4 ms·

Seems pretty reasonable to me. Part VI doesn't go in depth about firearms. In any case, it would be pretty alarming to me if a cryptocurrency exchange wasn't o

Seems pretty reasonable to me. Part VI doesn't go in depth about firearms. In any case, it would be pretty alarming to me if a cryptocurrency exchange wasn't oriented towards freedom and against regulation. Cryptocurrency, like cryptography or firearms is fundamentally a freedom-enhancing technology so long as they're in the hands of individuals and not institutions. Concerning part VII, It emphasizes the importance of tolerance of diverse ideas, and respect for co-workers. Generally speaking, I think that the "identity politics" (e.g. "inter-sectionalism") that characterize "woke-ness" are pretty untolerant and anti-productive, even for the pursuit of progressive/leftist causes. It would be wise for any group with pro-freedom goals to weed out these types from their organization ahead of time.

ivraatiems 4y ago
I will cop that I honestly disagree with you about your characterizations of "wokeness." But even disregarding that - the company is full of it. They sue and harass people who write negative Glassdoor reviews. Their CEO locks down Slack threads where people disagree with him and refuses to debate, claiming "dictatorship" is better. They claim to be "pro-freedom" but in reality I suspect they mean "pro our executives' freedom." Even if what they are claiming to be is good, that's not who they are. All of this and more is in the NYT piece: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/technology/kraken-crypto-culture.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/technology/kraken-crypto-... - but much of it just draws on the CEO's public tweets, which are quoted there directly.
- MrMan 4y ago
  Freedom simply is used as a synonym for "strength". It is weak to bow to others' wishes. Are you weak, or are you free? It is weak to accept constraints on your will. Will you accept regulations, which attempt to constrain you from exercising your will? Or are you strong? Firearms are wielded by the strong against the weak. Sometimes for no reason! Weak people explain why they murdered someone. The strong "stand their ground."
  - cowtools 4y ago
    I disagree. Freedom is a word with many meanings. One of them is not exactly "strength" but "opportunity", which could be established through higher levels of individual "strength" and ability to shape one's environment. Generally, firearms are a freedom-enhancing technology because they enable people to somewhat self-govern and give citizens leverage against their own government with respect to the social contract. But even if we accept the idea that individual "freedom" is somewhat used synonymously with individual "strength", then why would this be considered a bad thing? >It is weak to bow to others' wishes Bowing to someone else's wishes is not authoritarianism or weakness. Being forced to do so with no recourse or representation is authoritarianism and weakness. >Firearms are wielded by the strong against the weak. I completely agree. The disparity between the armed and non-armed population is what gives fascist and communist dictatorships to operate in the first place. >Sometimes for no reason! Weak people explain why they murdered someone. The strong "stand their ground." It might distress you that the strong have power over the weak. But this is merely the natural order of things. The world is only just and moral insofar as the strong choose make it so. If you want to render yourself and your peers weaker then you can do so, but you will only be forfeiting your power to others less benevolent than you. The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.

ivraatiems 4y ago

I will cop that I honestly disagree with you about your characterizations of "wokeness." But even disregarding that - the company is full of it. They sue and harass people who write negative Glassdoor reviews. Their CEO locks down Slack threads where people disagree with him and refuses to debate, claiming "dictatorship" is better. They claim to be "pro-freedom" but in reality I suspect they mean "pro our executives' freedom." Even if what they are claiming to be is good, that's not who they are. All of this and more is in the NYT piece: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/technology/kraken-crypto-culture.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/technology/kraken-crypto-... - but much of it just draws on the CEO's public tweets, which are quoted there directly.

MrMan 4y ago
Freedom simply is used as a synonym for "strength". It is weak to bow to others' wishes. Are you weak, or are you free? It is weak to accept constraints on your will. Will you accept regulations, which attempt to constrain you from exercising your will? Or are you strong? Firearms are wielded by the strong against the weak. Sometimes for no reason! Weak people explain why they murdered someone. The strong "stand their ground."
- cowtools 4y ago
  I disagree. Freedom is a word with many meanings. One of them is not exactly "strength" but "opportunity", which could be established through higher levels of individual "strength" and ability to shape one's environment. Generally, firearms are a freedom-enhancing technology because they enable people to somewhat self-govern and give citizens leverage against their own government with respect to the social contract. But even if we accept the idea that individual "freedom" is somewhat used synonymously with individual "strength", then why would this be considered a bad thing? >It is weak to bow to others' wishes Bowing to someone else's wishes is not authoritarianism or weakness. Being forced to do so with no recourse or representation is authoritarianism and weakness. >Firearms are wielded by the strong against the weak. I completely agree. The disparity between the armed and non-armed population is what gives fascist and communist dictatorships to operate in the first place. >Sometimes for no reason! Weak people explain why they murdered someone. The strong "stand their ground." It might distress you that the strong have power over the weak. But this is merely the natural order of things. The world is only just and moral insofar as the strong choose make it so. If you want to render yourself and your peers weaker then you can do so, but you will only be forfeiting your power to others less benevolent than you. The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.