Quote from: bc on July 15, 2012, 08:12:45 PM

Overlaying morality on top of bitcoin doesn't make it more resilient to attack.

When government-run water supplies run low, fines and invective are used to punish and embarrass those who might water their lawns or wash their cars. A free market solution is to simply raise the price of water - incentivising conservation. It sounds like that's what the miners have done (de-prioritizing SD txs). Berating SD doesn't seem to have accomplished anything.

Satoshi Dice has helped make it clear how easy it is to bloat the blockchain. If that slows adoption today, that's fine. Slow and steady growth is better than the boom and bust of publicity and exposed-flaw.

Lastly, it sounds like they're filling a market need. Apparently lots of people are "rolling the dice" because they want to. This is what P2P transactions are supposed to be about. No one should be able to stop anyone from sending bitcoin to anyone. This scenario was possible ever since the genesis block. If we've got a "tragedy of the commons" in the blockchain, then we've got to solve it in the model of P2P - not by name-calling.

All of those rational points don't mean anything because I can gainsay each one of them in a tit-for-tat manner.

You're just lashing out. Ouch, stop lashing us! I'm going to equate your rational argument to violence so I have an excuse to run away from the debate. Just like that other guy.

Obey my boring, snotty, white hat morality or I shall tisk-tisk at you a second time, you terrible person.

Mcorlett is right, defending SatoshiDice and advocating proactive over reactive security is exactly the same as the immoral leaking of weak, innocent Yahoo passwords. For shame, you SatoshiDice gambling addicts. Get some help and stop destroying Bitcoin.

/SARCASM