aminok

7 ms·

1.
by aminok 10y ago
>An ad-hoc process controlled by an individual? Of course I'd complain. Morally there's no difference. You just want the armed robbery to be done in a more organized and deliberative process. That doesn't change the moral
2.
by aminok 10y ago
>Yes, I'd prefer people be thrown in prison for refusing to feed the starving, rather than them starving to death. So I guess you won't complain when some self-righteous modern-day Robin Hood engages in armed robbery against yo
3.
by aminok 10y ago
>Why should I bother, if you're just going to change the way I was using a word and then tell me I'm sheeple? It doesn't really matter how you define it. What matters is that they have not improved much from the position t
4.
by aminok 10y ago
They don't have "vibrant economies". They have strong economies, that long ago stopped being "vibrant" (by vibrant, I mean fast-developing). Europe and Canada have seen stagnant wage and economic growth since adopti
5.
by aminok 10y ago
The proliferation of smartphones doesn't lead to everyone getting "propaganda from a central server". A smartphone is a personal computing device that enables far more peer-to-peer communication and interactive engagement wit
6.
by aminok 10y ago
>We are about to face a few individuals with technology will hold massive power over everyone else. There are plenty of counterindications to that. For instance, many forms of technology are becoming increasingly widely adopted, at a rap
7.
by aminok 10y ago
Humans cannot be made obsolete by technology because we come to own the technology.
8.
by aminok 10y ago
Neanderthals faced a different species of humans whose culture they were not capable of integrating into. Humanity right now forms one unified global culture through which ideas and technology freely flow. The rising tide of technology is l
9.
by aminok 10y ago
Isn't that obvious? I'm not sure how I could be more explicit..
10.
by aminok 10y ago
People being able to exercise their right to freely contract and control their own private property is sickening? You'd prefer people being thrown in prison for refusing to surrender their private property rights, or for engaging in a
11.
by aminok 10y ago
The US isn't the world. The US has many traits that are peculiar to it, and not universal to economies that are becoming increasingly automated. The world has seen more wage growth over the last 20 years than any other period in histor
12.
by aminok 10y ago
All regulations, except on natural resources like land, should be eliminated in my opinion, as they are forceful interventions against people exercising their legitimate right to freely contract and utilise their own private property. In in
13.
by aminok 10y ago
The Malthusian argument has never been tested for an extended period in a situation where resource usage has been decoupled from resource generation. From the brief experiment we've had with massive forcible income redistribution (soci
14.
by aminok 10y ago
Computers and horses don't have property rights or the means to exercise them. All of this automation is augmenting humans because we do. We've gone from 122 million people owning smartphones in 2007 to 2.5 billion people owning t
15.
by aminok 10y ago
>But as things stand now, the owners of the machines get richer, and the displaced workers get significantly poorer. No they don't. We've had 200 years of massive automation fueled job destruction, and wages and the demand for
16.
by aminok 10y ago
Forcibly redistributing income from low resource generators to high resource generators creates an incentive for people with fewer resources to have more children than they are capable of supporting. This dynamic will in the long run lead t
17.
by aminok 10y ago
Privileged clearly implies undeserving.
18.
by aminok 10y ago
It was once widely agreed upon that slaves had no rights. Just because something is widely agreed upon doesn't make it right. I would argue that the proceeds of the private trades you engage in are fully yours by right, and that no rea
19.
by aminok 10y ago
>Remember, by definition, your tax obligation is not yours. What a strange debt: one that a person assumes without their consent, and which you only know about by violating their privacy. With regard to the last point: if I trade $1 mil
20.
CEO of Blockchain.info recounts what he overhead at Money 20/20 conference(youtube.com)
1 points by aminok 10y ago|0 comments
21.
by aminok 10y ago
The study wasn't trying to account for strict plant-based diets. It was attempting to find a correlation between fruit/plant intake and cancer rates.
22.
by aminok 10y ago
It shows how unreliable scientific consensus about a theory that cannot be subject to controlled experimentation, like any medical theory, is.
23.
by aminok 10y ago
No one should be unfairly denigrated. Your class based narrative doesn't justify treating people unfairly.
24.
by aminok 10y ago
Isn't it self-evident? It harms their standing and reputation, in being cast as in possession of wealth they are not morally entitled to. It's defamation.
25.
by aminok 10y ago
>Some contracts are unenforceable, and while you're free to make them, as a practical matter, they are generally avoided where there is an enforceable alternative. Because otherwise you're back in a state of nature, where the w
26.
by aminok 10y ago
There's never been a pre-property era. Humans have always been territorial, and even intra-group, have recognized private property. Non-human animals are also territorial and observe principles like First Possession, which is the found
27.
by aminok 10y ago
I don't follow. What offender?
28.
by aminok 10y ago
Thr currency you receive in private trade is unquestionably your own private property. The fact that income tax law requires you to surrender your privacy rights and disclose all of the transactions you engaged in in order to collect an inc
29.
by aminok 10y ago
>Property rights are weird. We all mostly agree that no one should be able to steal your phone off your desk at work. We very much don't agree that governments should not be able to tax income. Stealing your phone or taxing your inc
30.
by aminok 10y ago
I think it's perfectly appropriate to use violence to take back the object that you crafted and someone stole from you. I don't think it's appropriate to use violence to force someone to hand over an object they crafted and w

More ›