저자: PROTON · 외국인
다듬은 글
But that leads me to this question about crypto that uh Benjamin writes in. He says, "In 2007 at the USC Law School, Charlie said, "I'm not entitled to have an opinion on this subject unless I can state the arguments against my position better than the people who are supporting it." The question is, does this also apply to your Wall Street Journal article on banning cryptocurrencies?
And if yes, would you care to share the arguments against your position? Well, I I uh I don't think there are good arguments against my position. I think the people that oppose my position are idiots and and and so I don't think there is a rational argument against my position. This is an incredible thing.
Naturally people like to run gambling casinos where other people lose and the people who invented this cryptocrapo which is my name for it and sometimes I call it crypto crapo and sometimes I call it well crypto and it's just ridiculous that anybody would buy this stuff and it isn't you I can think of hardly nothing on earth that has done more good to the human race than currency, national currencies.
They were absolutely required to turn man from a goddamn successful ape into modern successful humans in human civilization because it enabled all these convenient exchanges. So if somebody says I'm going to create something that sort of replaces the national currency, it's like saying I'm going to replace the national air.
You know, it's it's as it is. It isn't even slightly stupid. It's massively stupid. And and of course it's very dangerous. And of course, the governments were totally wrong to permit it. And of course, I'm not proud of my country for allowing this crap, what I call the crypto to it's worthless. It's no good.
It's crazy. It'll do nothing but harm. It's antisocial to allow it. And the guy who made the correct decision on this is the Chinese leader. The Chinese leader took one look at crypto and he says, "Not in my China." And boom. Oh, well, there isn't any crypto in China. He's right and we're wrong and there is no good argument on the other side.
I can't can't supply it. So, does that counter what you said back at USC that you shouldn't have a position unless you counter I I do think you ought to be able you ought to be able to state a lot of issues. You ought to be say how big should the social safety net be? That's a place where reasonable minds can disagree and you should be able to state the case on the other side about as well as the case you believe in.
But when you're dealing with something as awful as crypto you're you uh it's just unspeakable. It's it's an absolute horror and and I'm ashamed of my country that so many people believe in this kind of crap and that the government allows it to exist. It is totally absolutely crazy stupid gambling with enormous house odds for the people on the other side and they cheat in addition to the cheating in the betting and it's just crazy.
So that is something there's only one correct answer for intelligent people there is just totally avoid it and avoid all the people that are promoting it. How do you feel about the gambling that took place at the Super Bowl and surrounding that and the legalized gambling taking place in this country at this point?
Well, it's not as bad as crypto. I I I I don't think there's much harm in betting a modest amount you can afford on a Super Bowl game. that that strikes me as pretty, you know, particular if you do it with a friend and not with a bookie. And so I I don't I don't have the same feeling. I obviously don't think you should have a gambling compulsion to run around betting against odds.
If you take all the money that I have bet against odds in my whole life, I don't think it's more than a few thousand dollars.
Comments 0