6 ms·

I think that was what Libertarian-Socialists thought bitcoin would accomplish :)

by base698 13y ago

mindcrime 13y ago
Well, strictly speaking, I suppose that the combination of Tor and Bitcoin is still a bit subversive from an anti-government perspective. But the problem is, obviously, not everything can be done in Bitcoin at the moment. And as long as we need to exchange between USD and BTC, this kind of thing is going to be a problem. If BTC ever gains enough acceptance to (largely) eliminate the need to convert in and out of USD, it could be a real problem for governments who want to control all financial transactions. Whether or not that will happen is anybody's guess. It's something of a chicken or egg problem, as BTC is less likely to gain mainstream acceptance if you can't easily convert to/from other currencies (USD probably being one of the more important ones). If BTC remains relegated to only black-market transactions on sites like The Silk Road... well... that makes it a bit less useful. :-(
- bredren 13y ago
  I'd add that this isn't just a problem around getting USD into Bitcoin, but the challenge of making it easy for people to pass BTC to other people as casually and safely as they do cash. It would be great if someone released a solution like this.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- vijayboyapati 13y ago
  Without an exchange, price discovery is dead and bitcoin as a monetary phenomena essentially is too. The one thing that could save bitcoin is a distributed exchange, or something like Ripple taking off. Then shutting it down becomes essentially impossible
  - andyzweb 13y ago
    #bitcoin-otc here, we don't need no stinkin' exchanges.
liquidise 13y ago
As someone who follows politics very closely, i found the term "Libertarian-Socialists" borderline oxymoronic. I am upset to learn that it is in fact a well documented philosophy. How i would love to have a political debate with a self-proclaimed member of this way of thinking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
- mattrepl 13y ago
  Noam Chomsky calls himself a libertarian-socialist and explains why it is not a contradiction in terms: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wriQGI5NGOM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wriQGI5NGOM
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- rodgerd 13y ago
  Talk to Noam Chomksy, then. It's the label he was identifying with last time I heard him interviewed.
- rancor 13y ago
  In my opinion, it revolves around the idea that Capital in the Marxist sense intrinsically represents a restriction on the liberty of others. In a moderate sense, this mostly means that the accumulation of Capital can and should be restricted, counter to conventional Libertarian thought which holds this as an unassailable right. HTH :)
  - agent00f 13y ago
    > conventional Libertarian Given that 'Murican "libertarian" is entirely different that what it means anywhere else in the world, it's inaccurate to call it conventional.
- steveklabnik 13y ago
  > The use of the word "libertarian" to describe a set of political positions can be tracked to the French cognate, libertaire, which was coined in 1857 by French anarchist Joseph Déjacque who used the term to distinguish his libertarian communist approach from the mutualism advocated by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.[26] Hence libertarian has been used by some as a synonym for anarchism since the 1890s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Etymology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Etymology
steveklabnik 13y ago
That's what libertarians thought. Libertarian socialists generally have ignored Bitcoin.
- MacsHeadroom 13y ago
  Libertarian Socialist here. I like the idea of ecash and even own some Bitcoin. But I've always said that there's zero chance of Bitcoin ever seriously threatening powerful institutions like the state and financial industry.

I think that was what Libertarian-Socialists thought bitcoin would accomplish :)

by base698 13y ago

I think that was what Libertarian-Socialists thought bitcoin would accomplish :)

Well, strictly speaking, I suppose that the combination of Tor and Bitcoin is still a bit subversive from an anti-government perspective. But the problem is, obviously, not everything can be done in Bitcoin at the moment. And as long as we need to exchange between USD and BTC, this kind of thing is going to be a problem. If BTC ever gains enough acceptance to (largely) eliminate the need to convert in and out of USD, it could be a real problem for governments who want to control all financial transactions. Whether or not that will happen is anybody's guess. It's something of a chicken or egg problem, as BTC is less likely to gain mainstream acceptance if you can't easily convert to/from other currencies (USD probably being one of the more important ones). If BTC remains relegated to only black-market transactions on sites like The Silk Road... well... that makes it a bit less useful. :-(

bredren 13y ago
I'd add that this isn't just a problem around getting USD into Bitcoin, but the challenge of making it easy for people to pass BTC to other people as casually and safely as they do cash. It would be great if someone released a solution like this.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
vijayboyapati 13y ago
Without an exchange, price discovery is dead and bitcoin as a monetary phenomena essentially is too. The one thing that could save bitcoin is a distributed exchange, or something like Ripple taking off. Then shutting it down becomes essentially impossible
- andyzweb 13y ago
  #bitcoin-otc here, we don't need no stinkin' exchanges.

liquidise 13y ago

As someone who follows politics very closely, i found the term "Libertarian-Socialists" borderline oxymoronic. I am upset to learn that it is in fact a well documented philosophy. How i would love to have a political debate with a self-proclaimed member of this way of thinking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

mattrepl 13y ago
Noam Chomsky calls himself a libertarian-socialist and explains why it is not a contradiction in terms: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wriQGI5NGOM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wriQGI5NGOM
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
rodgerd 13y ago
Talk to Noam Chomksy, then. It's the label he was identifying with last time I heard him interviewed.
rancor 13y ago
In my opinion, it revolves around the idea that Capital in the Marxist sense intrinsically represents a restriction on the liberty of others. In a moderate sense, this mostly means that the accumulation of Capital can and should be restricted, counter to conventional Libertarian thought which holds this as an unassailable right. HTH :)
- agent00f 13y ago
  > conventional Libertarian Given that 'Murican "libertarian" is entirely different that what it means anywhere else in the world, it's inaccurate to call it conventional.
steveklabnik 13y ago
> The use of the word "libertarian" to describe a set of political positions can be tracked to the French cognate, libertaire, which was coined in 1857 by French anarchist Joseph Déjacque who used the term to distinguish his libertarian communist approach from the mutualism advocated by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.[26] Hence libertarian has been used by some as a synonym for anarchism since the 1890s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Etymology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Etymology

steveklabnik 13y ago

That's what libertarians thought. Libertarian socialists generally have ignored Bitcoin.

MacsHeadroom 13y ago
Libertarian Socialist here. I like the idea of ecash and even own some Bitcoin. But I've always said that there's zero chance of Bitcoin ever seriously threatening powerful institutions like the state and financial industry.