snitko

44 ms·

541.
by snitko 13y ago
The biggest problem the public has is not knowing what to do about it. People seem to finally grasp that voting is useless. Understandably they don't want revolutions and violence, because they have things to lose. And because they can
542.
by snitko 13y ago
He's built his software business. Radio show started as a hobby, I suppose. The thing is, he's very talented at constructing arguments. The presentation may seem a bit eccentric, but get through this. If he can't convince, I
543.
by snitko 13y ago
You may want to check out Stefan Molyneux, he's a libertarian (ancap, actually) and he addresses a lot of the things that are not directly related to state. He talks a lot about children and bullying too.
544.
by snitko 13y ago
Oh, my apologies, I misread. I thought you were bringin up that usual argument that libertarians think all people are rational... But answering your question, no libertarians don't necessarily assume there's just a state and every
545.
by snitko 13y ago
And what is greed? Of course, it's always the other fella who's greedy, not me.
546.
by snitko 13y ago
This is what you've been told. Libertarians don't start from this premise and that's not even the point. Yes some people are irrational, but most are not, otherwise it would be impossible to conduct business at all. Even if w
547.
by snitko 13y ago
Your comment finally made me realize why the difference in analysis of the problem leads to difference in solutions. Some people think that corporations are the root of all evil. They accumulate wealth, then put people in power to protect t
548.
by snitko 13y ago
I think it's a mistake to target and blame private companies for that. Should they not comply with the demands, feds would make their lives very difficult. How about you just stop paying to the NSA? Oh wait, you can't, cos if you
549.
by snitko 13y ago
I do think you can't fundamentally trust anyone in power, because the incentives for them are in the wrong place. The problem with people's view of government and democratic systems is that they judge it by intentions, not result
550.
by snitko 13y ago
There's a fundamental flaw with this idea. The existence of multiple participants in the chain of decision making doesn't make it secure and trustworthy. If those participants have little to risk or lose anything by being corrupt,
551.
by snitko 13y ago
Note how you say "they give us". It's not true. They don't give you anything. They take money from you in the form of taxes (and, mind you, take them with the threat of force towards those who, for example, dislike the s
552.
by snitko 13y ago
Ok, but the question was how to change things, not how to minimize risk.
553.
by snitko 13y ago
Companies are paying taxes too. If you stop purchasing products from one company, government would simply go and tax the hell out of the one you chose instead. It's the wrong way to tackle this problem.
554.
by snitko 13y ago
> the tax has already been paid Not so. Inflation is yet another tax you'll be paying if you keep your money in a bank. Inflation is a huge thing for governments. Without inflation, they'd be out of so many opportunities to f
555.
by snitko 13y ago
As I said in reply to swombat , if you can't switch to cash, gold and Bitcoin completely, then at least keep your savings in either gold or Bitcoin. That alone might make a significant difference both to you and to society at large.
556.
by snitko 13y ago
Ok, got it. Then just keep your savings in gold or Bitcoin. Even if half the population did just that, the government would be shitting bricks already.
557.
by snitko 13y ago
Writing to your MP (or governor, or senator) is akin to a slave begging his master. I don't mean to say you're a slave, but generations later, people may see this arrangement we have with our governments in this very way. It doesn
558.
by snitko 13y ago
Ask your employer if he can pay you in cash or Bitcoin off the record. If you're a business, sell for bitcoins and give discounts, certainly pay employees in Bitcoin if they ask you to. As far as I know, there's currently no law t
559.
by snitko 13y ago
Kinda simple. We finance this bullshit by paying taxes. Why do we pay them? Because they force us to and convince us it's a good idea. What do we do about it? Use any form of money that is problematic to track and tax: cash, gold, Bitc
560.
by snitko 13y ago
You forgot that the supply of gold is limited. So if gold is durable, storable, standardized, portable, easily divisible and the supply is limited, then it's exactly like Bitcoin. Only gold is actually less portable, less durable, mu
561.
by snitko 13y ago
"Founders" don't need and probably won't cash out.
562.
by snitko 13y ago
I think this is the best way to address the issue of Bitcoin being a ponzi-scheme that some people raise. Explain that it's a software product that allows instant low-fee transactions without a centralized server, and those transaction
563.
by snitko 13y ago
Ahh yes. I tried writing a schema for my document (ocd here, I like things to be valid), but then I realized that the cost/benefit ratio of this process would be completely unreasonable.
564.
by snitko 13y ago
I can kinda understand why XSLT is one of the most expensive (on an intuitive level - as quchen said, it's not clear how the data was obtained for this post). Certain parts of it is a complete brainfuck. I worked on a small opensource
565.
by snitko 13y ago
It's been tried before. What happens when the working class rises and takes what's theirs is that after some time, a new elite emerges thanks to this working class, pretending to have the same values, while actually screwing this
566.
by snitko 13y ago
I see. So by that definition guardian journalists should have their hard-drives in tact now. The problem with this assumption is that, while a nice idea, it is completely detached from reality and it obscures the truth. If I tell you that y
567.
by snitko 13y ago
>My problem is with the edge cases. What happens if a government starts abusing its power, spying on its own citizens, starting wars at their expense and detaining and killing innocent people all over the world? Or what if a person rec
568.
by snitko 13y ago
Then you would have to give me your definition of what property is, because I think we might have a crucial disagreement on that and should start from there.
569.
by snitko 13y ago
Thanks, I think your questions are important, because those are the exact questions people often ask when presented the idea of private protection agencies and other libertarian ideas. So I'd like to address them and maybe try to demon
570.
by snitko 13y ago
Your misconception is that it's government who creates property titles. That's not true at all. Even in the animal world, territorial rights are enforced by animals themselves or groups of animals. They don't have any kind of

More ›