Why does the left hate crypto so much?

[Clinamenic]

they should buy cigerettes

You clearly haven't been to the moon.

 

[catalog]

Note the key line, which Third missed because—again—he is literally illiterate

i think what you have to understand about third is that there is a logic there, it's not a pisstake, but it's not a logic you can understand unless you are him

 

[sus]

I used to think he was conceptually and philosophically incoherent, but then I realized his concepts are quite coherently organized around a philosophy of "No one else gets it, but I do"

 

[thirdform]

Very hypothetical I agree. Also speculative, but having pocket cash to invest, plus whatever savings rates, may give someone more of a sense of building toward something, some kind of agency that would otherwise be lacking maybe.

And rates at the existing crypto banks are a couple orders of magnitude higher than the incumbent commercial banks, and there are no minimum balances required to start earning. We can talk about the sustainability of these rates if you want, but I have faith in them, in terms of how risk is handled.

You will still be expanding the national debt. Short of the banklike crypto structures giving loans pro bono, which in any case would merely convert money into a voucher, not currency.

 

[sus]

i think what you have to understand about third is that there is a logic there, it's not a pisstake, but it's not a logic you can understand unless you are him

It's a logic of self-elevation. Either he's lying, or his eyes literally glaze over when there are sentences that directly contradict the point he's trying to make—even when the given text is only a few sentences long! It happened 30 minutes ago when he conveniently ignored the fact that the anarkiddy definition literally centers on accusations of anarchism. And it happened just now with the quote about having an intimidating forum.

 

[sus]

It's helpful insofar as it illustrates the Trivers-Bourdieu insight about self-deception & dissimulation being a precondition to rhetorically fooling others. You've gotta live in your own fantasyland if you wanna convince others the fantasy is real. I mean, it's not working here, but you can imagine him getting away with it in other contexts, or hell—even here if he was slightly better at it.

 

[Clinamenic]

By debt you mean spending deficit? Or is national debt broader? I just don't have an understanding really.

Anyway I'm not convinced that a large spending deficit is necessarily bad, but I hardly have an understanding of how value can indefinitely and sustainably be introduced into the system.

 

[thirdform]

Note the key line, which Third missed because—again—he is literally illiterate

youve never been on ilm that entire forum is based on a culture of one liners. That's different to me posting a one liner snark. have you woken up after your mum dumped you on your head and you lost cognitive braincells?

 

[catalog]

it's a rhetorical position more than anything. third i mean.

 

[thirdform]

It's a logic of self-elevation. Either he's lying, or his eyes literally glaze over when there are sentences that directly contradict the point he's trying to make—even when the given text is only a few sentences long! It happened 30 minutes ago when he conveniently ignored the fact that the anarkiddy definition literally centers on accusations of anarchism. And it happened just now with the quote about having an intimidating forum.

No, I mean that you are not an anarchist, because that would require maturity. So you end up coming across as an anarkiddy. Pretentious and self-absorbed. If I called you an anarchist it would be a compliment, it would be offered as a sign of respect.

 

[thirdform]

So insofar as I am calling you an anarchist, it is a fake anarchist. Aka. Not an anarchist.

 

[Clinamenic]

You will still be expanding the national debt. Short of the banklike crypto structures giving loans pro bono, which in any case would merely convert money into a voucher, not currency.

Still speculative and unclear here, but I do sense potential ways that facilitative work can be done by anyone with any amount of crypto. Whether or not it scales up far enough is even less clear to me.

One interesting "passive income" opportunity native to DeFi is "liquidity providing" which in principle seems equivalent to why commercial banks would pay interest to individuals to grant the bank custody of their savings.

On Uniswap, an "automated market maker", you can deposit $1000 of ETH and $1000 of BTC into the ETH/BTC "trading pool", an which people use to convert between ETH and BTC for a small fee, which gets divided and paid out to everyone who has deposited ETH/BTC in that pool.

The code can be open-source for an automated market- maker like Uniswap, but I'm not sure if its is.

Any you don't need permission to do any of this, assuming you already have crypto assets. Permission still is a roadblock so long as you need a bank account to "onramp" into crypto.

 

[thirdform]

It's helpful insofar as it illustrates the Trivers-Bourdieu insight about self-deception & dissimulation being a precondition to rhetorically fooling others. You've gotta live in your own fantasyland if you wanna convince others the fantasy is real. I mean, it's not working here, but you can imagine him getting away with it in other contexts, or hell—even here if he was slightly better at it.

I might not be good at it either, but neither are you, always setting up political figures you can smash to pieces rather than facing the music and having the maturity to look at things objectively. The subjective is irrelevant.

 

[catalog]

i tell you one thing about third, he's like a bloodhoud, he can sniff things out that a mere mortal cannot.

 

[thirdform]

i tell you one thing about third, he's like a bloodhoud, he can sniff things out that a mere mortal cannot.

Falling asleep to techstep and flashcore has recalibrated my mind, indeed.

 

[catalog]

i think it's something to do with how you process words that is different to the rest of us.

 

[thirdform]

i think it's something to do with how you process words that is different to the rest of us.

Well, they said I'd make a good lawyer. Unfortunately I have no interest in persevering with 30 overprivileged brats and then encountering a geezer. Rinse, repeat.

 

[sus]

I might not be good at it either, but neither are you, always setting up political figures you can smash to pieces rather than facing the music and having the maturity to look at things objectively. The subjective is irrelevant.

What are you talking about? When have I ever discussed a political figure on this board?

And I'm literally laughing my ass off at the idea that you—or anyone—can look at things "objectively"

The whole point of experimentation and science broadly is to get past subjective hunches and see what actually works, which is about as close as we get to objectivity—but we'll never see anything objectively, we'll only have theories with predictive power.

 

[Clinamenic]

It seems like third rarely proceeds in bad faith.

 

[catalog]

It seems like third rarely proceeds in bad faith.

yes i agree with that, that's what i meant when i said it wasn't a pisstake