If I had saved all of the bitcoins I spent on DMT (before I knew how to get it for free), I would now have close to $80,000 extra dollars considering back in the day bitcoins were not so astronomically expensive... But, the DMT was absolutely worth giving up that $80,000, if it were $1,000,000 I'd still say it was worth it, $10,000,000 and I'd trade it all back

*ban
Belfrics Bitcoin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWwZIt9COsA

I can see the aliens pulling up into orbit now.
Alien Captain: Let's just fire the main gun and we call all be home in time for dinner.
Alien Gunnery Sergent: I'm sorry Captain, but I can't fire the main gun, I keep getting this message that says I can only fire the main gun after I pay these people from a place called Russia a million Bitcoins, sir, what's a Bitcoin?
Alien Captain: Throws his face into his hands in a gesture eerily similar to that of a Captain from that earth television show, and groans like a an alien named Kyp, from an Earthling cartoon show.

Seriously, these poor fuckers don't stand a chance.

I totally expected an Onion type video of people digging up bitcoins in an underground mine.

someone should introduce these guys to fibre-optics...

Also, I don't see them wearing any ear protection at all - those guys who live on site will be deaf by the time they're 30. (if the company lasts that long)

Does the electricity provider accept Bitcoin as payment?

Hopefully nobody tells the Chinese government that Bitcoins are often used for illegal activities...

"There is nothing that states can do that needs to be done that markets cannot do better. The current technology trajectory is proving the point, many times over. The result is political instability. A paradigm shift. Obsolescence of the public sector. The growing irrelevance of power. Ever less dependent on, and hence loyalty to, the coercive power structure and ever more cultural, economic, and social reliance on the structures that society creates for itself." via.

An example of this technology is Bitcoin which is now where the internet was in 1995. Back then, the confused mainstream didn't get it, but will soon find out why (the likes of) Federal Reserve Notes are to (the likes of) Bitcoin what the radio is to the internet.

How can you use bitcoins to pay anonymously for stuff if you have to give all that ID!? Also the guy not doing the purchasing is super-annoying

Oh man...how do I buy a bitcoin ATM? I want 7! I'll put them all in airports and just hope people never come back to redeem their worthless receipt.
I'm only 1/2 kidding about that. It sounds like a money printing machine.

Note this video was from back in April. Follow up full story here:
http://www.tested.com/tech/concepts/460601-where-we-went-wrong-buying-bitcoin-atm/

Would have been nice if the feds hadn't taken all those bitcoins from the innocent silk road users.

AFAIK Silk Road acted like a middle man. You gave it coins, had a balance, and would spend them on whatever.

A lot of people had substantial balances on there, and they had spent their coins on completely legal things. Not even taking part in any of the illegal stuff going on there - but never got their coins back.

A lot of this stuff stems from the RICO laws, where property seized in an investigation doesn't have to be returned.

-scheherazade

What about Bitcoins? What can they be exchanged for?

I do a lot of bitcoin mining with ASCII like this.

I demand you apply a power point to my account. Or a bitcoin.

change title to, "Give Us All Your Bitcoin Are Ours!"

"As I see it, there is a finite amount of money"

This is only true if cryptocurrencies like BitCoin have their way. According to the Fed, by contrast, an infinite amount of money is but just one click away...

Cronyism aside, this is not true at all:
"When one minimally productive person gets 50% of the capital in a project, it's impossible for anyone else to be compensated fairly."

No minimally productive person would get 50% in a free market. And "minimally productive" according to whom? Are you going by the Labor Theory of value? Because the Subjective Theory of Value posits otherwise. It shows that this could not happen (providing an absence of cronyism which, at the moment, is baked into the system). In other words, no one would voluntarily pay 50% of anything to someone they consider to be minimally productive. Would you?

Money is just a medium of exchange whose value is determined by the market. There are some scarce resources (as well as some non-scarce ones). Having limited money/medium of exchange makes prices go down. Wouldn't you want to pay less for gas, food, etc.? When the central banks inflate the currency (i.e., increase the money supply), there is potentially "unlimited" money to buy scarce goods. The market then makes prices rise as a result, making people effectively poorer.

"To say "much of the world is coming out of poverty" ignores reality. Perhaps the ruling class of much of the world is coming out of poverty"

Flat wrong: Look at the statistics. Millions in India, China, Southeast Asia, and other places throughout the world have come out of poverty in the last couple of decades. This is a fact.

The ruling class is never among the poor so I don't know what you mean by, "perhaps the ruling class of much of the world is coming out of poverty." What?

"This is usually not in spite of governments, but rather because of them."

Sure, it is mostly because of governments that such poverty takes so long to be eradicated. Corruption and stupid ideas like the "war on poverty," along with cronyism, currency inflation, commercial regulations, taxes, "intellectual property" laws, and more all contribute to this stupidity which keeps people poor. Throughout the history of civilization, only innovation and free commerce has brought people out of poverty on a larger scale.

I won't argue, however, against the idea that governments are always corrupt, since I completely agree. Nothing good comes out of government that could not come to us, more efficiently, more cheaply, and more effectively from private free commerce.

"Praxeology only shows what human behavior is like"

More or less, it shows the logic and the logical consequences of the fact that humans act.

"it is not an accurate predictor of behavior in an environmental hypothesis."

It depends on what you mean to predict. It is not prediction. It deals in apodictic certainties. Humans act and employ chosen means to achieve desired goals. These are certainties, not predictions. Other things are unknowns, like time preference, the means chosen, the goals desired, etc. and those you need to either predict (thymology) or wait and see (history).

"History is better, and when wealth inequality becomes so outrageous that the populace can't survive on what's left for them, they revolt."

So far yes, history would indicate this is a likely outcome or consequence, although you may need to look more closely at which sector of "the populace" has historically revolted or instigated revolt.

"I hope that this asshat (even if he's just pretending to be an asshat) is among the first ones hung, quartered, and force fed to his own family (like they did in France)"

What has he done to deserve being tortured and murdered? I am unclear about that. The revolution in France, of course, was a disaster that amounted to little good for all involved. But things like that have happened before, and could certainly happen again. Same with the Russian Revolution. Or the Nazi takeover of bankrupt Weimar Republic.

Human behavior cannot be predicted mathematically. Only econometricians seem to think so. Certainly not praxeologists! In fact, that's the basis of Misean praxeology: that you cannot predict human behavior and so economics differs from the natural sciences and requires a different method of analysis.

"that placates the Right Wing, right?"

I have no idea what would "placate the Right wing" or not. Let's not conflate right-wing statists with anarchists. Two completely different things. I also don't care what would "placate" the right wing.


If you really care about inequality, do what you can to oppose government policy, especially warmongering and central banking. They are the biggest contributors to the class divide, regardless of how you parse the data. (Of course, you may find that you can do very little.)

If you think you should be paid as much as the CEO of Apple, then by all means you should try applying to that job. I am not saying you are not worth it, but it's not me you have to convince...