Except it doesn't just go away. It either remains as the "new normal", in which the IRS punishes and threatens political enemies/ideologies/opponents of the one in power or the Democrats (which is yet to be determined and might vary) or the IRS is forced to in no uncertain terms stay apart from partisian politics.
Seems the latter would require something like what I proposed, impeachment of officials, but would be a far superior outcome than the former.
The issue could easily go away. All that would need to happen is congress to stop investigating the scandal and the MSM would likely stop reporting on it (as there would be nothing/very little to report. If the situation were to "go away" then the IRS would be able to continue what they were doing and he democrats would be able to have a political advantage as their opponents would be able to be silenced This would be a win for the totalitarian fascists. That certainly would transform the Democratic party. |
|
|
|
That new age stuff is garbage. But... There is an interesting theory to connect consciousness with quantum states. It's real science from Stuart Hameroff and Roger Penrose. This work is early and will change as more is known, however they are proposing that life itself is a quantum phenomena and linked to consciousness. It's the best theory so far to explain living things. http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/penrose-hameroff/orchOR.htmlReally, it looks like more new age garbage to me.... |
|
|
|
U Penn Mysteriously Deletes Video Of Obamacare Architect Insulting American Voters…
.....Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber had said at the University of Pennsylvania’s 24th Annual Health Economics Conference that it was a good thing that Americans never realized what was in the Affordable Care Act, because “the stupidity of the American voter” would have otherwise killed the law......
Meaning, in realspeak, what? That the act of understanding is in his opinion, "stupid?" |
|
|
|
If he fails on this the internet as you know it is dead. This is the freedom fight of our lives and hardly anyone understands why.
Showing today... Obamacare for the Internet! And next showing... Obamacare for Bitcoin! |
|
|
|
You guys can say what you want. I know what I know because I am directly involved. The meetings that will decide the laws concerning bitcoin are happening now. I don't understand how you think it is better to let people with zero knowledge decide for you. And spend your time infighting? You are the banks best friend in this.
There is just something cultural in the bitcoin community about being superstitious and resistant to any organized anything. That opinion will not stop the train and I think we are loosing the regulation battle at the moment. We have only one shot at this. Once laws are passed, overturning them is unlikely.
I do not particularly care that you are involved or that you may think you are doing important things. I assume, correct me if I am wrong, that you are referring to the New York Circus. I think it would be unwise for you to shrug off the criticism and attitude of the greater community in this. Consider for example, Wikipedia - The Foundation and its leadership have frequently been accused of failure, dubious ethics, and corruption.[10][11] Former vice-chairman Charlie Shrem pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the operation of an unlicensed money-transmitting business related to his role in assisting agents of the infamous online drug marketplace Silk Road.[12][13][14] Executive chairman Peter Vessenes' business relationship to former board member Mark Karpeles, the disgraced CEO of bitcoin exchange Mt. Gox, has been highlighted as inappropriate.[11] The Foundation has also suffered scrutiny and resignations over its hiring of former child star Brock Pierce.[15] The Bitcoin community itself is divided over the role of the Foundation as a community or industry representative.[10] Libertarian bitcoin advocates have criticized the organization's strategy of political lobbying and participation with federal regulators.[10] Professor and author Mark T. Williams criticized the Bitcoin Foundation's priorities, writing in a Business Insider editorial that "A Foundation of 'B' players has no business claiming it is a protector of a system that remains vulnerable and untrustworthy."[16] |
|
|
|
It means that he is just trying to get public on his side, as he has always done in the past by saying one thing and doing the exact opposite. Americans lost many privileges in this decade and never objected, I hope they will stand up at least for the Internet.
It seems like every other time they've tried to put a leash on the internet the people have always stood up to a certain extent and stopped them in their tracks. However, that was going through Congress but considering this guy thinks he's a king and can do whatever he wants, there's really no telling how much he'll get his way considering he's probably offended by how bad some Americans think of him and his ideology via the latest ballot box contests. We can trust him with our Internet when he trusts us with our Guns, lol... |
|
|
|
Some people claim that consciousness is a product of quantum phenomena. For example, scientists like Robert Lanza and his Biocentrism Theory, and the (IMO less convincing) "new age guru" (pseudoscientist?) Deepak Chopra with his idea that quantum entanglement creates consciousness. While these seemingly philosophical ideas make for very interesting reading, they seem to be speculations that are profoundly unscientific, and therefore shouldn't be described as scientific theories. They tend to rely on misinterpretations of quantum phenomena, eg using the double-slit experiment and the "Observer Effect" to try and prove that conscious beings can influence quantum effects in a specific way (when in fact the collapse of the wave-function in the double-slit experiment is not dependent on the act of observing, it is due to the necessity of interacting photons with other particles so they can be measured, which subsequently change their state. Consciousness, or even life itself is not required to collapse the wave-function - just interaction with any other particles will do this just fine). A popular theory by Chopra misinterprets quantum entanglement and claims that it can cause the future to affect the past, and can transmit information faster than light. No experiment yet conducted has shown that these phenomena are true, in fact they all seem to show the opposite. I appreciate that quantum effects undoubtedly affect the mind, after all our brain is merely a collection of neural connections powered by electrons/molecules that all exhibit random quantum phenomena, which could likely change our perceptions/decisions in real life. I like to theorise that these phenomena give us true free will - the innate randomness of quantum effects means human behaviour could never be predicted to 100% accuracy. But this is a different hypothesis to consciousness being a product of quantum phenomena, which as far as I'm concerned is pseudoscientific. I'm not a quantum physicist, but I'd like to hear some other peoples thought on this matter - is there any testable/scientific proof that consciousness is a product of quantum phenomena? No, it is incredibly dumb stuff peddled to the ignorant. Also in a sense, you could babble that since electro chemical and synapse interactions were ultimately based on quantum phenomena VOILA! But you use the phrase in a different sense, that of the heisenburg principle, cat in the box, etc. |
|
|
|
I think, though that instead of endorsing a "spirit of hopelessness" as to the realistic ability to enact significant change and a return to the rule of law, various IRS and AJ officials should be targeted for impeachment.
I am not suggesting any targeting of people who cannot be shown or proven to engage in unlawful behavior, though. Offhand I don't know if IRS officials remaining have evidence against them that rises to this level.
Holder and Lerner have fled. Many others would (and should) and perhaps this would set an atmosphere in which these administrative agencies would do better than just grovel at the feet of the wanna be king.
It is not easy to impeach a government official. Even when the evidence is there, the process will turn out to be a political one and the democrats will likely try to stonewall any impeachment (as they have the investigation into the IRS) and would likely vote against impeachment regardless of any evidence presented. This is not necessarily true. You are suggesting that rank and file Democrats would line up and protect IRS administrators, who (assuming guilt for the minute) acted illegally although on suggestion to do so by the White House. The guilt is of the IRS administrator strictly. Democrats should fear the possibility that the next administration may well be Republican and would use the same tactics against them. It is only necessary to pick up 60 votes in the Senate to do this. I view it as appropriate and just if in fact IRS adminstrators can be proven guilty. This is very different than suggesting impeach Obama. You are assuming that it was not high ranking officials that ordered the illegal investigations. You are also assuming that the rank-and-file democrats were not made aware of the investigations ahead of time.
The chairman of the committee investigating the IRS in the senate has essentially said that nothing happenedAFRAID I'll just beg to differ with his sorry lying face. We'll see what the new chair of that committee says. The democrats generally want this issue to "go away" because they know it benefited them greatly and generally have a consensus that anything that is discovered as a result of any investigation would not be good for them Except it doesn't just go away. It either remains as the "new normal", in which the IRS punishes and threatens political enemies/ideologies/opponents of the one in power or the Democrats (which is yet to be determined and might vary) or the IRS is forced to in no uncertain terms stay apart from partisian politics. Seems the latter would require something like what I proposed, impeachment of officials, but would be a far superior outcome than the former. |
|
|
|
OP does have a point, Satoshi did walk away the moment Gavin accepted the invitation to speak with the CIA. Coincidence?
YES THAT WAS TOTALLY AND COMPLEETLY A COINCEDENCE!!!! HE WUZ PLANNING ON LEAVING WAY BEFORE THAT! I THINK THE OP IS RIGHT, SO I'M GONNA MOVE THE SOURCE CODE TO SUMPLACE MORE SECURE WHERE THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T SEE IT ANYMORE. AND I WENT AND GOT ME A GOOD HAT TO WEAR WHEN I WRITE CODE SO THEIR SATELITES CANT HEAR ME EITHER. FOR THE CHILDREN! Is this the real Gavin? Maybe someone hacked his account. I didn't expect that he had a sense of humor. Too much stress to still be funny. can anyone confirm? He is being sarcastic. He is trying to get across a point that having bitcoin be open source is much better then it be closed source and the government not have access to information about bitcoin Or maybe I just ate too much peyote one night (and, happily, decided to read bitcointalk instead of write some code). (and for the humor-impaired: NO, NOT SERIOUS. Everybody knows I don't eat peyote, I spend my money on hookers and blow.) But what about the hat? |
|
|
|
I am basing my statements on what I have been told by regulators that I personally talked with. I assure you guys that they are not going to entertain rants from the internet. They will listen to individual opinions only if they get a huge number of emails or a lesser number of snail-mail letters. But mostly they listen to lobbyists. Some of it is just for reasons of practicality. For example, they may schedule a meeting to talk about bitcoin with elected officials. Could you fly to Washington D.C. to make that meeting next week? I can't. So I pooled my money with others at the foundation to hire a pro to represent our opinions about not regulating bitcoin. They will hear my voice, but will they hear yours?
Actually, no they won't hear your voice. Not ever, from the BitcoinF. They'll hear what the major players tell the "pro" to say. And it won't be something that helps you. Unless what's Good For Karpeles and Shrem is Good for You. |
|
|
|
The qualms I do have now is having this episode continue after I've already mentioned a few times that lives are now at risk.
~Bruno Kucinskas
Paranoid much? Nobody is attacking your family - that is all in your head with the other bullshit which you imagine all day long. Patrick Murck has many important things to do all day - rather than deal with lunatics whose only contribution is to stimulate disorder and outrage. If you want to help bitcoin, shoot yourself in the head.
[/b] Holy shit, dude! Are you Patrick Murck's keeper? You have no skin in this game. It's now clearly between the two of them. Lay off Not only that, but given the escalation of this debacle, we'll never find out about the missing 100K from Knc, now. |
|
|
|
I think, though that instead of endorsing a "spirit of hopelessness" as to the realistic ability to enact significant change and a return to the rule of law, various IRS and AJ officials should be targeted for impeachment.
I am not suggesting any targeting of people who cannot be shown or proven to engage in unlawful behavior, though. Offhand I don't know if IRS officials remaining have evidence against them that rises to this level.
Holder and Lerner have fled. Many others would (and should) and perhaps this would set an atmosphere in which these administrative agencies would do better than just grovel at the feet of the wanna be king.
It is not easy to impeach a government official. Even when the evidence is there, the process will turn out to be a political one and the democrats will likely try to stonewall any impeachment (as they have the investigation into the IRS) and would likely vote against impeachment regardless of any evidence presented. This is not necessarily true. You are suggesting that rank and file Democrats would line up and protect IRS administrators, who (assuming guilt for the minute) acted illegally although on suggestion to do so by the White House. The guilt is of the IRS administrator strictly. Democrats should fear the possibility that the next administration may well be Republican and would use the same tactics against them. It is only necessary to pick up 60 votes in the Senate to do this. I view it as appropriate and just if in fact IRS adminstrators can be proven guilty. This is very different than suggesting impeach Obama. You are assuming that it was not high ranking officials that ordered the illegal investigations. You are also assuming that the rank-and-file democrats were not made aware of the investigations ahead of time.
The chairman of the committee investigating the IRS in the senate has essentially said that nothing happenedAFRAID I'll just beg to differ with his sorry lying face. We'll see what the new chair of that committee says. |
|
|
|
... 7. make Israel as their eternal friend, and always supports the entire decision israel in palestine 8. the senate controlled entirely by Jews so the real America, too much controlled by Jews ...  Joooooooooooos And the Illuminati  What? It's the Jews? I thought it was the Joes. All this time I've been worried about everyone named Joe Smith or Joe Schepshag or Joe Hesus and what is this? Look, I don't doubt you know your stuff, but seriously here. It's the Joes, man. Some, like DhaniBoy here has been led to believe Joe is short for Jewseph. He would be right, supposely. Here is the proof:   Very interesting. I was just joking around, but your facts are indisputable. Wait a moment.... LOL... |
|
|
|
Why would you "download" or "copy" something that someone wants you to pay to have the rights to do so? boycott more power to you, steal more power to them... you just don't fulfill your contractual obligations... and please don't tell me this movie/song/vg are so great that you can't buy them but have to "steal" them... respect the copyrights of others if you want yours to be respected...
/ this post isn't an endorsement of the mpaa and or dma in any way shape or form...
Because I have an old cassette tape of the music and want it in digital and don't want to bother doing it myself? Because I have a cd that got scratched? Because I had it downloaded in stupid Realplayer format and had to go to machines that didn't support that idiotic thing? Want more? Oh, wait, you want us to PAY MULTIPLE TIMES FOR THE SAME ITEM? really? |
|
|
|
I don't think bitcoin is going anywhere except legislative death without a lobby group. A lot of people think the government should do this or that, they do not hear you and are not interested in listening. They do however listen to lobbyists. It's not cool, but that is the way it is. I am aware of no other effort to provide guidance to the government in regulating bitcoin.
Make no mistake, there are new laws coming. The only question is whether they will be made with input from the bitcoin community or just made up by regulators who don't even understand it. Here in the U.S. that is the greatest threat to bitcoin.
Actually, none of that is true. All of it may seem to be true in the very short term in the local environment. In the medium and long term and the global environment it is a different story. We have dozens of clear examples of substitute currencies starting to be used historically, we know how this happens and why. It happens most commonly due to abuse of the national fiat currency by the government and in opposition to it. |
|
|
|
Evidence? And what community is this? There's always people who accuse every market of being a honeypot usually just based on suspicion and paranoia. I don't doubt they try infiltrate them, but wouldn't setting up your own black market be entrapment or at the very least just plain illegal?
Well, the FBI has a long history of using entrapment as it's primary tool. I do not think it really matters what legalese they use to justify or permit it, it is the way it is. There would definitely be some of us they would not want on juries... |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Foundation means nothing.
They accept world class scammers like MercadoBitcoin.net, those bastards stolen from me and from my family, about X,XXX.YY Bitcoins.
What Bitcoin Foundation did? They love MercadoBitcoin.
So, they support criminals.
It is a shame.
They have never reprimanded or kicked any industry member out to my knowledge. Including Mt. Gox.... |
|
|
|
this is a joke. how does people even buy all this soft communication crap? Developing a sustainable business model so that bitcoin's development isn't at the mercy of bitcoin price swings. This should also help align the Foundation's future with the value it is providing to the community. business model? lmao. This is extremely dangerous thinking and comments. It appears to indicate that Murck thinks he/the Foundation/Somebody should regulate the price of Bitcoin, instead of the market. In turn in some fantasy world the community would appreciate this "service" that the BF has "provided." To be fair to him, I interpret his statement to mean: Developing a sustainable business model (non profit charity model that is self sufficient) so that bitcoin's development isn't at the mercy of bitcoin price swings. This should also help align the Foundation's future with the value it is providing to the community. All he is suggesting is that they are blowing through the reserves paying for 3 devs and need to have a sustainable charity. I would like devs to be funded by projects like lighthouse, day jobs, and through tips instead. I would prefer the funding to come from users directly rather than primarily business insiders(some of which are thieves) I can see other interpretations of the comment exist, along the lines you suggest. However, aren't they "blowing through the reserves" with the approximate $400-500K USD administrative and lobbying expense level per year, a lot of travel expenses, etc., instead of on development? |
|
|
|
... 7. make Israel as their eternal friend, and always supports the entire decision israel in palestine 8. the senate controlled entirely by Jews so the real America, too much controlled by Jews ... Joooooooooooos And the Illuminati What? It's the Jews? I thought it was the Joes. All this time I've been worried about everyone named Joe Smith or Joe Schepshag or Joe Hesus and what is this? Look, I don't doubt you know your stuff, but seriously here. It's the Joes, man. |
|
|
|
A very verbal member of the community let one too many rants go wrong. I suggest we move on...
Sorry for the bump
+1 . Shit happens. I'm sure Bruno is allowed to make a mistake as he has been an outstanding member of this forum for a very long time. IF he does have info then so be it and it will come out with time I'm sure. Either way, I've been watching from the sidelines until someone with a sane brain stepped ( blindmayrbitcorn) to see if we can calm both sides. What is up with that skype chat?  A. An accusation of pedo is not a conviction and may be groundless. B. Any one could be cut some slack for going crazy once in a blue moon. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
