Quote from: katlogic on October 21, 2014, 10:22:37 PM

Quote

Are Bitcoiners Neoliberals?

Yes.

This debate always derails into left vs right, 80 who own 20% vs 20 who own 80%. Such is the nature of human condition until post-scarcity becomes a thing. More interesting is debate how can we fix it (no Bitcoin itself can not, if the GINI of bitcoin is any indication, on the contrary).

It's mostly impossible to measure. You can't just use accounts because one person may be holding many accounts. To measure GINI you need a reliable way to measure WHO owns which accounts.

Quote from: katlogic on October 21, 2014, 10:22:37 PM

As for the "death to the gubbermint" argument, ask people in sub-saharan africa how well it works for them.

commonly, the "libertarians" are highly privileged white American males who really have no clue how good they have it. They take America and civilization for granted. As you say, it's not hard to live the libertarian dream in Mogadishu.

Quote from: katlogic on October 21, 2014, 10:22:37 PM

Anarcho-syndicalism itself is a deceptive construct. While agent-based game theory is arguably rather vague approximation of sociology, its the closest thing to scientific method to guess behaviour of crowds (I'd recommend you sugarscape if you're interested in agent models of government-free capitalism).

I've seen things like this before but I'll have a look. I'm familiar with basic Game Theory.

Quote from: katlogic on October 21, 2014, 10:22:37 PM

There is a strong indication that the group benefits only if all, the 100% play by the rules. Libertarian tit-for-tat yields even worse outcome than agents randomly assigned to bins of kinship (which self-selects into 20/80 as per pareto much later in the sim compared to tit-for-tat).

curious points,

thx. -bm