pull down to refresh

Careful not to overextend the message. People can be amazing or shitty regardless of money, even regardless of reputation. But both are signals worth attending to, so long as you're aware of the nature of those signals, their generative story, and where they can mislead.
The bidrectional connection between money and speech -- and speech and transaction -- is very useful to contextualize this. Here is one of my favorite narratives on the topic.
Yeah I remember that thread. Bitcoin can only as much be for enemies as freedom is. And guess what, freedom really is for enemies.
I still think I don't get it, sorry. My dumbass question is: how is transactional/monetary freedom linked to actual reputation?
reply
The original statement is about the tie between money and reputation. In the pure state, when things are working cleanly, money is analogous to a type of reputation: it's the score for how much service your actions have rendered to the world, in aggregate. If you read Mises, that's what you will take away.
If you're a mostly sane person living in actual reality who is not totally deluded by some kind of ideological bagholding, you will also recognize many ways in which this formulation goes obviously wrong, at least for any semantics meaningful for normal life. But that doesn't mean there's no signal in it.
reply