5 ms·

This article misses the true breakthrough which bitcoin represents which is a trustless, decentralised store and exchange of value.

julespitt 13y ago
I'd say "less trusting" than "trust less." You still have to trust SHA-256 and that no one can afford to do a 51% attack, for instance.
praxeologist 13y ago
On that note, I want to point people to Protoshares and the concept of DACs (Decentralized Autonomous Corporations): http://protoshares.com/ http://protoshares.com/ http://letstalkbitcoin.com/bitcoin-and-the-three-laws-of-robotics/ http://letstalkbitcoin.com/bitcoin-and-the-three-laws-of-rob... http://letstalkbitcoin.com/dacs-that-spawn-dacs/ http://letstalkbitcoin.com/dacs-that-spawn-dacs/ The use of the word "corporation" is kind of wonky to me and the whole concept took me a little time to wrap my head around it, but these are the types of things we can expect to see with blockchain technology and hopefully IMO eventually the abolition of states worldwide.
- fragsworth 13y ago
  > hopefully IMO eventually the abolition of states worldwide. These kinds of comments do nothing to help promote bitcoin as a legitimate technology and only increase the risk that cryptocurrencies become generally illegal to use. I'm really disappointed with the anti-government garbage spouted by so many people in the community.
  - smokeyj 13y ago
    Can you voice your disagreement without getting angry? Everyone has an opinion. Being passionate about yours doesn't make theirs wrong.
  - praxeologist 13y ago
    Bitcoin is inherently libertarian: http://rudd-o.com/archives/bitcoin-without-the-politics http://rudd-o.com/archives/bitcoin-without-the-politics If all the libertarians who are into bitcoin suddenly cut down the rhetoric, you think that this will "make bitcoin legitimate technology"? What does that even mean? You mean that governments are going to suddenly be more friendly to bitcoin users? That seems like an incredibly naive belief, sorry. In general, it is disappointing that people still hold to backwards and primitive beliefs such as democracy and state worship. Statism is institutionalized violence and injustice writ large. I totally understand how your perspective on this can be different, but please understand that what you are calling garbage I see as a call for justice.
    - XorNot 13y ago
      Yeah people having a say in their government - how silly. We should simply let the free market determine policy. See the richest and strongest will decide what our social, economic and foreign policies are and it will be a golden age of serfdom!
      - praxeologist 13y ago
        I don't want to play a role in an ongoing crime... but I think that is naive to believe you even have a say in your government. You have a greater chance of dying in a car wreck on the way to the polling station than your single vote swinging an election. Democracy really doesn't work unless you have the option to opt out and it is at a very small scale where you are actually able to judge the character of the people to choose from. What you are advocating is what you then go on and complain about; it's total akrasia. You are suffering from Stockhom syndrome in believing freedom from your serfdom would be serfdom. Democracy is a very persuasive idea because it seems like you have choice, but then in reality the political elite rule. 2/3rds of Americans oppose the Iraq war; would you say this is an example of having a say in policy? Governments are, across the board, a failure and a drain on society. Every service, including things like providing a "social safety net" can be better provided through market processes.
        13y ago
- whyenot 13y ago
  I read the whitepaper. It is extremely poorly written and filled with largely meaningless jargon. Maybe the idea is brilliant but it is not being communicated very well.

julespitt 13y ago

I'd say "less trusting" than "trust less." You still have to trust SHA-256 and that no one can afford to do a 51% attack, for instance.

praxeologist 13y ago

On that note, I want to point people to Protoshares and the concept of DACs (Decentralized Autonomous Corporations): http://protoshares.com/ http://protoshares.com/ http://letstalkbitcoin.com/bitcoin-and-the-three-laws-of-robotics/ http://letstalkbitcoin.com/bitcoin-and-the-three-laws-of-rob... http://letstalkbitcoin.com/dacs-that-spawn-dacs/ http://letstalkbitcoin.com/dacs-that-spawn-dacs/ The use of the word "corporation" is kind of wonky to me and the whole concept took me a little time to wrap my head around it, but these are the types of things we can expect to see with blockchain technology and hopefully IMO eventually the abolition of states worldwide.

fragsworth 13y ago
> hopefully IMO eventually the abolition of states worldwide. These kinds of comments do nothing to help promote bitcoin as a legitimate technology and only increase the risk that cryptocurrencies become generally illegal to use. I'm really disappointed with the anti-government garbage spouted by so many people in the community.
- smokeyj 13y ago
  Can you voice your disagreement without getting angry? Everyone has an opinion. Being passionate about yours doesn't make theirs wrong.
- praxeologist 13y ago
  Bitcoin is inherently libertarian: http://rudd-o.com/archives/bitcoin-without-the-politics http://rudd-o.com/archives/bitcoin-without-the-politics If all the libertarians who are into bitcoin suddenly cut down the rhetoric, you think that this will "make bitcoin legitimate technology"? What does that even mean? You mean that governments are going to suddenly be more friendly to bitcoin users? That seems like an incredibly naive belief, sorry. In general, it is disappointing that people still hold to backwards and primitive beliefs such as democracy and state worship. Statism is institutionalized violence and injustice writ large. I totally understand how your perspective on this can be different, but please understand that what you are calling garbage I see as a call for justice.
  - XorNot 13y ago
    Yeah people having a say in their government - how silly. We should simply let the free market determine policy. See the richest and strongest will decide what our social, economic and foreign policies are and it will be a golden age of serfdom!
    - praxeologist 13y ago
      I don't want to play a role in an ongoing crime... but I think that is naive to believe you even have a say in your government. You have a greater chance of dying in a car wreck on the way to the polling station than your single vote swinging an election. Democracy really doesn't work unless you have the option to opt out and it is at a very small scale where you are actually able to judge the character of the people to choose from. What you are advocating is what you then go on and complain about; it's total akrasia. You are suffering from Stockhom syndrome in believing freedom from your serfdom would be serfdom. Democracy is a very persuasive idea because it seems like you have choice, but then in reality the political elite rule. 2/3rds of Americans oppose the Iraq war; would you say this is an example of having a say in policy? Governments are, across the board, a failure and a drain on society. Every service, including things like providing a "social safety net" can be better provided through market processes.
      - 13y ago
whyenot 13y ago
I read the whitepaper. It is extremely poorly written and filled with largely meaningless jargon. Maybe the idea is brilliant but it is not being communicated very well.