On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Thomas Lyon Gideon wrote:
> The point about emergent behavior is excellently made. A corollary that
> occurs to me is that one of the prime motivators in the emergent quality of
> human society may well be the pursuit of non-zero sum games.
Of course people want to take ad
On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 02:01:12PM -0500, Sunder wrote:
>
> While I'm not comparing humans to ants, nor to slime mold cells -- don't
> even attempt to make that connection, the lesson here for you to learn is
> that individual action performed in the self interest of the individual,
> when integr
On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 02:01:12PM -0500, Sunder wrote:
>
> While I'm not comparing humans to ants, nor to slime mold cells -- don't
> even attempt to make that connection, the lesson here for you to learn is
> that individual action performed in the self interest of the individual,
> when integr
You're confused.
The ability of individuals acting in their own interests does not deny the
ability of a collection of those same individuals from working towards
mutual benefits. Nor does it deny others who are not acting in those same
interest from benefiting from their work.
What objectivi
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001, David Honig wrote:
> At 07:56 PM 11/20/01 -0800, Morlock Elloi wrote:
> >> Capitalism is a natural result of free people.
> >
> >The ultimate argument. Like in "natural" and "unnatural" sex
>
> Hardly dogma; look at history.
Yes, look at history. Many if not most re
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, David Honig wrote:
> At 09:19 PM 11/19/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
> >C-A-C-L's would let people die from thirst before interfering in a 'free
> >market'. Others would say screw the market and give that man a drink.
>
> No, a libertarian would say "screw anyone who'd initia
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Faustine wrote:
> >Then you have missed a fundamental aspect of human society and the
> >responbility (shades of Hayek) that goes along with it.
> >Hayek, von Mises, etc. would be disappointed.
>
>
> In a survival situation, nobody gives a crap about "human society", it's
On Saturday, November 24, 2001, at 08:56 PM, scum wrote:
> Atheists who claim to be anti-theism are either (a) not
> atheists, or (b) mis-understand what theism is.
>
> If we spend a quality minute in the real world, one or two
> things of what capitalism is and what anarchism is not will be evid
At 12:36 PM -0800 on 11/22/01, Mark Henderson wrote:
> People who label themselves as anarchists
> tend to be anti-capitalist.
Except around here, and, frankly, in whole swaths of the internet.
Go read read up on David Friedman, and see if you can say what you said
above again with a straight
--
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 08:46:18PM -0800, Petro wrote:
> > Not necessarily. It is argued both that Libertarians are
> > chicken-shit anarchists (afraid to take the last step) or
> > that Anarchists are just extreme Libertarians.
On 22 Nov 2001, at 12:36, Mark Henderson wrote:
> As far a
On Monday, November 19, 2001, at 12:55 PM, Tim May wrote:
> On Monday, November 19, 2001, at 12:36 PM, Faustine wrote:
<...>
>> This applied as well to _new_ banks. This meant that neither the
>> customer (Joe Sixpack) nor the branch manager had to be "convinced" or
>> "sold" on the importanc
On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 01:17:44PM -0800, Petro wrote:
> When was the last time you worked a Customer Support line for a web
> site that did CC transactions?
>
> End users care about, and insist on security. They don't know JS
> about it, they don't begin to understand it, but they
On Sunday, November 18, 2001, at 10:37 PM, CDR Anonymizer wrote:
> At 08:29 PM 11/18/01 -0800, CDR Anonymizer wrote:
>> Because they could.
>
> This goes beyond gratuitous demonstration of power and ability,
> there is an economic reason behind it all.
> What is / their / economic reason?
On Sunday, November 18, 2001, at 02:16 PM, Faustine wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> declan wrote:
>> Not so with digital cash. It also suffers from deployment problems, of
>> course, but far more substantial regulatory ones. You need two
>> consenting users -- and a tie-
On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 11:46:45AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
| On Monday, November 19, 2001, at 10:29 AM, Adam Shostack wrote:
| > | 6. The failure to get true digital money. Call it what you like,
| > | "digital cash" or "ecash" or even one of Hettinga's pet names, but the
| > | fact is that for both
On Saturday, November 17, 2001, at 05:49 PM, David Honig wrote:
> At 03:15 PM 11/17/01 -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
>> on Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 01:36:32PM -0800, alphabeta121
>> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>>> what does C-A-C-L stand for?
>>
>> Crypto-Anarcho Capitalist Libertarian, per archives.
> Capitalism is a natural result of free people.
The ultimate argument. Like in "natural" and "unnatural" sex
=
end
(of original message)
Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows:
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com
At 09:19 PM 11/19/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
>C-A-C-L's would let people die from thirst before interfering in a 'free
>market'. Others would say screw the market and give that man a drink.
No, a libertarian would say "screw anyone who'd initiate force
against me to make me to do this" and then
On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 09:04:00PM -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, alphabeta121 wrote:
>
> > what does C-A-C-L stand for?
>
> Crypto-Anarcho-Capitalist-Libertarian
>
> It's the recognition that these approaches to social engineering are
> united by a shared interest in maximum p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim wrote:
>C-A-C-L's would let people die from thirst before interfering in a 'free
>market'. Others would say screw the market and give that man a drink.
I'd give that man a drink out of my last canteen--but I sure as hell wouldn't
force anyone
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Eric wrote:
>> I think the real flaw there--what keeps
>> me so uncomforable with it (even though my gut tells me it's a logical
>> conclusion)--is reflected in the sheer number of people I've seen change
>>their minds once they found out a little m
On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, David Honig wrote:
> At 03:15 PM 11/17/01 -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> >on Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 01:36:32PM -0800, alphabeta121
> >([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >> what does C-A-C-L stand for?
> >
> >Crypto-Anarcho Capitalist Libertarian, per archives. Shorthand for a
> >c
On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, alphabeta121 wrote:
> what does C-A-C-L stand for?
Crypto-Anarcho-Capitalist-Libertarian
It's the recognition that these approaches to social engineering are
united by a shared interest in maximum profit and a failure to take human
psychology as a boundary condition.
--
> "In and of itself" is a very vague and intangible concept.
>
> --Tim May
> "As my father told me long ago, the objective is not to convince someone
> with your arguments but to provide the arguments with which he later
> convinces himself." -- David Friedman
Quoting Jews again, Tim?
--
J
Faustine writes:
> Right. I suppose there's not much that can be done for people who expect
> "security" to be handed down to them from the sky on a silver
> platter. I'm sure it couldn't be more obvious to most here that if you
> don't put out the effort to take responsibility for your own secur
On Monday, November 19, 2001, at 05:03 PM, David Honig wrote:
>
> Yes, but what this thread has ignored is that gold (and other
> densely precious things) were valued *in and of themselves* and so
> using them as money was not symbolic. You traded your goat
> for a goat's worth of gold; if trust
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tim wrote:
>Companies have been trying to convince the home computer user that they
>should be encrypting for years. Doesn't work. And for not very
>surprising reasons. Same thing seen in the home security business,
>backups, etc.
>(The average us
At 01:27 AM 11/20/01 +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>It's amazing how many people assert this, even though it's clearly
>>wrong. A gold standard does NOT mean that the amount of currency in
>>circulation equals the amount of gold in the vaults, it mea
on Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 10:14:01AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On 19 Nov 2001, at 2:54, Neil Johnson wrote:
>
> > There are still a lot people that believe the U.S. should return to
> > the "Gold Standard" meaning the amount of money in circulation
> > should equal the
On Monday, November 19, 2001, at 12:39 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
> Tim May wrote:
>
>> So, here's the punchline,
>>
>> Regardless of companies trying to make money, not be run out of
>> business
>> by money laundering laws, trying to be banker- and Homeland
>> Fascism-friendly, IS THERE A FUNDAMENTAL
On Monday, November 19, 2001, at 12:36 PM, Faustine wrote:
> But then, that sounds suspiciously resonant with "if they're too lazy
> or stupid
> to get it, then screw em", doesn't it. I think the real flaw
> there--what keeps
> me so uncomforable with it (even though my gut tells me it's a logic
Tim May wrote:
> So, here's the punchline,
>
> Regardless of companies trying to make money, not be run out of business
> by money laundering laws, trying to be banker- and Homeland
> Fascism-friendly, IS THERE A FUNDAMENTAL REASON WHY TWO-WAY
> UNTRACEABILITY IS NOT "POSSIBLE."
>
> I believe c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tim wrote:
>Companies have been trying to convince the home computer user that they
>should be encrypting for years. Doesn't work. And for not very
>surprising reasons. Same thing seen in the home security business,
>backups, etc.
>(The average us
On Monday, November 19, 2001, at 10:29 AM, Adam Shostack wrote:
> | 6. The failure to get true digital money. Call it what you like,
> | "digital cash" or "ecash" or even one of Hettinga's pet names, but the
> | fact is that for both political and technical reasons we don't have
> | digital cash.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 10:00:05AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
| Also, I plan to reply only to folks who make a serious effort to debate.
ok, so this is just some nits, because your analysis is generally good.
| contributors have arrived. We had a guy from Germany, whose name I have
| spaced out on,
On 19 Nov 2001, at 2:54, Neil Johnson wrote:
> There are still a lot people that believe the U.S. should return to the
> "Gold Standard" meaning the amount of money in circulation should equal the
> amount of gold held by the U.S. government. That's what Fort Knox was
> originally for.
>
It's
On 18 Nov 2001, at 20:37, CDR Anonymizer wrote:
> >Anonymous:
> >> but why did governments engage in the vigorous and frequent
> >> application of bayonets and batons to render their money
> >> independent of precious metals?
> >
> >Because they could.
>
> This goes beyond gratuitous demonstrat
ort Knox was
originally for.
Seesh 3:00 AM better get to bed.
-Neil
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 10:29 PM
Subject: Re: The Crypto Winter
> --
> On 18 Nov 2001
On Sun, Nov 18, 2001 at 05:16:54PM -0500, Faustine wrote:
> On a scale of 1 to 10, how likely do you think it is that these
> problems will be resolved in, say, the next decade? Where are the
> people most likely to make it happen? Fascinating stuff.
Huh? In my message, to which you replied, I s
At 08:29 PM 11/18/01 -0800, CDR Anonymizer wrote:
>--
>James A. Donald:
>> > That is a really dumb idea.
>> >
>> > It took governments a generation and the vigorous and
>> > frequent application of bayonets and batons to render their
>> > money independent of precious metals.
>
>Anonymous:
>>
--
On 18 Nov 2001, at 14:17, Neil Johnson wrote:
> > > It would seem to me that digital cash would be better off
> > > not being tied either of these trust systems, but somehow
> > > develop it's own.
James A. Donald:
> > That is a really dumb idea.
> >
> > It took governments a generation an
At 05:11 PM 11/18/01 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On 18 Nov 2001, at 14:17, Neil Johnson wrote:
>> So how do we develop this trust for digital cash ?
>>
>> Digicash tried tying back to the trust of existing money
>> systems (unsuccessfully).
>>
>> E-gold, digi-gold, etc. are trying to tie bac
--
On 18 Nov 2001, at 14:17, Neil Johnson wrote:
> So how do we develop this trust for digital cash ?
>
> Digicash tried tying back to the trust of existing money
> systems (unsuccessfully).
>
> E-gold, digi-gold, etc. are trying to tie back to the trust
> of scarce materials (the jury's stil
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
declan wrote:
>Not so with digital cash. It also suffers from deployment problems, of
>course, but far more substantial regulatory ones. You need two
>consenting users -- and a tie-in to the banking system (preferable) or
>at least some exchange of v
On Sunday, November 18, 2001, at 01:53 PM, Faustine wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Faustine wrote:
> Tim wrote:
>
>> Getting away fron digital cash for a moment, If you'd care to point me
>> to any examples of crypto companies really focused and committed to
>> deve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Faustine wrote:
Tim wrote:
> Getting away fron digital cash for a moment, If you'd care to point me
> to any examples of crypto companies really focused and committed to developing
> applications that are commercially appealing to Joe Sixpack AOLuse
At 09:59 PM 11/17/01 -0800, Tim May wrote:
>
>As for me, I'm a neo-Calvinist Nietzscheian. It is of little concern to
>me whether crypto is dumbed-down to the point where Mr. Rogers uses it.
Mr Rodgers is mourning the death of Mr. McFeely the speedy delivery
man who succumbed to anthrax...
Th
Economics 101 for those who don't/won't check the archives:
The fundamental problem is Trust.
The basic concept of money is to act as a proxy for the exchange of goods
and services.
Say a farmer needs medical attention and a doctor wants pork chops. Without
"money" the farmer would have to pay
On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 11:25:19PM -0500, Faustine wrote:
> Getting away fron digital cash for a moment, If you'd care to point me to any
> examples of crypto companies really focused and committed to developing
> applications that are commercially appealing to Joe Sixpack AOLuser, I'd be
> intere
On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, Tim May wrote:
> and the security departments of leading dot com and Net companies. Even
> Mojo Nation, which had about half a dozen list members in it--not much
> being heard from it now.
I don't know about what's happening to Mojo Nation exactly, but it seemed
to me that
On Saturday, November 17, 2001, at 08:25 PM, Faustine wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 07:52:17PM -0500, Faustine wrote:
>> So maybe it's worth putting a little effort into thinking of ways to
>> AOLize (for lack of a better term) digital cash: a mass market reqires
>> mass appeal.
>
>> What a g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 07:52:17PM -0500, Faustine wrote:
> So maybe it's worth putting a little effort into thinking of ways to
> AOLize (for lack of a better term) digital cash: a mass market reqires
> mass appeal.
>What a good idea! Bet nobody th
On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 07:52:17PM -0500, Faustine wrote:
> So maybe it's worth putting a little effort into thinking of ways to
> AOLize (for lack of a better term) digital cash: a mass market reqires
> mass appeal.
What a good idea! Bet nobody thought of that before!
More seriously, as has bee
At 03:15 PM 11/17/01 -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
>on Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 01:36:32PM -0800, alphabeta121
>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> what does C-A-C-L stand for?
>
>Crypto-Anarcho Capitalist Libertarian, per archives. Shorthand for a
>common, if not prevailing, political viewpoint among acti
> 6. The failure to get true digital money. Call it what you like,
> "digital cash" or "ecash" or even one of Hettinga's pet names, but the
> fact is that for both political and technical reasons we don't have
> digital cash. This has ripple effects for nearly all of the constructs
> which dep
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim wrote:
>I think this is the central key problem.
>To establish any medium of exchange, one faces an enormous
>critical mass problem, as the stupendous expenditures by
>paypal and its competitors demonstrate.
Maybe once average people become full
on Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 01:36:32PM -0800, alphabeta121 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> what does C-A-C-L stand for?
Crypto-Anarcho Capitalist Libertarian, per archives. Shorthand for a
common, if not prevailing, political viewpoint among active listmembers.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PRO
alphabeta121 asked,
> what does C-A-C-L stand for?
Nothing really. It's Inchoate's blanket term for the several loosely
related free market theories/movements. It's an intellectually bankrupt
grouping. It's sort of like saying "commie" instead of differentiating
between communism, Fabian soci
what does C-A-C-L stand for?
alpha
- Original Message -
From: "Tim May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 10:00 AM
Subject: CDR: The Crypto Winter
> Alternative Subject Name: Decline and Fall: Crypto without politics is
> just applied number t
--
On 17 Nov 2001, at 10:00, Tim May wrote:
> 6. The failure to get true digital money. Call it what you
> like, "digital cash" or "ecash" or even one of Hettinga's
> pet names, but the fact is that for both political and
> technical reasons we don't have digital cash. This has
> ripple effect
60 matches
Mail list logo
