Replying to Avatar Kevin

Very interesting read. From my own understanding of Jason's argument about abstract power, so much power was given to governments that gold may have ended where we are no matter what. Because so much abstract power is given to governments, they centralize as much as possible.

As for your skepticism I completely understand. I too am wary of governments stockpiling Bitcoin and potentially cutting citizens off from ever being able to acquire some themselves, however, trying to get in Jason's headspace: he truly believes this is a war mechanism/tool. If he's correct, then everything must be abandoned for the new tool in order to come out on top. You don't commit resources to making swords when cannons arrive.

I'm also skeptical of the military aspect of Bitcoin. He doesn't have any practical use cases for why the government would be hashing in his book so far... I'm barely into chapter 5. Although I've also seen him allude to the fact that he has practical applications/reasoning but because he's a US Patriot he doesn't want to give those out for other countries to get ahead.

All in all time will tell what the truth is... All it has really done for me is drive me to stack sats more.

I think the apology is very noble. We all get caught in our own heads at times. And looking to his thesis again, I do think he's right about one thing at least: software being influenced by the creators own bias. Just because the creator describes the software as one thing, doesn't necessarily mean that's the ONLY thing it can do. We see this in writing all the time where the author doesn't even understand the full implications/symbolism of his/her own work.

Appreciate your point of view it's given me more to think about. :)

Thx for your feedback and kind words. I understand that some people see money as weapons, like JL. This might be due to the fact that politically controlled money is a weapon. Bitcoin is, however, purely defensive and non-violent. It has a very interesting architecture, which I describe with what I think are more relevant analogies in an ongoing book project that I'm working on.

I also understand that many people who support Bitcoin are happy when they see that a person working for the govt supports the technology. I suspect, however, that in some cases this reflects a curious need that many have today, where they appreciate it a lot if they get the blessing from mother state.

Furthermore, I read and hear that JL see private ownership as a result of egotism, pretty much like many economist explain how the market economy works. I don't support this understanding. Private markets are first of all a function of large scale co-operation in a positive-sum game, where the biggest winners understand others' needs and how to cater to them better than other. The competition element is much more in the background.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.