Jabanga

37 ms·

271.
by Jabanga 9y ago
I recommend you read up the definition of 'certification '. A certification is not mandatory. You're free to operate and offer your services in the market without it. What you're describing is a license, which is require
272.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Yet this entire discussion is based on your initial assertion that Uber should be free to break the law in order to create 'great consumer benefits'. I'm saying we should get rid of those laws that infringe upon the right
273.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>So, to maximize freedom, we need to limit concentrations of wealth/power. Yes that makes some less free, but it makes the greatest freedom for all. Like I said, it's like trying to boil away the ocean. It's futile, given
274.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Many modern legal systems thoroughly limit the autonomy of individuals with regard to suicide, either by directly criminalizing it, That's an edge case for which a stronger argument exists for lack of mental capacity to provide inf
275.
by Jabanga 9y ago
I think without a doubt it will remain the best tech hub in the world. The change that may occur is that Silicon Valley, while remaining in the lead, will see its centrality diminished by the emergence of decentralized funding using ERC20 t
276.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>I'm alleging that every square inch of land in California was claimed by Spain when Mexico took it, and claimed by Mexico when the US took it. Both of them did so by force Spain ceded the land in a treaty, as did Mexico. Sovereignt
277.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Do you really expect each taxi passenger to sort out all of that info for each and every ride!? There can be certification.. A certifying body certifies that a taxi driver meets all of the conditions you mentioned and issues certificate
278.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Let's get rid of doctor licensing then? The free market will separate the good ones from the ones who will kill you! Pyramid schemes? You have the right to invest in one, so why outlaw it? Toxic waste dump? Unlicensed doctors shoul
279.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Airbnb was valued at $31bn after its last round. As of market close today, that's about more than the market caps of Hilton & Intercontinental combined. The Airbnb industry stands to replace a large chunk of the entire hospital
280.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Once upon a time it was inhabited by people who probably descended from others who crossed the Bering land bridge. If you're alleging that every square inch of land in California was claimed by someone else at the time Spain claime
281.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Nonsense; neither has any value without the other. They each provide all of the value, which isn't additive. That's incorrect. A component being necessary doesn't mean it provides all of the value, and the other component
282.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>We're both free to do this because safety regulations and laws are an impingement on our "right" to engage in any voluntary economic interactions, right? Defraudment is not a voluntary interaction. By definition, it'
283.
by Jabanga 9y ago
The value provided by the naturally occurring inputs is minimal. It's almost always the case that the effort made to convert the natural inputs into the finished product provided the vast majority of the value. A cabin's value is
284.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Exactly, Warlordism is the antithesis of voluntary interaction. It is not a buzzword, but a shorthand used since I'm not writing a dissertation but a (supposedly) brief comment. And you're claiming voluntary interactions creat
285.
by Jabanga 9y ago
You have to prove the chain goes back to force/fraud. People are presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Moreover, most types of property are not naturally occurring, and simply claimed, like land is. They are man-made and much more li
286.
by Jabanga 9y ago
Everyone doesn't hate Status. They're one of the most serious outfits in the space, with alpha software already released and a solid roadmap.
287.
by Jabanga 9y ago
I'd rather have a choice. I might prefer the non-government-cerifird beef of the local rancher, and regulatory prohibitions deny me the option to choose.
288.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>It is the observation of their numerous complaints, lawsuits, and behaviour (typically quitting after only a few months). Of course it's paternalistic. You're saying they'll have a bad time if they CHOOSE to work for Uber
289.
by Jabanga 9y ago
Dumping waste is not a voluntary interaction. It's a violation of someone else's private property. This has no resemblance to Uber out competing local taxis. At least learn the basis of free market ideology before criticizing it.
290.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>since all modern property ownership is rooted in the use of force and/or fraud, and thus is of course morally invalid. You're engaging in mass-defamation against anyone who owns anything. You're hiding behind the politica
291.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>When the choices you make with respect to the use of your property cause harm to other people or their property, Offering something on the market, that other consenting adults voluntarily choose to buy, does not violate anyone's ri
292.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Ah yes. They obviously think this is the best of all possible worlds. I didn't say they think it's the best of all possible worlds. I said they think it's the best option available to them. Making that particular relation
293.
by Jabanga 9y ago
Definitely possible. Conceptually you're just debundling the roles into discrete tasks with automated mechanisms that assign those tasks and reward completion of them. The problem is that it's a complex undertaking to build it, be
294.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>it benefits Uber massively, and only incidentally benefits customers, and basically rips off the driver's time and investment. This is a very paternalistic attitude toward the drivers, who are choosing to drive for Uber because the
295.
by Jabanga 9y ago
It will recover, and as a result will be more robust than it was before. Regulatory prohibitions centralise the job of risk assessment and management leading in the long run to a more fragile economy, that's more dependent on a Single
296.
by Jabanga 9y ago
The laws restrict the right of people to do with their labour and private property what they want. They should be left unenforced, just like laws against marijuana and other personal choices. Driving things out of the formal economy and int
297.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>a blockchain isn't used to reach consensus on which intermediaries to use, it just acts as the settlement layer. To do the things the intermediary is not willing to do. To use the Yahoo example, Yahoo is willing to generate a publi
298.
by Jabanga 9y ago
There are so many projects now that I don't know if anyone is already working on or has a token sale being planned for these, but the best ones I could think of are: * using Town Crier or some other oracle that utilizes trusted hardwar
299.
by Jabanga 9y ago
In many cases you wouldn't bother with the overhead, you're right. I imagine there will be situations where having some elements of the business on the blockchain, and having some off-chain and centralized would be optimal. Regard
300.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Can you do this without centralization? No, this is a service of centralized parties, which are free to use the blockchain. My point is that an immutable blockchain can have both mutable and immutable services, while a mutable blockchai

More ›