• Xenforo Cloud is upgrading us to version 2.3.8 on Monday February 16th, 2026 at 12:00 AM PST. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Bitcoin currency of the future?

JonesBones said:
He is incapable of entertainting other thoughts. He has no lateral thinking and no elasticity of thought. For example, he said eating meat was objectively wrong. I said nothing is objectively wrong. There is no objective morality. IF there is objective morality, who set it? Who is the judge of it. He couldn't answer any of these questions and it went on for pages without him being able to. There are no objective ethics. There are no moral facts. But he 100% believes there are but can provide no evidence or reasoning for such a claim. He has the self awareness of a spoon.
Click to expand...

This is what he said @Nik123

And he's right. Philosophically, there is no objective wrong or objective morality. There seems to be plenty of information out there to support that.

Regardless, the point was to expose Der Fraudsbar's idiocy in claiming eating meat was "objectively wrong" lmao! What a fucking clown.
 
Luminaire said:
This is what he said @Nik123

And he's right. Philosophically, there is no objective wrong or objective morality. There seems to be plenty of information out there to support that.

Regardless, the point was to expose Der Fraudsbar's idiocy in claiming eating meat was "objectively wrong" lmao! What a fucking clown.
Click to expand...

Not really interested in the guys beef with the Der Freidsbar guy.

I’m just messing with Jones to be honest, easy target - sweeping grand statements backed up by nothing. And no, his original statement was full of shit. The Taoist stuff I am familiar with and don’t disagree with.

I’m bored and feeling frisky that’s all.
 
You want peer reviewed studies on a brand new technology?
Turtlejuice said:
I haven't dodged any question.

How is block chain going to make things better for mankind? Provide factual, peer reviewed sources.

Poor advice led to 1 man (at least) make poor investment choices. Said man killed himself as a direct result. Suffering. The family of that korean man now has to live with the loss of a loved one. Suffering. They may also now be responsible for the debt he accumulated. Suffering. Now according to you, 1 person eating meat is the same as the killing of millions of people, as they both cause suffering. Well, spreading poor information about bitcoin causes suffering.

Now, many medical and scientific advancements have come as a direct result of suffering. According to you, that is objectively wrong. So, take away that suffering, many medical advancements are now not made. That, by cause and effect, leads to more suffering. Which of those is morally correct?
Click to expand...

You want peer reviewed published research on the benefits of block chain to humanity? Ahahahahaha. Okay buddy. Thanks for letting everyone know you're not serious. It's brand new technology. There won't be these sorts of studies for some years to come.

And I said needless suffering. Needless suffering is objectively immoral. Morality is predicated on suffering. The holocaust was objectively wrong. If you can't agree with that statement, you're either a monster, or stupid.

The block chain is going to make things better for mankind in a number of different ways:
The main way is that It puts financial power and infrastructure back in the hands of individuals and out of the hands of banks and government. A huge potential for this is providing capital to underdeveloped places like Africa that do not have financial infrastructure. But guess what? They have phones. And when most of Africa has smart phones, they will have financial infrastructure in their hands and capability to change their continent. Liquidity and capital is what makes development happen, and Africa doesn't have that. Crypto has the potential to make all of that happen.

Then you come down to the benefits of individual projects:
With power ledger you are able to trade green energy directly from peer to peer. In a project like substratum you have the ability to create a decentralized internet, that cannot be controlled or censored by anyone (free expression and free speech directly benefit humanity, another objective moral truth). The list of potential goes on and on and on.

The fact that you don't even realize the benefits of the various projects out there tells us you haven't even researched this space. You literally don't even know what you're talking about.

If you don't even know wtf you're talking about why should any of us give a shit about what you have to say? You're just blindly hateful.
 
ChucksGlassJaw said:
Morality is often dictated by the victors. There's isn't much outcry for the fire bombings in Tokyo, or the obliteration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We were certainly morally wrong in all 3 of those attacks. Had the Nazi's won, maybe we'd be thanking them for eradicating those vile Jews, or some such nonsense.
Click to expand...
What in the world are you talking about? There is plenty of outcry about the war crimes of the allies during the second world war. There are volumes of books written on the subjects. You're stating absolute falsehoods as if they're reality when they're demonstrably false.
 
Blockchain will work out.

You just picked the wrong one at the wrong time.
 
Der Eisbär said:
It's too bad more of JBP's wisdom hasn't rubbed off on your stupid ass.
Click to expand...

You just don't seem to understand that there is no "objective morality" therefore things aren't "objectively wrong"

Morally reprehensible, sure.

Objectively immoral? No.

There's a difference.

And don't paint me to be some sort of parroting fan boy, I'm not you.
 
Luminaire said:
You just don't seem to understand that there is no "objective morality" therefore things aren't "objectively wrong"

Morally reprehensible, sure.

Objectively immoral? No.

There's a difference.

And don't paint me to be some sort of parroting fan boy, I'm not you.
Click to expand...
You don't believe the systematic extermination of millions of people is objectively wrong. Gotcha dumbass ;]
 
Der Eisbär said:
You don't believe the systematic extermination of millions of people is objectively wrong. Gotcha dumbass ;]
Click to expand...

You just need to learn words DerFraudsbar.

giphy.gif
 
I have a spreadsheet that keeps track of cryptos. I've lost 110% since about 10 days ago, but I'm still up overall.
 
Did any coin remain around the same through all these big drops??

Do you guys think a coin can still potentially be bigger than bitcoin?
 
Luminaire said:
You just don't seem to understand that there is no "objective morality" therefore things aren't "objectively wrong"

Morally reprehensible, sure.

Objectively immoral? No.

There's a difference.

And don't paint me to be some sort of parroting fan boy, I'm not you.
Click to expand...

Seems like a rhetorical argument. Immorality is, by definition, a counterthrust to the "accepted" morality, so it can be argued by definition that it is the standard within our culture, and as it is merely a word to express an idea of something that was born within that culture, I might argue that perceiving it as the objective fact could be as legitimate as declaring that water is comprised of two hydrogen and an oxygen molecule.
 
CerebralKnievel said:
Seems like a rhetorical argument. Immorality is, by definition, a counterthrust to the "accepted" morality, so it can be argued by definition that it is the standard within our culture, and as it is merely a word to express an idea of something that was born within that culture, I might argue that perceiving it as the objective fact could be as legitimate as declaring that water is comprised of two hydrogen and an oxygen molecule.
Click to expand...

It's not rhetorical. It's semantics.

It's subjective, and that doesn't mean it's a bad thing, it's just the proper word to use.

Once you start attaching qualifiers to make it "objective" by nature it's subjective.

According to evangelical christians premarital sex is "objectively wrong"... therefore it's subjective.
 
Luminaire said:
It's not rhetorical. It's semantics.

It's subjective, and that doesn't mean it's a bad thing, it's just the proper word to use.

Once you start attaching qualifiers to make it "objective" by nature it's subjective.

According to evangelical christians premarital sex is "objectively wrong"... therefore it's subjective.
Click to expand...

Well, anything that evangelical Christians proclaim is deserving of a deep scrutiny.

Of course, morality, much like evil or goodness, is a subjective term subject to the interpretation of its definition. I just wanted to elevate the perspective on that fact to suggest that one can apply thus reasoning to anything, even objectivity itself, which is itself still simply a human construct of language and idea.
 
BoxingFan123 said:
E-coin was up 110% during the crash up somewhere like 1910% now lol
Click to expand...

uh more like 70% down.

Someone was manipulating that shit. I watched it live, the trading volume was like $40,000 for the hour it went up like 2000%
 
Cid said:
uh more like 70% down.

Someone was manipulating that shit. I watched it live, the trading volume was like $40,000 for the hour it went up like 2000%
Click to expand...

You, me, Swami, Nik, RJ and Eisbaer need to start our own. Imagine the volume we could push (three figure acquisitions with precise coordination).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,907
Messages
58,401,755
Members
176,027
Latest member
jayjaxxxon626

Share this page

Back
Top