171–180 of 188 posts
This is the most political open source project I've seen in a while. I love the idea that it's designed to sit inside a progressive society where we all agree we have a social contract to the state. That is very different to a lot of similar efforts, and at the very least it's an important part of the discussion. Right now it's vaporware, but I'm very interested in its release. I'd love to help give it a friendly fac…
Much love and respect to Richard Stallman / the GNU Project for all the pioneering work and advocacy they did in OSS, but I personally don't want them near my $s. The number of religious / flame wars persistently raging in OSS circles just can not, would not be tolerated in this domain.
P.S. Stallman is a FS advocate, not an OSS advocate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/immigra...
A more authortarian gov as a solution to non-optional 'services'?
The IRS, or their equivalent, are the price of entry into whatever society you wish to be part of (or whichever will take you.
It's like a social club, if you don't want to pay your dues you don't get to use the facilities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A more authortarian gov as a solution to non-optional 'services'?
No, I was suggesting that if you don;t like the country you're in right now you can choose another. The IRS, or their equivalent, are the price of entry into whatever society you wish to be part of (or whichever will take you. It's like a social club, if you don't want to pay your dues you don't get to use the facilities.
You realize the IRS != US? We got along financially just fine (some would say better) before it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I was suggesting that if you don;t like the country you're in right now you can choose another. The IRS, or their equivalent, are the price of entry into whatever society you wish to be part of (or whichever will take you. It's like a social club, if you don't want to pay your dues you don't get to use the facilities.
It's a standard cop-out. "'Merica; leave if you don't like it". Imagine if activists in the 60's had taken that advice. You realize the IRS != US? We got along financially just fine (some would say better) before it.
You have a choice of many countries in the world, with all sorts of different rules decided on by the people there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I was suggesting that if you don;t like the country you're in right now you can choose another. The IRS, or their equivalent, are the price of entry into whatever society you wish to be part of (or whichever will take you. It's like a social club, if you don't want to pay your dues you don't get to use the facilities.
It's a standard cop-out. "'Merica; leave if you don't like it". Imagine if activists in the 60's had taken that advice. You realize the IRS != US? We got along financially just fine (some would say better) before it.
I just get riled up by the "It's wrong! They have no right to tax me! I have property rights!" stance, because it's inconsistent.
Much love and respect to Richard Stallman / the GNU Project for all the pioneering work and advocacy they did in OSS, but I personally don't want them near my $s. The number of religious / flame wars persistently raging in OSS circles just can not, would not be tolerated in this domain.
Your comment is completely baseless FUD, I wonder if you actually believe it. P.S. Stallman is a FS advocate, not an OSS advocate.
Sorry, FS, that was indeed my mistake.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But it is nothing compared to the reality without taxes Technology has come a long way in the last 1000 or so years. I suspect that there are new solutions to the problem that you describe. But they don't get explored because the State has a monopoly on violence and is very resistant to change. Most of the time that's a good thing as it means that things get screwed up only very slowly. But it also tends to prevent…
> But they don't get explored because the State has a monopoly on violence and is very resistant to change. No, wrong. Alternatives get explored all the time, and radical changes in the dominant role of social organization have happened over the 1000 year time period you discuss. You've anthropomorphized the abstract concept of the State improperly: the state is whatever entity or collection of entities taken togethe…
When there's a technological revolution every 20 years or so, but a political revolution only every 200 years or so, I think it's fair to argue that the state is very resistant to change. I might see several technological revolutions in my lifetime, and no political ones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bitcoin and others will never succeed because they are too friendly towards illicit behaviour. Bitcoin will never (fully) succeed because it's too complex for the general public.
Bitcoin will never succeed in its current form because its capabilities are limited in a number of ways by design, even if the problem of public's level of expertise goes away. One of such limitations is, even if there are subdivisions down to a "satoshi", "satoshi" level of payments are not currently (and I believe that will not ever be) possible. That is because of another limitation, that is the centralized nature…