Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/gray
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
✳️ dcposch on daimo
@dcposch.eth
Important thread. The compromise is full liberty (Mill's harm principle) for what's allowed, but legal limits on what is convenient. https://x.com/bpodgursky/status/1902769150532989130
4 replies
5 recasts
45 reactions
✳️ dcposch on daimo
@dcposch.eth
"Accredited investor" laws are a similar compromise. It's a euphemistic term. If you have >$1m or make >$200k a year, you are automatically accredited. If not, you have to pass an accounting exam. Is it perfect? No. But it's probably saved a whole lot of people from left curve exploitation.
0 reply
5 recasts
18 reactions
keccers
@keccers.eth
I think about this all the time. It is heartening to me to hear someone like you share this
0 reply
1 recast
3 reactions
Mac Budkowski ᵏ
@macbudkowski
That's why I'm closer to paternalistic libertarianism
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Trigs
@trigs
Doesn't it always boil down to continuing to improve the method that is used to decide what the legal limits are? Central planning may always be an "abject failure", but decentralized planning still hasn't been fully tested. I feel like decentralized planning is what libertarianism actually wants, they just don't yet have the framework to fully comprehend how that would work in a way that doesn't compromise individual sovereignty.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction