[Chugalug] More on Bitcoin:

Stephen Kraus ub3ratl4sf00 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 22 22:26:19 UTC 2013

Chad. That is literally one of the worst, and sorriest arguments I've ever

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Chad Smith <chad78 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Asshole or not, dead cats or not - Innovation occurred.  Your statement
> was that Edison stifled innovation by "stealing" ideas (that he paid for).
>  But the fact is, he was paying cash money for inventions, and inventors
> showed the frak up for work - and 1000 patents were filed.  (also, don't
> agree with patents)
> The point is, the argument that somehow Edison "stealing" the credit for
> the inventions led to less innovation is bull crap.
> And if you want to mock the personality of inventors - let's talk about
> Tesla's bird problem.
> And it was NOT a corporation that caused the BP oil spill.  CORPORATIONS
> A HUMAN BEING, (or rather several human beings) made decisions that led to
> that disaster.
> Corporations are FICTIONAL ENTITIES.  That would be like blaming Santa
> Claus for your lack of a Nintendo 64.  No, your parents (human beings) made
> a choice, and now you are stuck with a Atari Jaguar.
> *- Chad W. Smith*
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Stephen Kraus <ub3ratl4sf00 at gmail.com>wrote:
>> 1. I don't frequent Reddit, nice try.
>> 2. Edison, the man who paid kids to capture neighborhood pets to
>> electrocute with AC to prove how terrible Tesla's electrical system was,
>> cheated Tesla out of $10,000 for fixing his issues with DC, got most of his
>> 'innovative' ideas from a staff of inventors he paid (poorly) and then
>> patented their ideas under his own name for his company.
>> I'd also point out: That 'Edison brand Incandescent Light Bulb' runs on
>> AC.
>> Ford was the poster boy for the assembly line, he was also a anti-sematic
>> asshole.
>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Chad Smith <chad78 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I don't believe in "Intellectual property" - so steal all the ideas you
>>> want.
>>> And vomit back all the Reddit pro-Telsa arguments you want - Thomas
>>> Edison **DID** foster invention.  There were a lot of things invented in
>>> Menlow Park, regardless of who did the inventing.  Innovation occurred.
>>>  Just like they did in Bell Labs.  Trying to use Edison as an example of
>>> stiffling innovation?  Are you mad?  He is LITERALLY the poster boy for
>>> invention.  When someone has an idea, it's not a pointless Tesla Coil above
>>> their heads, it's a damn Edison Brand Incandescent Light Bulb ™®©.
>>> Seriously, the internet has really fried some people's brains.
>>> *- Chad W. Smith*
>>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Chad Smith <chad78 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> You are mission the point.  A corporation is an invention of the
>>>> government, not of the free market.  Yes, in a free market people can work
>>>> together.  But in a truly free market, they couldn't hide behind some "I
>>>> didn't do that, the corporation did that!" bs.  A human being built the car
>>>> that had glue under the gas pedal.  A human being designed it that way.  A
>>>> human being safety inspected it (alledgely) and a human being sold it.
>>>>  Those human beings should be held responsible for the results of their
>>>> actions.  Not hide behind some fictional "Entity" called a corporation.
>>>> The BP oil spill?  That was a human who did that.  A human being is
>>>> resposible for that - NOT a "Corporation".  Corporations are a fiction that
>>>> we all (or most of us) just willingly accept as truth.
>>>> If there was a Free Market - along with Personal Responsibility (the
>>>> other side of the "Yes, Mr. Obama, I really DID 'build that'." coin) - then
>>>> you wouldn't need government interference.  Standard laws that apply to any
>>>> human being (don't kill, don't steal, don't harm, etc.) would still be
>>>> around and enforcable.  In fact, they'd be far more enforcable than they
>>>> are today, because - as the law currently recognizes it - so much harm is
>>>> done by "Corporations" who cannot be jailed, or killed, or punished in any
>>>> way other than fines.
>>>> *- Chad W. Smith*
>>>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Stephen Kraus <ub3ratl4sf00 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> Well you are right about one thing at least: Money's intrensic value
>>>>> is not a physical item, its set by consumer and producer demand.
>>>>> Which is ironically why Bitcoin will never be a MAJOR currency or a
>>>>> replacement for the Dollar.
>>>>> I never said it couldn't be a currency, see my previous reference to
>>>>> trading sea shells for cash and giving them a value, technically that makes
>>>>> them a currency, but the value of my sea shell currency is still hard set
>>>>> on how many USD I can get for the value of my sea shell, which might
>>>>> fluctuate depending on how many sea shells I have.
>>>>> Its therefore a currency. Not a good one, but a currency.
>>>>> Chad:
>>>>> They WERE a corporation. Competing in a market. By driving every other
>>>>> competitor out of the market via either hostile buyouts or threats.
>>>>> In a free market, as you suggest, who is to tell these guys that they
>>>>> cannot do such thing? How do we keep a large, extremely profitable business
>>>>> from simply destroying all other businesses that compete with them? We
>>>>> can't regulate them, that would defeat the whole point of a free market.
>>>>> Innovation? They could just steal an innovative idea. See Thomas
>>>>> Edison for a good example of a man who basically bought peoples ideas, paid
>>>>> them nearly nothing for them, claimed them as his own, and then drove them
>>>>> out of the market.
>>>>> There is no such thing as a free market, its like saying having a game
>>>>> of chess, but everything is fair game.
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Tyler Mittan <
>>>>> flashbatmanquestion at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> There has a lot been said since I last checked so I haven't been
>>>>>> keeping up, but I do think that this nonsense about REAL, PHYSICAL things
>>>>>> is nonsense. Money is not all real, physical things.. Not unless you think
>>>>>> a credit card swipe is somehow valuable. All credit is a transfer of, not
>>>>>> funds, but credit it. It's really just a mark in a ledger. It is only when
>>>>>> the bank goes to the other bank that it is fulfilled. It's virtually a
>>>>>> credit.
>>>>>> It strikes me as odd for someone who is so anti-gold standard to make
>>>>>> claims like this which are so pro-gold standard it hurts.
>>>>>> Second, value is subjective (you can think Menger and the Austrians
>>>>>> who found this concept in which all modern day economics is built on except
>>>>>> socialists). NOTHING IS INTRINSICALLY VALUABLE. It seems like this is
>>>>>> something we all agree on. Given that money is not necessarily a physical
>>>>>> thing, and that value is subjective, we can see how bitcoin could be
>>>>>> considered money if valued by enough people.
>>>>>> Now that we've established that, we should look at why bitcoin is not
>>>>>> widely accepted which I mentioned before:
>>>>>> 1. People don't know about it. Economists and computer geeks, but if
>>>>>> you were to ask the average, say, psychology student whom has not interest
>>>>>> in politics whatsoever (and there are plenty) or virtually anyone else,
>>>>>> they most likely wouldn't know about it.. this begs the question: even if
>>>>>> they did know about it, would they want it?
>>>>>> 2. They might. The underlying point of me posting this was to show
>>>>>> that competing currencies could be a thing. They could be a thing that work
>>>>>> very well (as they have historically.. look up Richard Timberlake, Lawrence
>>>>>> White, and George Selgin). We can't say for sure if bitcoins would be a
>>>>>> very valuable thing, but we do know that it's getting very popular.. this
>>>>>> begs the question, if it's so popular, why aren't businesses buying it?
>>>>>> 3. This can be answered mostly by the fact that the legality of it is
>>>>>> iffy at best. It can also be answered that people trust the backing of a
>>>>>> government (whom obviously have a pretty poor track record, but people
>>>>>> don't know better).
>>>>>> So, there's no reason to think that bitcoins can't be money. I am not
>>>>>> saying they are widely accepted. I am not saying if they were legal that
>>>>>> they even would be widely accepted. I am saying that competing currencies
>>>>>> can, and should, be a thing to keep the dollar honest.
>>>>>>  On Aug 22, 2013 5:05 PM, "Stephen Kraus" <ub3ratl4sf00 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> John...that is called the exchange rate. It really doesn't make
>>>>>>> bitcoins any more legitimate as a REPLACEMENT for the USD or as even a
>>>>>>> strong competitor.
>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:53 PM, John Aldrich <jmaldrich at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Quoting Stephen Kraus <ub3ratl4sf00 at gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>  Its funny that, Aaron a good comparison.
>>>>>>>>> Because if I sell something on Ebay, I set a price in USD.
>>>>>>>>> And if paypal doesn't give my bank my USD, I get cross
>>>>>>>>>  Yes, that's true, Stephen... but if someone in, say, Germany,
>>>>>>>> wants to buy what you're selling, they will pay you via PayPal in
>>>>>>>> DeutschMarks, which Paypal will CONVERT to $USD. Or if you want to buy
>>>>>>>> something for your VW from someone in Germa ny, they are likely selling in
>>>>>>>> DM, and you will pay in $USD, but THEY will receive DM from PayPal.
>>>>>>>> Similarly, in theory, PayPal could start accepting Bitcoins and then
>>>>>>>> convert them to $USD or whatever currency, or just bank them like you do
>>>>>>>> with your local currency.
>>>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>>>>> Chugalug mailing list
>>>>>>>> Chugalug at chugalug.org
>>>>>>>> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/**mailman/listinfo/chugalug<http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Chugalug mailing list
>>>>>>> Chugalug at chugalug.org
>>>>>>> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Chugalug mailing list
>>>>>> Chugalug at chugalug.org
>>>>>> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Chugalug mailing list
>>>>> Chugalug at chugalug.org
>>>>> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Chugalug mailing list
>>> Chugalug at chugalug.org
>>> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chugalug mailing list
>> Chugalug at chugalug.org
>> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
> _______________________________________________
> Chugalug mailing list
> Chugalug at chugalug.org
> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://chugalug.org/pipermail/chugalug/attachments/20130822/6f1d326a/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Chugalug mailing list