They already know . They are trying to fool the people who are new or don ' t understand . They want banks 2 . 0 . We ' ll have the same system , the same groups controlling it , and the same inefficiencies from that control that make it too expensive to bank 1 . 5 billion poor adults . That ' s 1 . 5 billion adults and their kids who can ' t interact with the online economy because they have no banking option . Because of insidious assholes like those that back Blockstream . <| sep |> Deadlifting way too heavy with a weak upper body . Scaps weren ' t contracted and i wasn ' t sitting down on it , so my back was rolled to start with and it just sliced <| sep |> I disagree . There ' s no mystery in why people steal , it ' s well understood both economically and psychologically , and I ' d argue that understanding why it happens is an essential step in preventing it . You could argue that food stamps are , among other things , a response to people stealing due to poverty making them hungry . We addressed the problem of people stealing food with a solution that attempted to remove the root cause . Same goes for animal abuse . A great many psychologists have worked on figuring out why it happens , and those causes are important and necessary to understanding the approach most likely to solve the problem . It ' s also important because psychology has shown a strong link between animal abuse and abuse or murder of humans . By understanding why people abuse animals we can better tailor laws to help them so they don ' t later abuse people . Understanding why people want to do X is absolutely essential to passing laws regulating or prohibiting X if you want those laws to be effective . Admittedly , sometimes understanding the causes is more important on the enforcement end , police profile murderers to track and find them for example . But even with something you ' d imagine is clear cut , like murder , we ' ve actually to a rather complex and flexible system of laws , breaking murder into several categories including some categories where we define it as being not merely legally permitted but laudable self defense . But to get to the point where we decide that killing in self defense is acceptable , you have understand why a person would kill another person . Then you have to decide what , exactly , self defense is , because while you ' d think that is a settled matter there ' s plenty of room for disagreement . For example , was Zimmerman ' s killing of Trayvon Martin self defense ? He argued it was , he claimed Martin attacked him and he feared for his life quotes because that ' s the essential component in Florida . Others , like me , would argue that the claim to self defense is invalid because Zimmerman had been stalking Martin and provoked the incident which caused him to fear for his life . It seems wrong that a person can pick a fight then get away with murdering their victim when the victim starts to win the fight . But all of that must come from understanding why people would kill other people . Otherwise you wind up with a law that is , at absolute best , ineffective , and at worst will wind up hurting people .