Also ein Interessensverband, der sich auf die Fahnen geschrieben hat, die Gesamtheit de Bitcoin Community zu vertreten, auf Grundlage von Mitgliederpartizipierung und der sich deutlich von einer recht breiten Strömung dieser Community distanziert.

Eine demokratiebasierte Organisation, die einem grossen Teil der Teilnehmer nur einen streng begrenzten Raum gibt.

Da denke ich jetzt nochmal drüber nach.

Du vielleicht auch!

Joe


(Disclaimer: ich bin JP, Mitglied des Gründungsteams, spreche hier aber nicht im Namen des Verbandes sondern in meinem eigenen).

Stop by at ROOM77, Graefestrasse 77 tonight in case you are still in town.

I will be around there from about 6pm on and always like to talk Bitcoin .

Joe

Die spezifischen Menschen, denen wir in Uganda helfen wollen, haben Decken und haben was zu essen.

Die Idee, dass wir Europäer 'soziale Kompetenz' nach Afrika exportieren sollten, will ich nicht mal kommentieren. Die Situation, in der dieser Kontinent ist, ist nicht zuletzt auf die 'soziale Kompetenz' der Europäer zurückzuführen.

Was die Leute da nicht haben, ist die Möglichkeit, auf das Weltwissen zuzugreifen, Ihr Wissen mit uns zu teilen, uns ihre Situation und Bedürfnisse zu schildern und zwar ohne dass diese Schilderungen von Unicefsen und Entwicklungsministern gefiltert werden, und vor allem haben sie keine Möglichkeit Geld empfangen zu können, ohne Banken 20% abdrücken zu müssen.

Ich war zwar selbst noch nicht vor Ort, aber soweit die Mitarbeiter von Afrika Rise berichten, halten die Leute da unten Bitcoin nicht für was 'abstruses' sondern für eine 'fucking great idea'.

Selbstverständlich wären Bitcoin-Tablets für Menschen, die gerade verhungern, gerade keine sehr sinnvolle Zuwendung (wobei solche Absurditäten gerade bei den grossen zentralisierten Hilfsorganisationen passieren). Aber wir sind nicht ausgezogen den Hunger auf der Welt zu beseitigen (das können wir nicht) sondern wir wollen einer definierten Gruppe von Menschen helfen, den Anschluss an die IT-Welt zu finden. Das Projekt-Budget beinhaltet eine ordentliche Internet-Anbindung der betreffenden Schule und Ausbildung an den Geräten mit dem Ziel, dass die Schüler in die Lage versetzt werden, nach Abschluss der Klasse selbst online publizieren zu können. Das bereits bekundete Interesse, an diesem Unterricht teilnehmen zu können, übersteigt bereits jetzt jegliche Erwartungen und unsere Kapazitäten, ganz so abstrus und irrelevant scheint das für die Leute da also nicht zu sein.

Wir müssen da aber ja nicht einer Meinung sein und ich freue mich über jedes Buch, welches Du in ein Entwicklunglsland schickst .

Joe

Werden die im Laufe der nächsten Zeit auch implementieren.

Joe

oh shit Typo-Teufel:

cryptocharity.org

ohne minus, soll das heissen, sorry!

Joe

No I have not and you know that very well and you don't need to try to interpret our conversation in your personal and subjective way as it is up there for everybody to read and interpret for themselves.

I am thankful that you are daring me like this as you and I are in here for very different reasons and you are stating an example of that difference here. I may quote you from two pages earlier in this thread:


So you are here for the profits. And I am here for what you call the 'extremist' ideology from which you now expect to gain your profits of which you wish that the government will allow you to have them .


I guess I will never and I just prooved that here by loosing your vote entirely.

Joe

I am sorry if I made the impression to want to belittle you, I did not.

You will have to admit though that your nick and the above statement (please read it over again!) are somehow contradictory. You basically state that you are questioning authority but at the same time are very willing to obey to it since someone else has already suggested to obey anyways. In case I misinterpreted you you are free to clearify that.

No, I did not walk out to belittle the people who could potentially vote for me but I did not take on this nomination to try to please everyone who could potentially vote for me by watering down my opinions either. Therefor I do not run a middle-of-the-road campaign trying to please everybody with feelgood-blabla. If you think that this honest and integer approach is the wrong one and there should be someone else on the board who is better than me in giving out feelgood-blabla without any substance then you know who to vote! I am no good for 'playing nice' with authorities and I will never be.


I am not working on making the system obsolete. With the advent of the blockchain the system HAS BECOME obsolete, finally.

I believe that crypto currency is going a bit deeper in questioning authority than merely questioning it, it is abolishing financial authority. And I believe that someone who chose the nick 'QuestionAuthority' might as well appreciate that as much as I do. We can't be that far away from each other really.

Joe

I don't know if it is orthoganal but at least it right now seems to represent only a fraction of opinions from only one jurisdiction.

The main reason for me for having accepted the nomination is to help the foundation to clearly position itself and to clearify this question for the whole Bitcoin community. In my opinion, the members of the Foundation will with the result of these elections decide if their organisation will in the future be a SF/DC-Bitcoin-Business-Club or the global roof organisation representing the whole diversity of the international Bitcoin community, which it claimed to want to be when it started and for which, by the way, a lot of non-US-citizens and a lot of people with other stuff than regulation in mind donated a lot of money.

Deciding if that money is now going to be spent on a fancy office space, lawyers and Cocktail-bills in DC or on R&D for decentralised exchange and mixing will make that positioning clear for everybody to see.

I stand for the latter, my strongest opponent for the former. Of course I would love to win and be able to throw my opinion and vote into the decicion-making of the Foundation, but if I loose against Elizabeth I already win again, together with the whole Bitcoin-community:

we will gain clarity.

To freedom of transaction!

Joe

Danke Akka, danke auch allen anderen die finden, dass ich den richtigen Ansatz habe.


Das rauszufinden, die Mitglieder der Foundation zu zwingen, sich zwischen diesen grundsätzlich unterschiedlichen Anätzen einer Washingtoner Lobbyistin und eines Berliner Cypherpunks zu entscheiden und sich zu überlegen wessen Ansätze Bitcoin wohl weiter bringen und diese Entscheidung so klar wie möglich herauszustellen, ist das Anliegen meiner Kandidatur.

Ich behaupte, mit dieser Wahl entscheiden die Wahlberechtigten, ob die Foundation nach eben dieser Wahl als Silicon-Valley-DC-Bitcoin-Business-Club wahrgenommen wird oder als die globale Dachorganisation, die die Interessen der äusserst heterogenen globalen Bitcoin-Community vertritt, als die sie sich ursprünglich dargestellt hat und wofür sie auch 'ne Menge Kohle von nicht-US-Bürgern bekommen hat.

Wenn ich die Wahl gegen Elizabeth verliere, dann gewinne ich trotzdem und dann gewinnen wir alle: nämlich Klarheit .

In diesem Sinne!

Joe

Aber ja vielleicht einen Exil-Franken .

Oh, nein, da fällt mir ein bayrisches Sprichwort ein: "Du musst dem Herrn für alles danken, ausser für die Franken!".

Na dann muss ich  Dich wohl in den Topf 'leider verlorene Stimmen' packen .

++jp

@QuestionAuthority: is that some kind of extreme authority questioning, almost radical?

Joe

So you are suggesting the Bitcoin community should form a lobby that is more powerful and influencal than the existing lobby of banks and financial institutes and that has more buying power than those to be able to buy out more congressmen? If you really think that is possible I shall reconsider my statements .


That is exactly how I see it, and in our case the 'somebody' can be defined as the legacy financial aristocracy. Since these groups will never ever benefit from an unregulated free market currency you will never ever see any approval for it from them.  That simple.


'you can't regulate the UNregulatable' is what I said. And with that I meant the concept of crypto currency altogether, not just Bitcoin. We can sacrifice Bitcoin on the altar of regulation now but that will not stop crypto currencies from taking over the financial system, it will merely throw the development back a couple of years and destroy all the value that has by now evolved in the Bitcoin economy.


Sorry in case I wasn't clear enough on that. I don't say we should not interact with and talk to government.

But looking at the disruptive potential of crypto currency I strongly believe that the lobbying-concepts of the past will not take us anywhere when it comes to organising a smooth transition of our current system to one based on crypto technology.

There is no point trying to get crypto currency implemented into the old system and it's ideals and ideas, now's the time to develop entirely new systems and ideas that are only now possible with the advent of the blockchain.

Governments an financial institutions will play a much smaller role in that new system and this is what we need to educate them about. We need to develop new ideas for how an adminstration can get the funding for necessary projects after having lost the power to tax income or to confiscate bank accounts whenever they need some cash because simply these times are coming to an end. We need mechanisms that allow the funding of public goods and services based on volantury contributions by the people who understand that their society needs these goods and services and who can by funding these projects make their vote for what the government should do with every payment.

We are talking about hyperdemocratisation.

And we need to consult government in regards to what they can do to make the transition as painless and with as little victims and collataral damage for society as possible. That is their ultimate responsibility.

Imagine an asteroid heading towards earth on collision course. Seeing it comming, does it make more sense to turn around and ask the government if that asteroid has all the licences it needs to creat a compliant impact on the planet's surface or does it make more sense to try to estimate the location and magnitude of that impact and to evacuate as many people as possible and to get prepared for the consequences of the impact?

Crypto currency is a rather huge asteroid for the financial system and it does not care about being licensed or not in the long run and no license will reduce its impact.

I think.

Joe

Addon to clarify if this position is rather a secretary's or a director's. Let me quote Adam Levine:

"... whoever wins the seats will help influence the direction of the foundation, and represent the interests of the community. It is an important role."

Joe

You gotta be kidding Theymos!

'Director' comes from directing things, defining the direction in which to go.

There will be seven on this board so each of them will have one out of seven votes on all issues regarding the direction of the Bitcoin foundation.

You do know that exactly, why else would you post a candidate's views on really important strategical matters if it was only a secretary's job?

I am surprised that you believe we need _more_ lobbying efforts really. I would vote Ben, unfortunately I do not have a vote .

Joe

I don't think so. The German government is rather a poodle sitting on the US government's lap than anything independent.

See also:

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/can-germany-really-tax-bitcoin

++jp

I thought I had made that clear, sorry if not:
"... the foundation being internationalised and based in a more freedom-affine country that embraces innovation instead of trying to keep the status quo by all means. We should promote the creation of several independant foundations, associations, societies or organisations, be they defined geographically or focused on certain aspects of crypto-economics or certain goals of their members."

We should decentralise and diversify and be in the jurisdictions that do not intend to regulate Bitcoin to death.

Once governments understand that this emerging market will develop there where one does not try to stop it (can't be stopped anyhow) and that this brings innovation and economic growth then governments will start sending lobbyists to the Bitcoin community in order to make themselves more attractive to the businesses and people who develop it.

Joe

Moin!

Ich bin nominiert worden und habe aktzeptiert, weil ich das für eine gute Gelegenheit halte, mal den einen oder anderen Standpunkt an die Wand zu schreiben und was zu sagen.

Sowas wie (hole mal aus hinter der Paywall der Foundation hervor):

snip--->

Internationalisation

> If the eye of Sauron is upon you GTFO of Mordor!

 The foundation is based in and under the jurisdiction of the US of A. The USA is an absurdly overregulated economy with a regime that is trying to abolish privacy in all aspects of people's lives and thus the most hostile environment for Bitcoin on this planet. The fact that the majority of the current members of the foundation board runs rather big businesses that are dependend on the goodwill of that regime does not really make things better.

 It is a no-brainer to demand the foundation being internationalised and based in a more freedom-affine country that embraces innovation instead of trying to keep the status quo by all means. We should promote the creation of several independant foundations, associations, societies or organisations, be they defined geographically or focussed on certain aspects of crypto economics or certain goals of their members.

 Any satoshi spent on 'lobbying for Bitcoin in Washington' is an irresponsible waste of money donated by members of the Bitcoin community in good faith. And it will take us exactly nowhere.



Freedom of Transaction

> The trigger to a new economic singularity

Freedom of transaction should actually be listed amongst other basic human rights just like freedom of opinion and freedom of speech. It is not, for the trivial reason that there was never a need to demand it because we simply always had freedom of transaction in our cash-based past.

We are watching a moment in history, where transaction all of a sudden becomes global, instantanious and anonymous from human to human.

Money though is only quantifiable human energy and every transaction is the flow of that energy or value. That means that we are entering an age in which the untraceable free flow of human energy in split seconds around the globe becomes a reality.

This very possibility will change the way we interact, make contracts, conduct business and carry out transactions beyond anything we can now imagine or for which we even have words now. The boost of economic growth and wealth for everybody involved cannot even be envisioned now, we can merely estimate that it will have an impact similar to that of the neolithic or industrial revolutions.

Now even though there are entities in our society that derive their power from controlling, channeling, taxing and permitting or not permitting this monetary flow these days are over with the advent of crypto currency.

Let's promote and foster this new reality of the free flow of human energy for the benefit of all of us!

<---snap


Ich finde einfach, die Foundation muss mal gehörig ihre Prioritäten ändern. Drum nehm' ich da teil, damit ich so 'ne old-school Bitcoin-Enthusiast-Standpunkte mal wieder auf den Tisch legen kann. Bin da quasi ein Krypto-Konservativer .

Joe

Now I wonder what that could be in your opinion.

Can you elaborate on this?

Joe

Sell burgers and beers for it, works for me.

Kinda like asking "what can I do so that someone gives me something for it?"

Do something, anything, that is of some value to other people and then charge Bitcoins.

Not that difficult really.

Joe