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
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 either
a
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 initiate
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 reasons for war
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 evident.
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 as I
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. Shorthand
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 profit
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
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, at 14:17, Neil Johnson wrote:
It would seem to me that digital cash would
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 demonstration of power and
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 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 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. This
-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 user
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
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 REASON WHY
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 means that
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
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 security,
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?
--
Julian
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.
--
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
common, if not
-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 more
-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
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
to be deployed in any popular way. One obvious way to limit its utility
is to restrict its tie-ins with the banking system, or prohibit businesses
within their borders from using it.
That's the crypto winter.
-Declan
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
-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 AOLuser,
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
developing
, or prohibit businesses
within their borders from using it.
That's the crypto winter.
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.
~Faustine
--
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 still out,
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 back to the
mean that crypto anarchy
will likely triumph over central control. But we probably are facing a
crypto winter lasting at least 5 years, and maybe much longer. The
moves to expand wiretapping and surveillance, the Carnivore boxes, the
rapid move to reduce civil liberties in the wake of 911
--
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 effects for
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 theory
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
-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 fully
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 depend on
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 active
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 been
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 good idea!
44 matches
Mail list logo
