Bitcoin: no angel investors, only Faustian bargains

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Bitcoin: no angel investors, only Faustian bargains

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:

What can someone possibly get out of owning a structure like that? I mean it's almost literally a treehouse sitting on a buoy in the open ocean. What could you do in it? I guess you could gamble or rape, but you could only gamble if you had some kind of satellite internet.

Every high wind is a gamble!

# ? Apr 18, 2019 19:39

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 14:40

Fatkraken: Jun 23, 2005; Fun-time is over.

I think the idea for some of them is for the structure to be nominally occupied but able to be a place to base legal entities. Others want to have servers there to host illegal content, and some genuinely want to actually live there because they think being in international waters makes them immune to laws.

# ? Apr 18, 2019 19:42

D-Pad: Jun 28, 2006

If you have never read the story of Sealand I highly recommend you do!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand

quote:

Attack in 1978 and the Sealand Rebel Government
In August 1978, Alexander Achenbach, who describes himself as the Prime Minister of Sealand, hired several German and Dutch mercenaries to spearhead an attack on Sealand while Bates and his wife were in England.[8] Achenbach had disagreed with Bates over plans to turn Sealand into a luxury hotel and casino with fellow German and Dutch businessmen.[19] They stormed the platform with speedboats, Jet Skis and helicopters, and took Bates's son Michael hostage. Michael was able to retake Sealand and capture Achenbach and the mercenaries using weapons stashed on the platform. Achenbach, a German lawyer who held a Sealand passport, was charged with treason against Sealand[8] and was held unless he paid DM 75,000 (more than US$35,000 or �23,000).[20] The governments of the Netherlands, Austria and Germany petitioned the British government for his release, but the United Kingdom disavowed his imprisonment, citing the 1968 court decision.[3] Germany then sent a diplomat from its London embassy to Sealand to negotiate for Achenbach's release. Roy Bates relented after several weeks of negotiations and subsequently claimed that the diplomat's visit constituted de facto recognition of Sealand by Germany.[8]

Following the former's repatriation, Achenbach and Gernot P�tz established a government in exile, sometimes known as the Sealand Rebel Government or Sealandic Rebel Government, in Germany.

# ? Apr 18, 2019 20:01

Bleusilences: Jun 23, 2004; Be careful for what you wish for.

Seastead movement: we are reinventing the wheel by going to tribulation that our ancestor went trough to create a somewhat stable society.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bceePdFruU

# ? Apr 18, 2019 20:02

mojo1701a: Oct 9, 2008; Oh, yeah. Loud and clear. Emphasis on LOUD!
~ David Lee Roth

Disappointed no one's ever considered seasteading as Waterworld cosplay.

# ? Apr 18, 2019 20:28

Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester: Oct 3, 2000

D-Pad posted:

If you have never read the story of Sealand I highly recommend you do!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand

That actually sounds hilarious and loving awesome at the same time. Looking forward to Statham starring in the action comedy based on it. Also love that there's literally a guy named Putz involved.

# ? Apr 18, 2019 21:09

The Rabbi T. White: Jul 17, 2008

Why not just get a loving boat?

# ? Apr 18, 2019 21:41

Pochoclo: Feb 4, 2008; No...; Clapping Larry

Bleusilences posted:

Seastead movement: we are reinventing the wheel by going to tribulation that our ancestor went trough to create a somewhat stable society.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bceePdFruU

Don't need no FDA, just gonna chug a big tankard full of loving Thalidomide with the boys in the middle of nowhere

# ? Apr 18, 2019 21:48

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

The Rabbi T. White posted:

Why not just get a loving boat?

Then you're subject to admirality law.

# ? Apr 18, 2019 21:53

Powershift: Nov 23, 2009

Yeah, if you ever have to recognize the authority of a court with a gold fringed flag, you're already hosed.

# ? Apr 18, 2019 21:58

orange juche: Mar 14, 2012

I googled admiralty law and clicked the first link and i got a loving pile of whoa, it's like timecube

bearded heretic posted:

Bearded Heretic
1 year ago
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CITIZEN?
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CITIZEN?
STOP BELIEVING THE MYTH!
WE ARE ALL SOVEREIGN!
Nobody can prove their UNITED STATES CITIZEN-SHIP!
It is a myth.
It doesn't exist.
It is public relations.
It is propaganda.
It is just a way to get you to obey people to pay the group of strangers, to give them money.
It is a myth and demonstrably so.
There is plenty of evidence to prove this.
That nobody has any "citizenship".
There are no citizens, there are no "nations".
There are no "Cities", and "States", they are all fictional.

Even if you do have a "Birth Certificate" it is impossible to prove that you are a citizen. It's not even in the realm of possibility.

This is not a religious thing where people believe something without evidence, by overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

That there is no such thing as a citizen.

They lead you to believe that so you will comply!

This is one of those times you can prove a negative.

You can prove overwhelming evidence, irrefutable evidence, that there is no such thing as a "citizen".

No such thing as "STATES". "QUOTING" from Black's Law dictionary, is not evidence.

That's like saying the evidence that the 'constitution' and "CODE" apply to men and women, is section 1 of the internal revenue CODE. It is a fallacy that the CODE applied because the CODE said so.

So lets get to this nonsense that somebody with a "Birth Certificate can be proven to be a "citizen".

It is absolute falsehood.

First we have to discuss exactly what a "citizen" is.
We have to define our terms so we know what we are talking about.

First we have to discuss exactly what a "citizen" is.
We have to define our terms so we know what we are talking about.

Citizen: member of the body politic owing a duty of allegiance, in return for a duty of protection...these are reciprocal obligations, one a consideration for the other.
Luria v. 231 US 9,22.

Duty of protection
+
Duty of allegiance
=
Citizenship

And you have got to have the 'Duty of Allegiance'.

So we know that a "STATE" is a 'Body Politic.'

It is not a geographical location.

It is a Body Politic organized under a 'government'; occupying a certain territory.

People and a Territory is not a state.
They are not the same thing.

This has got to be a "Body Politic", organized under a "Government"; occupying a territory.

So let us prove how we go about proving that there is not a "citizen" whether you have a birth certificate or not.

To have a "citizen" like pointed out above, in court has been laid out many many times, you have to be a member of the body politic owing a duty of "allegiance", in return for "Duty" of "Protection"?

From what?

From whom?

Yourself?

And it is that duty of protection where it all COLLAPSES!

I, will demonstrate two ways that nobody is a citizen. Whether they have a "Birth Certificate" or not.

If you look at cases like this, and there are literally thousands of them, Canada, Australia, and England.
I'm sure every jurisdiction has it.

If you look at BOWERS v. DeVITO, 686 F,2nd, 618 (7thCir. 1982) Cir. 1961).
But there is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.

It is monstrous if the state fails to protect its residents against such predators but it does not violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or, we suppose, any other provision of the Constitution.
The Constitution is a negative charter of negative liberties; it tells the state to let people alone; it does not require the federal government or the state to provide services, even so elementary a service as maintaining law and order.

Discrimination in providing protection.

There is no duty to protect anybody.
Even for madmen.

The government is under no duty to you, me, or anyone else. There will be some that will claim that.

Then there is no duty of allegiance.

The "reciprocal obligations" are gone. no duty to protect.

No duty of allegiance.

You are not a citizen.

There is no "body politic", because, hey... there are no citizens.

If there are no citizens and no body politic there is no STATE.

And that means that it is not a government, it means literally men and women forcing you to pay them.
That's all they are. Or, like Lysander wrote, just a gang of killers, thieves and liars.

So lets look at just the facts. Not what the 'courts' have said. I think they are telling the truth, there is no duty to protect.

If we look at just the facts.
How did 'government' come about?
Were you ever asked?
Ever given a freely given choice whether you wanted this?
No!
Of course not!
All support is pay or go to jail.
It is compulsory.
If they were interested in protecting you, your life, liberty, and property, they wouldn't be violating it by forcing you to pay them.
Or go to jail.

If we look at just the facts.

How did 'government' come about?

Were you ever asked?

Ever given a freely given choice whether you wanted this?

No!
Of course not!

All support is pay or go to jail.
It is compulsory.

If they were interested in protecting you, your life, liberty, and property, they wouldn't be violating it by forcing you to pay them.

Or go to jail.

Remember. If I did things like the government types and I forced you to give me money, would you consider me a criminal?

The same standard applies to everybody.
Government is made up of people.
It is just men and women.

That is it.

There is no government they are just men and women forcing you to pay them and we all can agree that is criminal.

So. Because they are forcing you to pay.
No "duty" is created, therefore there is no reciprocal obligation, of allegiance.

So. Once again.
It all collapses.

You do not have a duty of allegiance.
You do not have a duty of protection.
You are not a citizen.
The facts are against it.
Totally against it.

If there are no citizens; there is no body politic; no body politic; there is no STATE; there is no government.

They are just people.
That we can prove.

That is all we need to do to collapse this idea that anybody is a citizen.

Even if they have a "Birth Certificate".

Because it still goes into the same basic operating presumption "Well if you're born in New York then the constitution and laws apply.
You're a citizen."

No!

There is not a single shred of evidence to support that argument.
Zero.

"But you are here in New York."

Got that!
What facts do you have that the law applies to me, though?

"Well the law says!"

That is circular logic.
It is a logical fallacy.
It is not evidence it applies in the first place.

So stop buying the myth, the lie, that you are a citizen.

You are not.

All people are sovereign, and have all of their rights.

# ? Apr 18, 2019 22:07

mojo1701a: Oct 9, 2008; Oh, yeah. Loud and clear. Emphasis on LOUD!
~ David Lee Roth

orange juche posted:

I googled admiralty law and clicked the first link and i got a loving pile of whoa, it's like timecube

All those words because of a complete misunderstanding. When dealing with admiralty court, you need to produce a berth certificate.

# ? Apr 18, 2019 23:05

orange juche: Mar 14, 2012

I wonder what sovcits think of bitcoin?

# ? Apr 18, 2019 23:08

Mozi: Apr 4, 2004; Forms change so fast
Time is moving past
Memory is smoke
Gonna get wider when I die; Nap Ghost

citizen... ship

citizen...... ship

.... my god

# ? Apr 18, 2019 23:12

Powershift: Nov 23, 2009

Mozi posted:

citizen... ship

citizen...... ship

.... my god

get this....

berth certificate

# ? Apr 18, 2019 23:18

Yay!: Dec 21, 2018

Powershift posted:

get this....

berth certificate

And if they aren't subject to any country's laws, they aren't entitled to their protection either - so if anyone fancies taking the place over and have suitable armaments - they're hosed.

# ? Apr 18, 2019 23:46

divabot: Jun 17, 2015; A polite little mouse!

Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:

What can someone possibly get out of owning a structure like that? I mean it's almost literally a treehouse sitting on a buoy in the open ocean. What could you do in it? I guess you could gamble or rape, but you could only gamble if you had some kind of satellite internet.

he didn't own it, he was renting it from a company trying to establish a seastead franchise

i have heard rumours that the Thai authorities found drugs on board their sovereign metal coffin, which is why they're talking up the death penalty. of course, i can't substantiate this, and i'm sure no honest and trustworthy bitcoin libertarian in thailand for the "culture" would be involved in such things,

# ? Apr 18, 2019 23:50

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

I think the real implicit religious belief here is that once they have magically escaped the burden of the law, the takers, the shitheads, the non-producers, the blacks and Jews and everyone else who doesn't embrace the true thought of Rand, they will be so incredibly productive and wealthy as to make up for, you know, living in a rusty shack on the ocean.

Alternately they all played Bioshock and went "HEY NOW..."

# ? Apr 19, 2019 00:17

wid: Sep 7, 2005; Living in paradise (only bombed once)

Nessus posted:

I don't understand. This sounds like it discourages me from hoarding wealth? Is not the purpose of an economy to give me a very large number, and all the implicit power and influence that goes with it - and then to protect that number forever, so that I am king until the cosmos ends (for surely there was nothing before I was born and will be nothing after I die)

You're not supposed to hoard wealth in the form of currency because that defeats the very purpose of currency: to be a stabilizing tool of trade. Small inflation incentivise the spending of currency into something else, a product for instance, so the economy would keep moving and grow. If you don't want your wealth to diminish then invest it in things that do not diminish over time like land or some precious metals or you invest them in businesses. But even they're not guaranteed. Bitcoiners are lazy idiots who want their "wealth" to grow without them doing anything.

It's a poo poo investment because it has no inherent value. It's a poo poo currency because it is deflationary so you are better off hoarding it. Even if in some dumb reality where Bitcoin actually became a staple of the economy, it would just end up as commodity where people could hoard it and use something else as currency to buy and sell Bitcoin.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 00:33

ghosTTy: Sep 22, 2008

Monero is digital gold.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 00:35

mojo1701a: Oct 9, 2008; Oh, yeah. Loud and clear. Emphasis on LOUD!
~ David Lee Roth

divabot posted:

honest and trustworthy bitcoin libertarian in thailand for the "culture" would be involved in such things,

By the way, what is Roger Ver up to these days?

# ? Apr 19, 2019 00:56

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

wid posted:

Bitcoiners are lazy idiots who want their "wealth" to grow without them doing anything.

Oh I agree with you but I think this is the actual refined goal. They want to be rich forever because they had their computer on in 2010 or just, you know, because. Even people who "make" bitcoin just own a bunch of computers burning electricity, but the wealth* comes from an asset they own rather than - ugh - labor.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 01:17

ChristsDickWorship: Dec 7, 2004; Annihilate your demons

Nessus posted:

I think the real implicit religious belief here is that once they have magically escaped the burden of the law, the takers, the shitheads, the non-producers, the blacks and Jews and everyone else who doesn't embrace the true thought of Rand, they will be so incredibly productive and wealthy as to make up for, you know, living in a rusty shack on the ocean.

They're actually the most reasonable libertarians, having given up on dismantling existing civilization and choosing instead to gently caress off into the ocean

# ? Apr 19, 2019 05:21

McSpanky: Jan 16, 2005

ChristsDickWorship posted:

They're actually the most reasonable libertarians, having given up on dismantling existing civilization and choosing instead to gently caress off into the ocean

Really we should be propagandizing the benefits of seasteading.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 06:21

IPCRESS: May 27, 2012

McSpanky posted:

Really we should be ~~propagandizing the benefits of~~ forcing sovcits into seasteading.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 06:31

Powershift: Nov 23, 2009

Just take them to international waters and throw em in the ocean, they're a boat, they'll figure it out.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 06:40

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

Powershift posted:

Just take them to international waters and throw em in the ocean, they're a boat, they'll figure it out.

Unburdened by the moochers and the statist system they will surely thrive.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 09:12

klafbang: Nov 18, 2009; Clapping Larry

ghosTTy posted:

Monero is comedy gold.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 10:20

ghosTTy: Sep 22, 2008

https://masteringmonero.com/book/Mastering%20Monero%20First%20Edition%20by%20SerHack%20and%20Monero%20Community.pdf

# ? Apr 19, 2019 11:05

Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester: Oct 3, 2000

By New York Times Bestselling Author SerHack and the Monero Community

# ? Apr 19, 2019 13:51

Razorwired: Dec 7, 2008; It's about to start!

Yeah people try to go stateless all the time. 99% of them don't know what "the government protects citizens" actually means.

The land locked version is my brother in law(a federally employed Strike Team Leader in wildfire control) always meets some prepper begging the crews to shift lines to guard their compound.

He gets a huge kick out of informing them that he's the federal government they spend all their time trashing.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 15:51

klafbang: Nov 18, 2009; Clapping Larry

Should have called them pedo pogs instead.

# ? Apr 19, 2019 15:56

LethalGeek: Nov 4, 2009

I'm 99% sure we have, several times.

# ? Apr 20, 2019 03:00

mojo1701a: Oct 9, 2008; Oh, yeah. Loud and clear. Emphasis on LOUD!
~ David Lee Roth

LethalGeek posted:

I'm 99% sure we have, several times.

That's nonce-cents.

# ? Apr 20, 2019 03:47

Alan Smithee: Jan 4, 2005; A man becomes preeminent, he's expected to have enthusiasms.

Enthusiasms, enthusiasms...

Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:

What can someone possibly get out of owning a structure like that? I mean it's almost literally a treehouse sitting on a buoy in the open ocean. What could you do in it? I guess you could gamble or rape, but you could only gamble if you had some kind of satellite internet.

what does that leave you with?

# ? Apr 21, 2019 13:26