What does it mean then?
Google it.
I mean you don't have to Google it you already know what it means.
But Google it anyway.
Oh yeah, what you doing in this situation?
Checkmate!
Fear based logic is not insightful.
It's the standard.
I have literally been robbed of assets you describe above as risk-off.
That was, indeed, the entire point of me saying it.
When you have been robbed of >$1M of your assets, you will have the benefit of experience that will enable you to secure your assets from such vectors of harm.
Being fearless is not being brave. It's being food.
There are risks. Mitigating risks is what is necessary to preserve capital. Calling mitigations that are necessary 'fear based' is foolhardy, and invites the rewards of lacking reasonable fear.
Reason is not the enemy, and fear is reasonable when there are predators.
It's odd how you fully believe that you aren't making a case for Bitcoin right now.
Literally every Bitcoiner is going to tell you that all these things you talk about are exactly why you get into Bitcoin. There's an entire culture and series of memes that revolves around this exact problem and how Bitcoin solves it.
And here you are saying you've found a better solution.
And that solution is actually communism with a barter system.
It really doesn't get much more ironic than that.
I am baffled by the idea of reciprocity and gratitude for kindness to be Communism. Stalin is surely rolling over in his grave. Neither is it barter. There's never a quid pro quo, 'I'll do this if you do that.'
Perhaps you didn't grasp the details of the theft in the event I ever shared them, but BTC would not at all have been any kind of barrier to the fraud. Lawyers were involved, but lawyers cost money, even if it's BTC they charge, and the courts are designed to make tort actions expensive, even highly weighted in favor of deep pocketed transnational corporations that can keep throwing motions at the courts for decades, just waiting til you die and forfeit the case.
If your BTC wallet is the property at stake you can't spend it on your legal case. You make maxi sounds here for some reason I can't fathom. You still mad about that SSI thing?
Ha well continue being baffled by it because it's the literal definition of grassroots communism.
What exactly do you think communism is on a small scale?
Give what you can; take what you need.
Have you heard this before?
Communism.
The only differences between large scale and small scale communism are voluntarism (small scale communists voluntary participate) and centralization (someone has to be in charge of distribution and determining who needs what). Obviously these are not small differences and lead to exactly where they lead to.
You're response in referencing Stalin... the most notoriously fascist government ever... and then equating it to small-scale communism is just... no.
Give what you can; take what you need.
But that's not what I said, or what is happening. I provide what they need, and they provide what I need. I don't take, and they don't take. It's just reciprocity. It's not governance. Sometimes I have to accept money instead of chocolate chip cookies, but I try to avoid that when I can.
Stalin IS Communism. Society isn't instituted. We can disagree.