3 ms·
This is always posted like some 'gotcha', despite it being right there in the transparency report. In case you trust any company blindly: any company that want
by ziddoap 5y ago
This is always posted like some 'gotcha', despite it being right there in the transparency report.
In case you trust any company blindly: any company that wants to keep playing the money game will follow the laws forced upon them by the government they are beholden to.
- inter_netuser 5y agointeresting way to put it, "the money game". did you see that somewhere?
- edoceo 5y agoI first heard that in the 1990s. And the TV show "The Wire" (c2004?) made frequent use of the phrase "the game" to describe the process of street-dealing drugs, and the money, and the police, etc. As in "it's all in the game" - ie: all's fair in love and war.
- tejohnso 5y agoIsn't this what seasteading, and other jurisdiction avoidance schemes attempt to address? I wonder if anything like that has ever worked out.
- pavel_lishin 5y agoI can't imagine seasteading is going to be able to avoid a nation's navy.
- tablespoon 5y ago> I can't imagine seasteading is going to be able to avoid a nation's navy. Seasteaders: "My Libertarian non-aggression principle trumps your cruise missiles!" Navy: "No."
- md_ 5y agoThere seem to be two popular approaches to avoiding the need to trust institutions. One is technical: e2ee, implementation transparency, and similar. The other is social: have fewer institutions. I have never understood people who think the latter is a good approach. Like, "I don't trust these people who use their real names and are registered in a jurisdiction that has strong privacy obligations, so I'm gonna trust some randos on an abandoned oil rig instead."