Quote from: Zangelbert Bingledack on July 10, 2015, 12:52:25 AM

Quote from: 2112 on July 10, 2015, 12:28:57 AM

Quote from: Zangelbert Bingledack on July 09, 2015, 11:58:06 PM

Not sure what you're on about, but the point here is merely to illustrate a particular dynamic: how something maintained by a group of people can appear consistent because of reasons other than the consistency of opinion and background of such people, when it is really that very thing that accounts for the consistency. Whether Hasnas is actually right about the US legal system is completely irrelevant for my purposes here (though if you really want to discuss legal theory in particular at least read the whole essay; this quote is pretty out-of-context).

Sorry, bro. This cannot be explained in the single forum post. The best I could do is give you a link to a philosophy book by Herbert Marcuse:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-Dimensional_Man

Essentially the thinking you espouse is a moral equivalent of:

a) football https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultras "What is the best football team and why Manchester United?"

b) post-communist intellectuals who consider Marxism the pinnacle of human thought

Quote from: Zangelbert Bingledack on July 09, 2015, 11:05:06 PM

They're experts at _{snippage}, not at _{{more snippage}} (except Satoshi, of course).

just substitute any of combination of {Marx,Engels,Lenin,Stalin,Mao,...} in place of Satoshi.

I think you're reading too much into it. The point is simpler: if we are to take the argument that "devs know best because they have proven themselves" at face value, the only dev we could credit as having any evidence of being a good incentive designer is Satoshi, since he is the one who designed the incentives. I'm not idolizing Satoshi, just pointing out that the other devs have no track record on that front, so it wouldn't make sense to expect them to be particularly skilled at it.

Hear ye hear ye.