only way to win is not to play by their rules. > cryptocurrency is your world. It's your religion. It can do no wrong. First, how many times have I said already that the "currency" part is the least interesting section for most cypherpunks? The point is independence and resilience, cryptocurrency is just the beginning. Second, "crypto" doesn't do anything. It can do as wrong as "Free Software". People working in crypto can do wrong, have done wrong and there will be more examples to come. But - here's where I seem to lose you - whatever people do does not bring systemic risk. Mt Gox didn't kill Bitcoin. TheDAO didn't kill Ethereum. Tether won't kill Bitcoin or Ethereum. All the scammers and the people learning very expensive lessons won't kill crypto. All of these events (unpleasant as they are) cause shocks to the system that lead to reactions that make it stronger - better security, more permissionless applications, less centralization. This is how every robust system evolves. (Yes, one could say that our institutions were already the result of centuries of social interactions and is what we had as the most robust solution. But the last years are seeing such a change in the environment that an evolutionary leap was bound to happen, and it is getting clear every day how the current system is failing to adapt fast enough.) Worse, the ones benefiting from the status quo all want to keep the illusion that is all good and fine and that no change is needed. This is reactionary and ignores the fact that evolution is a continuous process. Bitcoin is not going to go extinct by decree. If Bitcoin ever gets to be extinct, it won't be because too many buttcoiners wrote on reddit or complained about how wasteful PoW is, or because some big shot got hacked and wanted its money back, or because Putin blocked transactions in Russia. It will be either because something clearly better came along and it was more fit for survival or because some other catastrophic event came and destroyed the environment (in the case, the Internet).

arcticbull 6y ago
Crypto is the only market more heavily rigged and manipulated lol. The whole idea behind decentralized and permissionless is anyone can fuck with it in any way they want - and they do, constantly, all the time, and not only is there no way to stop it, it's a feature. This is a case of the Vantablack swatch calling the kettle black. This is your least compelling argument yet.
- rglullis 6y ago
  > anyone can fuck with it in any way they want (...) it's a feature. Keyword: anyone. Symmetry of information, symmetry of power. Symmetry of risk exposure and reward. I will take that over a golden cage - any day, any time.
  - arcticbull 6y ago
    Oy vey. No. There's no symmetry of information between you and an exchange and the arbitrage bots and various other manipulation bots, whales in their discords, and so on. Between you and and the Tether bros. For instance, where's the audit? Only Tether and Bitfinex know what they're actually holding, if anything. That's not symmetry of information. There's no symmetry of power. Power is a function of position size. Your statement is only true if everyone has a position of equal size. There's no symmetry of risk exposure and reward. That's a function of your position size. There's symmetry of opportunity to invest your position but it doesn't matter if you're an ant in front of a freight train. Both have equal access to the tracks! In fact that's not even true at exchanges or with variable transaction fees. This argument you're making is basically Citizen's United. "Money is speech, and all speech is the same no matter how much it costs!" -- Incorrect. Money is volume. Anyone can talk free of charge but unless you're doing it loud enough, what you have to say doesn't matter because nobody can hear you. I get it, these are the typical kool-aid lines from r/bitcoin. They do not stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny.
    - rglullis 6y ago
      I know I added it in a later edit, but did you ignore the part I said about systemic issues deliberately? Tether is on the same track to become Mt. Gox, times a hundred. They are trying to outsmart the market and inevitably going to fail and wipe out the funds of those that trusted them. They will get rekt'd at some point. That will be good. Not for the people involved, but the overall system. > This argument you're making is basically Citizen's United. (...) Anyone can talk free of charge but unless you're doing it loud enough, what you have to say doesn't matter because nobody can hear you. Quite the opposite. My idea is that talk only should be considered when it is not cheap, when it involves a considerable stake from whoever is calling for action/change/bet. It is not free (of cost) and it should not be free (of consequences). The problem is that the current system even when you get organized with a sizeable group (WSB) who is willing to pay the price and face the consequences, you still get silenced, shut down or rug pulled.

arcticbull 6y ago

Crypto is the only market more heavily rigged and manipulated lol. The whole idea behind decentralized and permissionless is anyone can fuck with it in any way they want - and they do, constantly, all the time, and not only is there no way to stop it, it's a feature. This is a case of the Vantablack swatch calling the kettle black. This is your least compelling argument yet.

rglullis 6y ago
> anyone can fuck with it in any way they want (...) it's a feature. Keyword: anyone. Symmetry of information, symmetry of power. Symmetry of risk exposure and reward. I will take that over a golden cage - any day, any time.
- arcticbull 6y ago
  Oy vey. No. There's no symmetry of information between you and an exchange and the arbitrage bots and various other manipulation bots, whales in their discords, and so on. Between you and and the Tether bros. For instance, where's the audit? Only Tether and Bitfinex know what they're actually holding, if anything. That's not symmetry of information. There's no symmetry of power. Power is a function of position size. Your statement is only true if everyone has a position of equal size. There's no symmetry of risk exposure and reward. That's a function of your position size. There's symmetry of opportunity to invest your position but it doesn't matter if you're an ant in front of a freight train. Both have equal access to the tracks! In fact that's not even true at exchanges or with variable transaction fees. This argument you're making is basically Citizen's United. "Money is speech, and all speech is the same no matter how much it costs!" -- Incorrect. Money is volume. Anyone can talk free of charge but unless you're doing it loud enough, what you have to say doesn't matter because nobody can hear you. I get it, these are the typical kool-aid lines from r/bitcoin. They do not stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    I know I added it in a later edit, but did you ignore the part I said about systemic issues deliberately? Tether is on the same track to become Mt. Gox, times a hundred. They are trying to outsmart the market and inevitably going to fail and wipe out the funds of those that trusted them. They will get rekt'd at some point. That will be good. Not for the people involved, but the overall system. > This argument you're making is basically Citizen's United. (...) Anyone can talk free of charge but unless you're doing it loud enough, what you have to say doesn't matter because nobody can hear you. Quite the opposite. My idea is that talk only should be considered when it is not cheap, when it involves a considerable stake from whoever is calling for action/change/bet. It is not free (of cost) and it should not be free (of consequences). The problem is that the current system even when you get organized with a sizeable group (WSB) who is willing to pay the price and face the consequences, you still get silenced, shut down or rug pulled.