3 ms·

Interesting that all of the pro-cryptocurrency folks read this as an attack. I quite carefully did not place value, positive or negative, on it. Perhaps the f

Interesting that all of the pro-cryptocurrency folks read this as an attack. I quite carefully did not place value, positive or negative, on it. Perhaps the fact that you read it that way reveals your true thoughts on the matter. No, I don't support all laws in pretty much any regime. But I do believe that the ability to enforce laws is important. The only thing that consistently works more poorly than having rules is not having any rules at all. You are of course welcome to move to a lawless state if this is really what you want, but I suspect you would not find it to be the utopia you dream of.

nwienert 5y ago
> I guess doesn't sound as nice. How is this anything but dismissive? Your whole post was insinuating it’s only utility is for illegal things, in context implying that’s what makes it non-valuable. If you weren’t making that claim, then there’s no point to your post. Don’t hide from your own claim and act coy now. It was obviously dismissive, and now just looks like you’re backsliding. Not to mention the straw man turning “some laws are bad and you should be able to resist them” into “live in a lawless state”. Or that you ignore the litany of non-illegal uses I added. In fact, I’m skeptical of 99% of the field, I believe without PoS it should fail and isn’t worth the cost, and I was a harder skeptic until recently and changed my mind because I honestly believe I’ve seen some truly interesting uses now outside of being a freer currency. Get outside of “pro” or “anti” box and think in terms of utilities and specifics, and if you reply reply to my specific claims.