6 ms·

Illegal is a pretty strong word. We need more rights not stipulation on everything we do. Just realize what you're asking for.

JeremyBanks 6y ago
Illegal is the appropriate word when you're looking at something that's draining resources (electrical and human) in every major country and providing nothing of value in return. (I've made some nice money from crypto speculating, but that's not making the world better, that's just taking advantage of bigger fools.) Proof of work systems, which by design compete on wasting resources, need to internationally outlawed. If people want cryptocurrencies to keep going, they can get a move on finally fucking migrating to these alternatives systems they tell us are just around the corner. If none of the major networks are able to do so, they shouldn't exist.
- shkkmo 6y ago
  I think outlawing math is a very bad idea. If there is a regulatory route towards reducing / eliminating crypto, I would hope that involves restrictions on the fiat / crypto interchange, not restrictions on what kind of math you can do with a computer.
  - prox 6y ago
    We have rules against speculation because it highly skews towards people already with the necessary resources. 2008 is already a distant memory for some. Math will never be outlawed, but as it stands now it is just too speculative. I don’t have an answer, but as it stands [cryptocurrency / NFT] we need to have a lively debate on what we want it to be.
    - shkkmo 6y ago
      > We have rules against speculation. This is so broad I am not sure which laws you reference. Most of the laws I am aware of talk about how bmuch money you must have to be allowed to speculate. > Math will never be outlawed, I wish I shared you certainty. We currently have laws about exporting some types of Math (cryptography) and we have lots politicians interested in placing further restrictions on cryptography.
      - prox 6y ago
        Countries around the world implemented laws : Dodd-Frank in the US. Banks have tighter rules against speculative activities in general around the world after 2008. It was a mortgage crisis foremost, with lots of speculation. Crypto is kind of the same : you invest and hope to gain a return. It stands to reason you want to curb the damage it can do if (and when) it bombs. Laws in general should not be unnecessary broad, most countries have that general rule, and while there is certainly another debate to had on privacy and backdoors, it is a different debate. So when a law comes against Crypto, it should be very specific to curb its problems.
  - TomSwirly 6y ago
    > I think outlawing math is a very bad idea. Not as bad as completely misrepresenting real world problems, it isn't! :-D
  - anoncake 6y ago
    We have already "outlawed" physics, chemistry and biology (various crimes involve these) and even communication (fraud and slander). Might as well "outlaw math" as well.
keenreed 6y ago
Rape and murder is already illegal, just saying...
- leesalminen 6y ago
  Did you seriously compare rape and murder to cryptocurrency? C’mon, man!
  - KineticLensman 6y ago
    I'm guessing they meant that making things illegal doesn't stop them happening.
    - cortesoft 6y ago
      No, but it lets you punish people that do them. No one is under the assumption that outlawing something means that it will never happen, and implying that people breaking the law means that the law is useless is asinine. If we believed laws had zero effect on behavior, society would be a lot different.
reader_mode 6y ago
This is a clear case of market incentives getting corrupted and not actually providing any utility. At this point it's not about whether you believe crypto will succeed at any of it's proposed utilities, people are investing because they want to get in on the hype bubble and ride high. And once you're in you have every incentive to prothletise before you cash out. Meanwhile the rest of us get stuck with externalities - huge energy consumption, hardware supply disruptions, hardware waste, compute hijacking, enabling scammers and extortions schemes. I don't think crypto should be illegal but the institutions enabling it should
- necrontab 6y ago
  You should read about Accelerationism. You have a left-wing interpretation of Accelerationism (we should create new laws to handle technological divergences) and I have a right-wing interpretation of Accelerationism (as systems becomes more fragile from cryptocurrencies, such as in this example, corporations will be motivated to find cheaper ways to produce electricity, GPUs. Thus I believe that because of increased chaos, "Corporations find a way").
  - lanstin 6y ago
    I always thought right wingers where interested in the Sovereignty of the Individual but you are explicitly and consciously pro-corporations? Seems likely to have some bad local maxima without regulation from the Individuals speaking thru a Democratic Government.
    - necrontab 6y ago
      I am pro autonomous corporations. I want Manna[0] in reverse so that instead of making fast-food employees listen to an AI, I want to start at the top. [0]: https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 https://marshallbrain.com/manna1
- yunesj 6y ago
  > I don’t think crypto should be illegal but the institutions enabling it should. I feel the same about PoN[1]-based currencies! Get rid of the Fed and the military! [1] Proof of nukes.
prox 6y ago
I think some debate on the political level is very much necessary. From the way use it to the way we manufacture crypto. At the moment it’s not just sustainable (think environment, think speculation and so on) Crypto / blockchain is great, its current implementation is very much lacking.
knorker 6y ago
It's illegal already to dump toxic waste in your neighbors pond. And just bitcoin does something way WAY worse than this. I realize what I'm asking for. I'm asking for cryptocurrency speculators to actually pay for the externalities they cause. Because that's the core of the libertarianism they pretend to support. But of course they don't have libertarian values. The only ideal they stand for is them getting richer by burning everyone else to the ground.
- yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
  > It's illegal already to dump toxic waste in your neighbors pond. And just bitcoin does something way WAY worse than this. Why? They pay for electricity like everyone else, excepting cases where they're already breaking laws.
  - knorker 6y ago
    And for the actual topic at hand? And other non-electricity externalities?
    - olalonde 6y ago
      There are none, unless you want to stretch the meaning of externalities beyond recognition.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
      The topic at hand should already be illegal, no? You don't need a cryptocurrency-specific law to cover running code on someone's server without permission.
  - colinmhayes 6y ago
    Electricity usage has major externalities which are not taxed because people would get pissed off. If every country instituted carbon taxes I'd be much more accepting of crypto/proof of work, but we're nowhere close to that happening.
- 2pEXgD0fZ5cF 6y ago

JeremyBanks 6y ago

Illegal is the appropriate word when you're looking at something that's draining resources (electrical and human) in every major country and providing nothing of value in return. (I've made some nice money from crypto speculating, but that's not making the world better, that's just taking advantage of bigger fools.) Proof of work systems, which by design compete on wasting resources, need to internationally outlawed. If people want cryptocurrencies to keep going, they can get a move on finally fucking migrating to these alternatives systems they tell us are just around the corner. If none of the major networks are able to do so, they shouldn't exist.

shkkmo 6y ago
I think outlawing math is a very bad idea. If there is a regulatory route towards reducing / eliminating crypto, I would hope that involves restrictions on the fiat / crypto interchange, not restrictions on what kind of math you can do with a computer.
- prox 6y ago
  We have rules against speculation because it highly skews towards people already with the necessary resources. 2008 is already a distant memory for some. Math will never be outlawed, but as it stands now it is just too speculative. I don’t have an answer, but as it stands [cryptocurrency / NFT] we need to have a lively debate on what we want it to be.
  - shkkmo 6y ago
    > We have rules against speculation. This is so broad I am not sure which laws you reference. Most of the laws I am aware of talk about how bmuch money you must have to be allowed to speculate. > Math will never be outlawed, I wish I shared you certainty. We currently have laws about exporting some types of Math (cryptography) and we have lots politicians interested in placing further restrictions on cryptography.
    - prox 6y ago
      Countries around the world implemented laws : Dodd-Frank in the US. Banks have tighter rules against speculative activities in general around the world after 2008. It was a mortgage crisis foremost, with lots of speculation. Crypto is kind of the same : you invest and hope to gain a return. It stands to reason you want to curb the damage it can do if (and when) it bombs. Laws in general should not be unnecessary broad, most countries have that general rule, and while there is certainly another debate to had on privacy and backdoors, it is a different debate. So when a law comes against Crypto, it should be very specific to curb its problems.
- TomSwirly 6y ago
  > I think outlawing math is a very bad idea. Not as bad as completely misrepresenting real world problems, it isn't! :-D
- anoncake 6y ago
  We have already "outlawed" physics, chemistry and biology (various crimes involve these) and even communication (fraud and slander). Might as well "outlaw math" as well.

keenreed 6y ago

Rape and murder is already illegal, just saying...

leesalminen 6y ago
Did you seriously compare rape and murder to cryptocurrency? C’mon, man!
- KineticLensman 6y ago
  I'm guessing they meant that making things illegal doesn't stop them happening.
  - cortesoft 6y ago
    No, but it lets you punish people that do them. No one is under the assumption that outlawing something means that it will never happen, and implying that people breaking the law means that the law is useless is asinine. If we believed laws had zero effect on behavior, society would be a lot different.

reader_mode 6y ago

This is a clear case of market incentives getting corrupted and not actually providing any utility. At this point it's not about whether you believe crypto will succeed at any of it's proposed utilities, people are investing because they want to get in on the hype bubble and ride high. And once you're in you have every incentive to prothletise before you cash out. Meanwhile the rest of us get stuck with externalities - huge energy consumption, hardware supply disruptions, hardware waste, compute hijacking, enabling scammers and extortions schemes. I don't think crypto should be illegal but the institutions enabling it should

necrontab 6y ago
You should read about Accelerationism. You have a left-wing interpretation of Accelerationism (we should create new laws to handle technological divergences) and I have a right-wing interpretation of Accelerationism (as systems becomes more fragile from cryptocurrencies, such as in this example, corporations will be motivated to find cheaper ways to produce electricity, GPUs. Thus I believe that because of increased chaos, "Corporations find a way").
- lanstin 6y ago
  I always thought right wingers where interested in the Sovereignty of the Individual but you are explicitly and consciously pro-corporations? Seems likely to have some bad local maxima without regulation from the Individuals speaking thru a Democratic Government.
  - necrontab 6y ago
    I am pro autonomous corporations. I want Manna[0] in reverse so that instead of making fast-food employees listen to an AI, I want to start at the top. [0]: https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 https://marshallbrain.com/manna1
yunesj 6y ago
> I don’t think crypto should be illegal but the institutions enabling it should. I feel the same about PoN[1]-based currencies! Get rid of the Fed and the military! [1] Proof of nukes.

prox 6y ago

I think some debate on the political level is very much necessary. From the way use it to the way we manufacture crypto. At the moment it’s not just sustainable (think environment, think speculation and so on) Crypto / blockchain is great, its current implementation is very much lacking.

knorker 6y ago

It's illegal already to dump toxic waste in your neighbors pond. And just bitcoin does something way WAY worse than this. I realize what I'm asking for. I'm asking for cryptocurrency speculators to actually pay for the externalities they cause. Because that's the core of the libertarianism they pretend to support. But of course they don't have libertarian values. The only ideal they stand for is them getting richer by burning everyone else to the ground.

yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
> It's illegal already to dump toxic waste in your neighbors pond. And just bitcoin does something way WAY worse than this. Why? They pay for electricity like everyone else, excepting cases where they're already breaking laws.
- knorker 6y ago
  And for the actual topic at hand? And other non-electricity externalities?
  - olalonde 6y ago
    There are none, unless you want to stretch the meaning of externalities beyond recognition.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
    The topic at hand should already be illegal, no? You don't need a cryptocurrency-specific law to cover running code on someone's server without permission.
- colinmhayes 6y ago
  Electricity usage has major externalities which are not taxed because people would get pissed off. If every country instituted carbon taxes I'd be much more accepting of crypto/proof of work, but we're nowhere close to that happening.
2pEXgD0fZ5cF 6y ago