Nostr Web Client

Ooof. This logic is so absurd I'm at a loss for words. "If they are our representatives then why would they stop our freedom"...You must have missed the last century. Governments are not benign. They are not your mom, dad, or family. They are strangers that use violence against peaceful people to get what they want. You wouldn't put up with a stranger doing this to you or your loved ones. You should realize there is no principle difference.

There are so many layers and schools of thought we would have to peel back before we can even have the discussion at hand that I'm not even sure this is fruitful. You exist in another world. I suggest reading the white paper and figuring out the main value prop of Bitcoin (permissionless transactions). The point of decentralization is so the network remains unstoppable no matter what any government or entity wants

Have you been keeping up with current events? In the last two weeks there has been crackdowns on Samourai, Wasabi shutdown, Phoenix fled the USA, TornadoCash case escalated by DOJ, and the FBI subtley threatened it's citizens about using no-KYC tools. All in a couple weeks.

Bitcoin may be neutral and non-political, but it is more conducive to political philosophies that emphasize the individual since it empowers the individual.

Satosha 1y ago

If you read the history of politics , what we have today ..in last 30 to 50 years is the best we have ever seen .. the old days were really bad .. literally the game of thrones ..

The current problem is NOT as much govs as the big tech .. or big business driving the govs .. but then again there will always be a new equilibrium found across corporations .. they will have conflicting interests and thus govs shall become free ..

As for Samourai or Wasabi , this is not even a blip on the timescale .. such things are bound to happen for btc to find it course .. all I can say that collective and law of land is paramount .. there is no way to bypass the political process - I mean , we can't even ignore politics with in btc community ..

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Saberhagen The Nameless 1y ago

Words on paper have never stopped anyone, neither citizens nor the parasite class. If someone really wants something they'll get it. If someone wants to do something they'll do it. If you like the illusion of safety it offers, okay.

You break several obscure laws a day and probably don't even realize it

I wish you well, but you obviously do not understand the point of Bitcoin. Either it is permissionless or it is not. If it is not, there is no reason for it's existence

Satosha 1y ago

I think the right order is Ethical -> Legal -> Permissionless

There are many permissionless things that no one will indulge in becuase they are either unethical or illegal . For example "Stealing" is permissionless but no one does it cuz it is neither ethical nor Legal ..

That said - I do agree I don't understand bitcoin as much as you might be, but I sure know that Ethical and Legal aspects are human-centric .. software (or tools) can't be a proxy for these ..

Satosha 1y ago

And the funny thing is bitcoin is ethically and legally allowed - and it is permission-less -- it is the best so far .. at least the ones I know of ..

Saberhagen The Nameless 1y ago

I'm saying if one will only ever use it in a "law-abiding", "rule-following" way then I can't see why you would want to use Bitcoin. Maybe temporarily as a glorified NGU stock that you only hold? While you still can that is, before it is taxed to hell and the regulators become more entrenched.

But digital fiat is much better for staying within the lines as far as transactions go.

Satosha 1y ago

I tend to disagree - there is HUGE scope of improvement as far as an Ethical , Legal and sound asset are concerned - for example today most usable assets are highly inflated because rich want to hoard buildings and stocks - if that money is moved to Bitcoin , home ownership will increase many fold - and poor will be able to participate in market economics (stock market) ..

#Bitcoin does offer an easy path to migrate to favorable jurisdictions in case one apprehends a dispute - You can't easily move a building (or even stocks) but you can technically move anywhere with your cold wallet - in a legal fashion - before the water gets over the head. That said, I would probably never do that cuz I can't even leave my dentist - let alone my home and friends :-) .. I would rather have my 21 sats confiscated than pack my baggage for good :-)

Saberhagen The Nameless 1y ago

Ok, what will you do when they push another executive order 6102 saying no citizens can self-custody their Bitcoin: "Please deposit all your Bitcoin at one of our regulated approved custodians and you will be given a Bitcoin IOU." Now what? Your only alternative is to break the law if you don't want to. Now you are in the black market territory. There is already precedent for this with gold.

Ok, what if they just make a law saying you can't leave the country with your Bitcoin? Again, you now must break the law. There is no getting around it. You can ultimately be lawful or permissionless, but not both.

Jurisdictional arbitrage sounds great in theory, but 99% of people cannot just pack up and migrate like that especially nowadays. And they'll just place a burdensome exit tax so no one does. Didn't you see what happened to Roger Ver recently?

Satosha 1y ago

"before it is taxed to hell and the regulators become more entrenched"

This is where power of democracy comes into play . For a term , yes it can be heavily taxed - even that will be challenged in court of law . But next term will be tough for such regulations because bitcoin is good for the state , for the economy and for the people . The way I see it, it is as if people are opting against uncontrolled printer . In a way it is a powerful vote for getting back to fiscal discipline.

Saberhagen The Nameless 1y ago

Sorry, our worldviews are just incompatible. Like I said if democracy overrides Bitcoin, then it can't be permissionless. If it isn't permissionless it is of no use and fails the original value prop. Think adversarially: If you need permission a government can simply make a law saying you can't self-custody your Bitcoin, you must use their Bitcoin IOUs, and they can print as many Bitcoin IOUs as they want for it's citizens. Now we are back to square one.

Consent is everything. I don't think something magically becomes morally good just because a system is a democracy and more people win a vote over a minority (which is not how laws are decided in reality anyway either)

In that case, a gang of rapists could win a "vote" over their victim. A mob could "vote" to take all your stuff. Makes no sense.

You have a very "solarpunk" take on crypto and paternalistic view of government:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA3YZVDUN5s

Saberhagen The Nameless 1y ago

While I agree with the moral sentiment it is impossible to have the order you propose by definition...if "Permissionless" is subservient to "Legal" or "Ethical"...then it isn't permissionless

It's just a tool, it is neutral, it can be used for good or bad like anything else in life. That is all on the person using it.