5 ms·
What you're missing is something can be criticized even if it fulfills some needs. Drugs, gambling, crimes all satisfy some people's needs but most people have
by xpressvideoz 3y ago
What you're missing is something can be criticized even if it fulfills some needs. Drugs, gambling, crimes all satisfy some people's needs but most people have negative view on them.
- block_dagger 3y agoDrugs and gambling do not hurt others. Throwing “crimes” in makes your reasoning weak. Where are you getting your data on the first two? I’m not sure you’re correct.
- quickthrowman 3y ago> Drugs and gambling do not hurt others. The bad things people do to other people to get money for drugs and gambling are included in the blanket statement “drugs and gambling”.
- epolanski 3y ago> Drugs and gambling do not hurt others. They ruin families, neighborhoods, cities.
- Spivak 3y agoIf you ever need an example of how drugs genuinely ruin things on a large scale read absolutely anything about the opium wars. I do contend that "ruining families" is not a thing we should base policy on because it implies both a crazy amount of government intrusion into individual lives and because it imposes rules on everyone to make the nuclear family work.
- npunt 3y ago> Drugs and gambling do not hurt others. Please spend like 30 seconds of analytical thinking trying to poke holes in this. It's remarkably easy to disprove. The challenge is what if anything we choose to do about the harms that they can cause.
- chii 3y agoNeither drugs nor gambling, in and of itself, harms anyone but the individual doing it. However, said individual could harm others in the persuit of drugs and gambling when their own income or savings are unable to satisfy their own cravings. But how is that any different from any other forms of harm from crime conducted for other reasons?
- staplers 3y agoDrugs, gambling, crimes all satisfy some people's needs I've seen the exact same people crying about Bitcoin's "drug use" then turn around and applaud marijuana and psychedelics for their medicinal effects. I call bs on the "drug" scapegoat. People are salty they work in tech and don't understand bitcoin.
- kemotep 3y agoIs it possible that you can understand bitcoin and still not like it?
- obviouslynew 3y agoSure as long as you realize its simply an opinion and not act like it's a fact that it's bad. Fundamentally it feels like every time these threads open up on HN 70% of it is bad faith, repeat arguments. Don't like Bitcoin's Proof of work properties, check out Ethereum. Don't think that everything needs to be on one central ledger? Check out Polkadot. It feels like so many commenters here put their heads in the sand about an entire class of technology because they're caught up in their opinion as fact.
- lern_too_spel 3y agoI object to Bitcoin on the fact that governments regulate money, so centralization is guaranteed. Wasting any effort on fake decentralization is objectively inferior because it adds to the cost with no benefit.
- staplers 3y agoWasting any effort on fake decentralization is objectively inferior because it adds to the cost with no benefit. Do you feel similarly about democracy?
- lern_too_spel 3y agoDemocracy doesn't have the same problems. If a government is not functioning properly, voting them out is better than armed revolting then out.