Patrick is too polite to mention it, but frauds work much better if the fraudsters are also fully integrated into the political machine of the people nominally investigating the fraud.

▲

tptacek 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't think that's in evidence. Institutionalized and ideologically-driven apathy towards the fraud, sure, but that's not uncommon (see: the defense industry; the finance industry).

	▲	learingsci 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		A distinction without a difference imo. I think most people rightfully surmise the defense and financial industries are rife with, if not outright fraud, at least waste and abuse. We could use better language perhaps.

▲

laidoffamazon 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[flagged]

▲

joe_mamba 5 hours ago | parent [-]

>cryptoracist

He hates cryptographers?

▲

SketchySeaBeast 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The man has nothing nice to say about Bigfoot.

▲

renewiltord 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The alternative explanation that he is against cryptocurrency actually is true.

	▲	SketchySeaBeast 8 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Seems to be a bad use of "racist".

▲

laidoffamazon 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cryptoracist

▲

joe_mamba 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

So it's a made up term from people who want to discredit people they don't like by calling them "secret racist" without having any proof.

▲

renewiltord 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I should warn you that the user you are replying to is a crypto-paedophile. Be careful. There is no evidence to describe how he might retaliate.

▲

laidoffamazon 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

All terms are made up by humans

▲

joe_mamba 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Yeah but calling someone a racist is a serious accusation, you better bring receipts or be liable for defamation. Calling them a "secret racist" instead isn't the workaround that absolves you from this.

	▲	dragonwriter 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> Yeah but calling someone a racist is a serious accusation, you better bring receipts or be liable for defamation There are a large number of countries with their own systems of law, and its possible that in one of them calling someone a racist might be subject to defamation law, but in most I am aware of that's going to be a problem because its not even a well-enough-defined fact claim to be legally true or false.
	▲	tptacek 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You cannot in fact be made liable for defamation for calling someone a racist. (Patrick, a close friend I have known for many years, is not a racist.)

▲

mikkupikku 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Crypto[insult] is just a shorthand for saying "I don't actually have evidence to support my accusation."

▲

mock-possum 3 hours ago | parent [-]

No, it’s a term for a particular brand of racism -

Like complimenting someone for being ‘articulate,’ or ‘one of the good ones.’ Sounds innocent enough, until you understand the racist underpinnings.

	▲	mikkupikku 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		See above, where it is being used as an insult without any evidence to back it up. This is the most common usage, and usage defines the true meaning of the word.

▲

christkv 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Its hilarious how short human memory is. To me Minnesota just seems like a replay of Tammany Hall in NYC

▲

tptacek 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Then I think you need to read more about Tammany Hall, because it was not simply a widespread pattern of fraud in social services.

	▲	christkv 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There was few social services at the time. It was a patronage system. Different rewards but buying votes all the same. My point is that patronage is a long storied American tradition so I don’t know why people are al shocked that such schemes are still ongoing. Republican and anti castro cubans is or was a similar patronage system.