Post
Topic
Board Serious discussion
Re: Where do you draw the line, Freedom of Speech/Misinformation
by
Carlton Banks
on 24/07/2018, 19:03:29 UTC
How does 2009 BTC fit into the freedom.  The libertarian community along with silk road and satoshi dice were the only reason IMO bitcoin made it out of the basement dwelleing nerd domain!

Imagine if groups of bankers, politicians and anti-gamblers etc had been able to stifle the free speech of those users, we may never have heard of BTC.  The model of free expression of value was completely against the "norm" of the time!  I personally found BTC from a fiat online poker forum I was into at the time, and after I figured out it wasn't the next internet scam (which was my first impression LOL) I was hooked.  If they had censored in anyway that information I would not have been here 5 years ago, who know's if or when I would have ended up here!

I admit that anti-vaccine, flat earth, chemtrail etc etc are vastly different that disruptive tech like BTC however the line must be such that legitimate innovation MUST NOT be stifled because illegitimate/agenda driven/trollingmotherfucking users are taking advantage of the situation.

Right.

I heard about Bitcoin in 2010, but dismissed it because Keynsian economics (which I'd learned as simply being the only economics) dismissed it. It was only because the tech sounded interesting that I checked it out again in 2011, and found threads here on Bitcointalk.org talking about Austrian economics and central banks being scammy etc. The latter completely changed my mind about the "conspiracy theory" topics, it's pretty obvious that the whole financial system (fiat banking inclusive) is just a massive scam. Seeing as the "free market" financial system is the basis of the entire Western world narrative, it changed my view of the world alot.

7 years later, this is my conclusion: alot of what gets labelled conspiracy theory is actively encouraged by the corporate/bank/intelligence uberclass as a kind of smokescreen. This is their weapon to make it very difficult to make an informed choice about what's true and what's false. They are likely manufacturing a whole range of fake and true stories using agents controlled by them, so that given a little passage of time, they can manipulate perception about anything (most Americans believe the Oliver Stone version of what happened in the JFK assassination, but one of the source materials for the screenplay of that movie went on to become a UFO person, despite the earlier JFK stuff being far more credible. Maybe this guy was a government agent paid to say something convincing about JFK in the 1980s, then screw his reputation in the 1990s by deliberately by switching to UFO craziness? Stranger things have happened in cases involving government agents)


Plato wrote about this in the year 2200 BC in The Allegory of the Cave, and Aristotle in his appraisal of the abuse of political power. If anyone really believes that Aristotle & Plato were nothing more than ancient Greek conspiracy nuts, maybe you'd believe anything if someone on TV wearing a suit and tie told you (i.e. the Stanley Milgram compliance experiments).