Quote from: d_eddie on Today at 01:46:50 PM

Quote from: obuoma on Today at 12:47:56 PM

please can you explain to me more about Maxis and Marxists. Thank you.

Marxist = A follower of Karl Marx, the inventor of Communism. Here's a simplistic explanation of communist thought. In capitalism, the wealth produced by the whole population isn't equally shared by all participants. All profit comes from inputs + means of productions. For example, when you make and sell a hamburger,

Means of production: cooking equipment, shop (lease or own).
Inputs: meat, bread etc., human work (burger flipping guy).
If you pay all this (meat, bread, rent, 5 minutes of flipper's work etc.) $3 and you sell the burger for $5, the $2 of profit are only possible because you underpay the burger flipper, who doesn't own the cooking equipment or (part of) the physical shop. So you are "stealing" from the workers, who should collectively own the shop and share the $2. Ownership of the burger enterprise (the shop, pans, cooking equipment, meat and bread orders etc.) should be distributed among the workers.

In practice, collective ownership turns into a nightmare where the big political bosses own everything and the burger flipping plebs own nothing. No one is motivated to open burger shops. It may be illegal to open your business, even. The economy stagnates, poverty spreads.
TL;DR Some people get richer than others because they own the means of production (factories) and pay the workers less than fairly.

Fair enough summary - even though there could be all kinds of ways that various forms of Marxist societies could end up playing out, and surely there are ways that incentives get screwed up through Marxist practices in ways that are dissimilar to the ways that incentives get screwed up in debt-ladden monetary societies, which seems to be a current state of our world that bitcoin seems to be attempting to address.

Quote from: d_eddie on Today at 01:46:50 PM

Maxi = Bitcoin maximalist. Here's a simplistic explanation of bitcoin maximalism. There's bitcoin and there are shitcoins. The latter are very different from bitcoin. Bitcoin is good, shitcoins are bad.

TL;DR Shitcoins are shit.

Examples: JJG and many others here.

I suppose my behaviors might cause you to label me as bitcoin maxi, and it is not like I can really fight such label, even though I would suggest that I believe that there are roles for the government and there are various kinds of public goods - even though I seem to be becoming even more and more confused in regards to how boundaries between government intervention might be needed versus where private ownership might be preferred... There are surely challenges, even for bitcoin to address some of these kinds of balances. Bitcoin can fix a lot of things, but not all things.

I recently listened to an early 2022 interview with Robert Breedlove and Noam Chomsky, and surely Noam Chomsky has abilities to make the case for government having a role in society.. just like several others of the liberal left.

Also in regards to shitcoins, part of my opposition to them comes from when they are pumped in this thread, since it seems to be mostly off-topic and also a slippery slope to allow one shitcoin and then when do we stop trying to figure out which shitcoin happens to be less shitty? I have likely always acknowledged a belief that shitcoins will continue to exist and even to exist in various wild and crazy stages, even surely I have been surprised by some of the levels of craziness (and creativities in scamming people) in the shitcoin scene over the years, yet I am likely more against the pumping of the various shitcoins rather than the acknowledgement that they exist, will likely continue to exist and might even have one or two redeeming attributes from time to time.

I am also quite irritated when vague terms are used that may or may not be referring to bitcoin (when there seems to even be a purposeful avoiding of saying the word bitcoin, perhaps to sound smarter?), so I am not so much against the use of the term "crypto," when there might be some relevance to the idea being discussed, yet when the term is vaguely used to lump together bitcoin and shitcoins without any clarification of the topic, then the whole practice of using vague words just comes off as sloppy in the better interpretation and potentially misleading in a more sinister interpretation, even though many of us likely hear those kinds of vague references by quite a few people in mainstream circles and probably even in real life circles (even coming from seemingly smart and aware people).

Quote from: d_eddie on Today at 01:46:50 PM

In practice, Maxis and Marxists are distinct groups. Very few maxis are marxists. Very few marxists are maxis. Maxis are usually capitalist at their core, often with an anarcho-capitalist tinge. Especially old school maxis, such as the people you can find in this little club.

I thought that bitcoin is for anyone, even though everyone might not be ready, willing and/or able to directly own bitcoin... while at the same time, bitcoin seems to be intended to help everyone through the creation of a more fair money - even though we can still see that early adopters are getting advantages over later adopters, and still the ones coming into bitcoin late might not feel enthusiastic to be pumping the bags of the earlier adopters, but at the same, time it does not really help them if they wait. What is it called? Damned if you do and damned if you dont, but probably more damned if you wait when you could have had been able to join the club by buying some cornz.

Quote from: d_eddie on Today at 01:46:50 PM

I hope this helps.

It kind of does. But I am still confused.

Quote from: philipma1957 on Today at 09:14:39 PM

We could likely do with under 500 coins in all rather than have 10,000 plus. But if we were only BTC I think if would have never become as big as it is.

I must chime in to emphasize that the tail does not wag the dog so frequently you seem to get lost in regards to basic doggie facts. nuff ruff said.

Quote from: philipma1957 on Today at 09:14:39 PM

I also think shitcoins are now too many in number and are not needed at levels of 10,000 + shitcoins.

This repeated theme of yours regarding the proper number of shitcoins comes off a bit pie in the sky contradictory. It is like you are saying: "I like shitcoins, but more than 500 is too much." Roll Eyes

Quote from: Biodom on Today at 10:37:47 PM

In my opinion, the hasty jump from bitcoin to VBcoin and others essentially bypassed the built-out of layers on the top of bitcoin.
Nobody ever expected bitcoin to do everything, but if financial rails were built on bitcoin first, it would have been much more "organic", imho.
Currently, "crypto" (apart from btc) is a disorganized mess with, unfortunately, lately developing criminality, like recent 'sniping', etc.

So, my position is that s-tcoin took something from btc, and gave almost nothing...for now.
Yeah, as an exception, perhaps they increased the velocity of money because people were constantly moving between s-tcoins and btc and then stables, as was rightfully noted, but i am not sure how important it was as far as the market size is concerned.

Shitcoins seem to have created a decent amount of deflection from bitcoin and surely various kinds of affinity scams that confuse people, and yeah, whether shitcoins have played out as a net good or a net bad could be debatable, to the extent that it even matters in terms of being able to control what happens in the real world and the various ways that markets were already set up prior to bitcoin coming onto the scene.

Yeah, bitcoin may have had nearly a whole cycle of relative obscurity, yet even when I came to bitcoin in late 2013, there were congressional hearings, and silk road, and China continuing to take its own aggressive stances towards bitcoin, even while businesses were getting built around bitcoin, and some of them rug pulling their users and others having other questionable technical and/or incompetence questions, like some of the MTGOX developments...

And there were already shitcoins in late 2013 when I got started in bitcoin, but the shitcoins really did not start to get pumped until around the time that Ethereum launched in 2015 - even though I am pretty sure there was some prelaunch attempts at pumping ethereum, too... but yeah various bitcoin threads we were constantly battling off the shitcoin pumpeners...which has never completely stopped, but just sometimes coming in different kind of ways, and probably certain circles are more inclined towards which shitcoin they are going to pump, or figuring out ways to "get in early," and those kinds of nonsenses that seem to have some similar patterns, just with some changes in the actors..to the extent that any of "us" bitcoiners are dedicating any of our time to follow those kinds of developments (and topics).