[TeMPOraL]

Still, if you break a law, you should face consequences, whether you're doing right or wrong. That's the point of civil disobedience - willing to accept the punishment for going with your conscience.

Then there's a difference between breaking the law out for moral reasons and breaking them because they're inconvenient and you could profit more by ignoring them.

[dmichulke]

About "profit by ignoring them":

- Is food profit?

- When I'm hungry -is food profit?

- When my family is hungry and I don't pay taxes in order to buy food today - is it profit?

- What if I don't pay taxes in order to send my kid to a school?

- What if I don't pay taxes in order to send my kid to a good school?

- What if I collect taxes from people who could otherwise send their kids to school?

There are a million possible definitions of profit and I bet that to each of them I can invent a scenario where it's simply unjust.

[TeMPOraL]

And for each of your scenarios I can invent two in which your actions are just parasitic, in which you freeload on your community. It's easier to make a profit when you don't play by the same rules as everyone else. Also, if you run a startup, you're likely not struggling to feed your kids, so the moral picture you're painting does not apply.

[mike_hearn]

Maybe Ripple Labs were engaged in civil disobedience, then?

Or is it impossible for organised groups of people like Ripple and Uber to engage in civil disobedience, in your view?