pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @jbschirtzinger 14h \ parent \ on: DISCUSS: "If you ever made a sat from spam, you are a bad actor" bitcoin
The analogy is meant to point out where you draw the purity line with money is arbitrary for most folks. You can say that someone's opinion is irrelevant because you think they aren't "pure enough" whatever that means—but if you move it to what you will receive you generally find people will accept money from most anyone or anywhere. It makes the ethical objection irrelevant, of course, because you are still a whore, whether you spam nfts or take a zillion bitcoin from someone who does.
You missed the point of the analogy entirely. If you pay a stripper then service and the medium of exchange / unit of account are entirely distinct.
If you add content to the medium of exchange the only way is down, it's impossible to make the medium of exchange more valuable, you can only make it less valuable, distorting by diluting its function, adding noise.
These experiments were all made on shitcoins and they all devalued against bitcoin.
reply
Actually, I made the analogy, so I know what the point is I was making, and it wasn't the one you are advocating.
What you value is the thing I'm drawing attention to, not how you pay for it. That you value sin is an easy price to calculate--it is paid in blood. It matters not what currency you use to purchase it.
reply
I made the analogy of cumming on the dollar note.
reply
Yes, yes you did. If you were referring to that analogy, then I misunderstood what you were alluding to. Since I also made an analogy, it was not clear to me which one you meant.
reply