5 ms·

that's an escalation - I would risk my life to fight against a state that threatens life in prison to control something like crypto

by gfody 5y ago

malermeister 5y ago
I feel like people sometimes say things like that, but it always ends up sounding naive. The state has tanks and drones that rain death and destruction from the sky. What could the crypto people possibly do to counter that?
- ric2b 5y ago
  Are you seriously saying that you would be ok with using the army to violently murder civilians because they use some computers that you think use too much energy and don't provide enough value?
- Sargos 5y ago
  How did all those tanks and drones work out for us in Afghanistan? Or Iraq? Or all of the other places where insurgents tend to win out over slow and bureaucratic militaries.
  - malermeister 5y ago
    That was a foreign occupation, very different. The US didn't have popular support in either of those and was seen as the invader. It would be very different if some crypto fanatics started an insurgency over wanting to have their computer money. I definitely would side with the state over them and I have a feeling most folks would.
    - gfody 5y ago
      crypto fanatics are still just civilians operating a network, the state can and should regulate by setting policy (eg by making it not so lucrative to waste electricity mining crypto that it threatens the environment)
    - yellowapple 5y ago
      > That was a foreign occupation, very different. Do you think a domestic occupation would somehow go better? > I definitely would side with the state over them and I have a feeling most folks would. In order for a cryptocurrency ban to actually have any real effect on the actual crypto fanatics (i.e. the ones who would be willing to take up arms to defend cryptocurrency), the US would have to pull some very draconian online censorship measures that would absolutely peeve the average American. Short of that, it would be comparable to the US' existing "ban" (via the DMCA) of digital piracy: pretty much ineffective, without pirates needing to take up arms as outright insurgents to defend it.

that's an escalation - I would risk my life to fight against a state that threatens life in prison to control something like crypto

by gfody 5y ago

that's an escalation - I would risk my life to fight against a state that threatens life in prison to control something like crypto

malermeister 5y ago

I feel like people sometimes say things like that, but it always ends up sounding naive. The state has tanks and drones that rain death and destruction from the sky. What could the crypto people possibly do to counter that?

ric2b 5y ago
Are you seriously saying that you would be ok with using the army to violently murder civilians because they use some computers that you think use too much energy and don't provide enough value?
Sargos 5y ago
How did all those tanks and drones work out for us in Afghanistan? Or Iraq? Or all of the other places where insurgents tend to win out over slow and bureaucratic militaries.
- malermeister 5y ago
  That was a foreign occupation, very different. The US didn't have popular support in either of those and was seen as the invader. It would be very different if some crypto fanatics started an insurgency over wanting to have their computer money. I definitely would side with the state over them and I have a feeling most folks would.
  - gfody 5y ago
    crypto fanatics are still just civilians operating a network, the state can and should regulate by setting policy (eg by making it not so lucrative to waste electricity mining crypto that it threatens the environment)
  - yellowapple 5y ago
    > That was a foreign occupation, very different. Do you think a domestic occupation would somehow go better? > I definitely would side with the state over them and I have a feeling most folks would. In order for a cryptocurrency ban to actually have any real effect on the actual crypto fanatics (i.e. the ones who would be willing to take up arms to defend cryptocurrency), the US would have to pull some very draconian online censorship measures that would absolutely peeve the average American. Short of that, it would be comparable to the US' existing "ban" (via the DMCA) of digital piracy: pretty much ineffective, without pirates needing to take up arms as outright insurgents to defend it.