@arbusto is on PowPing!

PowPing is a place where you can earn Bitcoin simply by socializing, for FREE.
Never tried Bitcoin? It's OK! Just come, socialize, and earn Bitcoin.
Check out arbusto's activities
Total Economy: 0.02 USD
A world where "property" is anonymous, is a world where there is no private property. Cypherpunks (not all anarchists, I dont even think cypherpunks are an-archist) are wrong thinking that possession of keys has anything to do with private property. They are not going to win for several reasons, but if they will, the would create a system closest to libertarian comunism than to capitalism. When you argue with a comunist about property, they can tell you one of those: a) they are fighting for PERSONAL property (not PRIVATE). Thats the usual stalinist way of thinking and when you study the nature of this, you can see that it is actually a concession from the state, who by exercising property rights will determine what you can acquire and what use u must give it. b) they want to forbide property, so there will be just possession. That s the typicall answer form a comunist libertarian. And it is what cypherpunks propose too. This is just imposible, you can remove ownership as much as you can make cows fly. You can only throw them off the cliff and keep them off the ground momentarily. Private property is about what you can build without distubing others, not what the state gives you. Private property is based on the legitimate acquisition of goods, is what you can produce, not what anyone can give you nor what you can possess. It is the ability of doing what you want with the thing, the right to use and abuse how you want it, not others. On the other hand, private property of intangibles is impossible. You can only appropriate scarce, tangible and rival things. The same way that what we call "intelectual property" is not a real property, and it is just, again, a right concession from the state to seek and chase others using it, utxos are not a property. You dont own the utxos, you just own a concession from the system to do a certain things with them. The system will determine what you can do with "your" utxos, not you. You just can decide what system lets you to decide. You can not destroy utxos, you cant do what you want if the system doesn t let you. When you own a scarce, tangible and rival thing you can do whatever, even destroy it. You can do what you want with it. Not in the case of intangibles. So we hear cypherpunks saying all this seductive words full of young rebellion we must think if they can keep the represantation of scarce, tangible and rival things in a intangible system when the intangible system don t follow the tangible rules. I honestly think they are fighting against the reality, not against the state. They are fighting to eliminate the private property, and individual liberty; not to guarantee them.
Actually, if you have a private key, then no one else can do anything with these utxo's you own. And if you can transfer them, it means you were able to transfer some kind of property you owned. The fact these goods are intangible doesn't remove the fact that these are assets, in fact, this is how the law conceives those: as "digital assets"
arbusto replied:
Yes. By possessing keys you have the ability to exclude others from the rights granted by the system, but you do not obtain the right to abuse the utxo. The system will decide if you can op_return or not. If you can p2p or not. At last, nodes decide. They are the ones who can abuse Bitcoin. They supose to don´t have incentives in doing so, as owners dont have incentive in destroying their property. When an utxo is used to tokenize something, it is business who will give rights to their users, using bitcoin. The possession of such of a key (like a coloured bitcoin or so) could have a very different associated rights, but it is not real property... full property rights can only be given in tangible things
The distinction between personal and private property has nothing to do with the state. The same distinction is made by socialist anarchists. What makes property private rather than personal is that your use of the property affects other people. Like if you claim as your private property the right to fish a fishery, that's not the same as a personal possession, because your use of that property can affect other people's lives and the health of species and ecosystems. People should be allowed to have personal property but they can't have private property because in order to have actual democracy we have to have control over decisions about resources that affect our lives.
arbusto replied:
Whoever decide what affect to others or not, is the real owner. He, she or they are the owners. Individuals (not people) owns scarce, tangible and rival things. If a thing with those attributes has no owner, it is a "res nullius" and it is susceptible of appropriation. It is not about what people should do... it is about what they do.
borisjavier tipped:
0.02 USD
1 year ago
arbusto replied:
Whoever decide that in "personal property" is the real owner who use the thing as he/she/they want. The owner can give a concession to whoever wants, thats owners do. To be owner, is what everyone wants. Who asks for equality, want to decide the use of other people s property. Who asks for liberty, all what they want is to be free of poverty by become an owner.
mungojelly replied:
Personal property is just things you have. You can keep other people from stealing the things just by hiding them or protecting them. Private property is actually about relationships between people. You need people to come work with the private property in order to make money from it, so you can't just hide it from them or keep them from having access to it. To get the full value of that type of ownership you have to give workers the ability to use the property to produce value while also denying them the fruits of that labor, that's the point of tension. It's not about people taking things from you that are just your things that you personally use. It's about people taking control for themselves of things that you say they own but they're who has to go there every day and produce all of the value there.
arbusto replied:
You could not need no one to work on my tenth house because I am good building. Private property is about dominium of scarce, tangible and rival things. It is the right to exclude other in this dominium. No capitalist deny the fruits of the worker labor but they know the value of invest their savings, what let the worker produce faster and easier. If people cant invest their savings or they have no incentive on doing it becausesomeone else will take its fruits, the worker will need to work harder. Who would say what is personal? Who would say how many houses I can keep? This is not just the real owner of the houses and the one who let u use his property, but will becoume ur owner too. In communism we are slaves, if u can not keep what u can build, if u have to give someone else ur work, ur saves or ur capital, u are just a slave. There is always an owner, the owner decides the future of the things and take the rents.
arbusto replied:
U say personal property is about people taking control for therself. I say its about theft. Capitalists are people who would be stolen by others. It can happen once, after the first time, people hide all they can, and if they cant hide, they quiet working because the people who decide what is personal and what it is not always take more than what they produce. To be honest is to not spend more than what u produce. In communism the incentive is to work less than others, because u can not keep what u produce. Majority in an assambly, or the party, will tell u what u can keep. Communism is the most terrorifyng thing we face. It is about a ruler asking cows to fly and persecuting them if not.
borisjavier replied:
"Private property is actually about relationships between people. You need people to come work with the private property in order to make money from it, so you can't just hide it from them or keep them from having access to it." That's actually BULLSHIT. Those days when you needed operators to drive the machinery are gone, automation are a challenge fucking socialists didn't count on. The truth is whatever you own is your PRIVATE PROPERTY, from your life to your entire company -marxists means of production-. If you have employees and you hire them to work for you, and they agree to earn a salary for what they do, it doesn't mean they own your property, it just means they get what they needed (money in exchange) and you get what you needed (man-hours). The rest is pure socialist Bullshit.