#bitcoin-wittgenstein-assets

Saturday, 06 October, Year 4 d.Tr. | Author: Mircea Popescu
BTC-Mining

I assume he's spending user deposits. Maybe he's using his own money, but I don't think he has enough to cover lawyer fees. He said in the meeting that he wants BitcoinGlobal to pay for the lawyer."

Wow... nice theymos, nice... He just "assumed" it.

mircea_popescu
Needs to be preserved for posteriority.
BTC-Mining
That's exactly the kind of things I was talking about when people state their opinion/speculation as facts... Seriously...
____Atlas_____
Theymos wouldn't say that without a good hunch. He knows how much GLBSE has in total.
mircea_popescu
Seems rather convincing to me too.
BTC-Mining
Yeah, but he doesn't know.
____Atlas_____
Well, we don't know if the moon is hollow. Sometimes an assumption is reasonable.
mircea_popescu
"His name is Nefario. How could you people not see this coming?" this is so retarded. What's this, a coloring book ?
____Atlas_____
lol
BTC-Mining
You don't start executing someone for murder, than investigate if he was the murdered.
____Atlas_____
BTC-Mining: Well Nefario is disobeying GLBSE's bylaws. He is technically already violating policy left and right.
BTC-Mining
Yes, but he hasn't stolen anything... the first claim by theymos was stating it as a fact, when he was just speculating. He hasn't been proven to have stolen anything*. It should have been stated as such that it was an opinion/guess and why. Not put it forward as a fact. An opinion is not a fact.
____Atlas_____
Here are the facts:
1. GLBSE has had very little revenue ; very little profit if any
2. Assuming the funds available are just user funds and he wants to spend some of them for lawyer fees, then it is reasonable to think he is embezzling funds.
mircea_popescu
BTC-Mining Things presented as fact but w/o acompanying documentation should be read as opinions. Something's not a fact by virtue of carrying a "fact" tag given by the author.
BTC-Mining
No... in my book you write them as "I think/believe/would guess that X because Y".
mircea_popescu
You can write it any way you please, but unless it's "here's so and so and here's the proof" it ain't a fact.
BTC-Mining
Not simply state X. It confuses people as having been witnessed by the claimer.
mircea_popescu
I guess it's a difference of approach.
assbot
[MPEX] [S.MPOE] 6700 @ 0.00037432 = 2.5079 BTC [+]
[MPEX] [S.MPOE] 5900 @ 0.00037546 = 2.2152 BTC [+]
BTC-Mining
Well the thing is, by formulating it as a fact, one could believe theymos actually saw that funds were being moved away from the reserve.
mircea_popescu
Maybe he did.
BTC-Mining
There's a reason the English language has words such as "could, might, guess, believe, think, etc." He later said "I assume he's spending user deposits. Maybe he's using his own money, but I don't think he has enough to cover lawyer fees. He said in the meeting that he wants BitcoinGlobal to pay for the lawyer."
____Atlas_____
I am just finding it hard to be empathic towards someone who closed down a mutually owned company without clear consent
mircea_popescu
You're comitting the exact converse of the error you protest it seems. Theymos saw something, did he ?
BTC-Mining
Acknowledging he might be using his own money, and that he just claimed he stole fund because he didn't think Nefario had the money for a lawyer.
mircea_popescu
Now look. if i go into a house with a girl and come out with a body have you witnessed a murder or not ?
BTC-Mining
Nope.
mircea_popescu
Well that's the problem. You haven't, but in your place I have, and i doubt we'll ever agree on this point.
BTC-Mining
Okay... so assuming you didn't see what you think you saw and there was no body, you'd go around claiming a murder?
mircea_popescu
Well what did i see ?
____Atlas_____
It depends how large the building was.
BTC-Mining
I'd probably report it stating I saw someone carrying what seemed like a body out of a house. I wouldn't go stating I saw a murder.
mircea_popescu
____Atlas_____ 100 sqft
____Atlas_____
Yep, murder. If the building is 100 sqft. If it's a large complex I would have doubt.
mircea_popescu
Well BTC-Mining you're in a very studied minority, and i don't think you're particularly right, either.
BTC-Mining
I state what I see for what it is. If I'm just speculating, I'd present it as such.
FabianB_
In any case and whatever happend, nef should've known there's lots of negative gossip in the community if there are no clear statements from him, lol
mircea_popescu
BTC-Mining when you look at your computer do you see something that seems like a screen or an actual screen ?
BTC-Mining
I would say I see an actual screen.
mircea_popescu
Right. Because why ? Maybe you're wrong. Maybe it's something else.
BTC-Mining
Because I can see it up close and I know it to be a screen.
mircea_popescu
How close ?
BTC-Mining
Eh... you'd want a distance at which I'd claim or not claim to have seen something?
mircea_popescu
Fact of the matter is, knowledge is always assailable from a purely nominalist perspective. How you draw the lines is arbitrary. Gotta learn to live with people's many lines.
____Atlas_____
I try to look at the relevance of right and wrong in this case and to me any libel in this case is easily undone. So, really, the whole argument is non notable.
BTC-Mining
Yes. But that you decide to claim what you saw or not as a body, you still can't say you witnessed a murder.
mircea_popescu
BTC-Mining for the same reason you decide you saw a screen I decide I saw a murder. I judged myself close enough. But Atlas has it, it's not really a notable argument.
BTC-Mining
Eh, I suppose. You could reasonably assume a murder was committed.
mircea_popescu
The reason natural languages are natural is that you always have to begin communication by negotiating terms. There's never going to be a workable version were we instantly understand what the other means just by reading the words.
BTC-Mining
But you saw a body being carried out. As such you cannot claim that you saw the person carrying said body murdered someone. You can only guess or propose said person as the probable murderer. You can state the first as a fact, and the second as a proposition.
mircea_popescu
I never claimed I saw the guy murder someone. I just claimed i saw a murder.
BTC-Mining
Okay. So in your example it's fine then.
mircea_popescu
Yes, but it only becomes fine after you overcome your initial interpretation of what I said, which will always be the case no matter who or what.
BTC-Mining
But theymos, on the other hand, apparently didn't saw anything.
____Atlas_____
I like how we have deep philosophical discussions. This is Socrates grade stuff here.
BTC-Mining
But theymos still stated like it was set in stone "He is also illegally using user deposits to pay for his lawyer." without even seeing anything.
mircea_popescu
Well theymos is also an idiot. I was just using this as a convenient example. I'm not defending theymos wtf.
BTC-Mining
Well the whole argument was about how how presenting an opinion/guess as a fact is bad if you didn't directly witness the fact, as it creates confusion for the listener. Or at least that's what I was stating until you interupted me to say that anything presented as a fact is an opinion.
mircea_popescu
Yeah. Moreover, about how there's little choice in the matter : you're always going to create confusion. It's part of communication.
BTC-Mining
Yes, always going to be some confusion.
____Atlas_____
A fact is merely a unified vision of an arbitrary number of individuals.
mircea_popescu
Which is why we don't take forum shit *that* seriously. To keep our sanity. Especially if no corroboration or proof is offered.
BTC-Mining
I'm simply stating I'm quite astonished at the sheer amount of hearsay/opinion/etc. presented as facts instead of for what it is...
____Atlas_____
Perception is reality. Reality is facts. If a civilization agrees 2 + 2 = 5 it might as well be.
BTC-Mining
When I'm talking to people in person, I'm used to people being much clearer and honest about what is their opinion and what they claim as facts.
mircea_popescu
BTC-Mining you probably spend a lot of time in an academic environment.
BTC-Mining
I'm spending time with Canadians.
mircea_popescu
Haha ok
midnightmagic
Wittgenstein thought that most of what people say to one another is never fully understood.
mircea_popescu
midnightmagic did he say this ? or just think it ?
____Atlas_____
That is likely true, midnightmagic. As a absurdist-nihilist, it's hard for me to get into these kinds of arguments.
BTC-Mining
I suppose according to stereotypes, that makes perfect sense...
midnightmagic
mircea_popescu: Every conversation he had was apparently full of, "But what do you MEAN?" At least according to this book I read called "Wittgenstein's Poker"
mircea_popescu
Yeah.
reeses
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darĂ¼ber muss man schweigen.
mircea_popescu
.tr :en :de of the crooked reeses of women no straight cock was ever made
markac
mircea_popescu: "der schiefe reeses der Frauen nicht gerade Schwanz war jemals gemacht" (en to de, translate.google.com)
mircea_popescu
Sounds legit.
____Atlas_____
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Sounds pretty dogmatic to me
Comments feed : RSS 2.0. Leave your own comment below, or send a trackback.

2 Responses

  1. was ist reese

  2. Mircea Popescu`s avatar
    2
    Mircea Popescu 
    Sunday, 7 October 2012

    Ein dingle-dongle ticolensic.

Add your cents! »
    If this is your first comment, it will wait to be approved. This usually takes a few hours. Subsequent comments are not delayed.