No matter how anyone defines anything, what counts is what works. Again, the three links to what works:

http://www.broadmind.org/

http://www.unkommonlaw.co.uk/

http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Karl-Lentz.html

They really got you kids brainwashed, don't they? Or are you guys part of the movement to keep us in bondage?

I concur. Too bad the math language of man is such a poor interpreter of what natural law is trying to tell us.

Is it a law of nature that people need air to breathe? How about water to drink? Or food to eat? Look at the Declaration of Independence for the United States: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Are the above laws of nature for only a few people here and there? Or are they COMMON among all people?

No government or body invented the common law at its basic foundation. Governments and people may claim that they did, but at best, they adopted the TRUE AND REAL common law. When they add other laws to it, they are making civil law.

As long as people will not base their living and life on the REAL AND TRUE common law, they will continue to be slaves of governments. Bitcoin won't be able to help them much.

If, however, people go back to the TRUE AND REAL common law, governments and banks will fall before them, and Bitcoin will help it happen that way.

Common law, the real common law, has its basis in private property. "I, a man or woman," am my own private property. Property that I own is my own private property. If I, through some agreement/contract, join my property with the property of others, then the contract controls the extent of the private property of all of us in the contract. The ability to contract is my own private property. If I, through some agreement/contract, join my property with the property of others, then the contract controls the extent of privacy regarding the private property of all of us in the contract. Depending on the way the contract is written, and the terms of the contract, the common law is the civil law of the contract. It is common civil law... common because it is civil law that applies to everyone that is bound by the contract.

If I have accidentally, or through stupidity, agreed to and contracted to something, because I have the right to contract, I also have the right to contract out of the contract. In civil law there are words and terms that show that I have the right to do this. Some of it is called "mistake of fact and mistake of law."

Let someone show that they own me or my property. If they can prove that they own me or my property, then they have the right to do with their property as they will. All United States law is against the idea of someone else owning me. It is called involuntary servitude.

If governments take away my right to use my Bitcoin property, or if they steal my bitcoins outright, they are going against the basic common law. If I don't call them to account under common law, then it is my own fault, and I am virtually giving them my property.

If anybody, person or government, wants to force me into something that I have not agreed to, it is called "under threat, duress, and coercion." Even the courts will throw out cases where law enforcement obtained contractual agreement under threat, duress or coercion. REAL and TRUE common law cuts directly to the basis of ALL law... private property, and the harming or damaging of the private property of someone else.

The REAL reason most governments have not outlawed Bitcoin, or at least fought against it vigorously in some way, is that they realize the potential for them to use it for "jihad." One of the biggest countries that thinks this way is the United States. Everybody has heard of CIA slush funds that are used, on occasion, to throw foreign governments into turmoil when they won't follow the dictates of the United States. Now the CIA has a way to hide what they are doing, financially, almost completely. Governments love Bitcoin, even if it gives the common people a little more freedom.

Now it is you who are wrong. It seems that you want to almost skirt the point. The point is, listen to Karl. See the successes he and others have been having. Consider that it is only since the 1950s or so that the attorney and judicial systems have become bloated, the reason being that they have convinced or coerced the people out from under common law into civil law. The true, basic, original common law isn't dead. It is simply almost empty of users.

Consider a group of families living in a community, without any formal government system. They are simply living in close proximity to one another. The law is simple for them. It is: harm nobody; damage the property of nobody else; live up to your agreements; if you accidentally damage someone in some way, whether you know it or not, when you become aware of it, make it right. That's it! There is nothing else... at least not until the people as a group agree on something else. But then it starts to become civil law. The common law that we mainly exercise in the United States is really civil common law. It is a form of common law that has been adopted by the civil law government, to look like common law when it really is NOT, so that the government can craftily drag the people out from under the REAL common law, and turn the country into a civil law nation.

Believe what you want. But do yourself a favor and listen to the audios at the three links for Karl, the links in my post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=677338.msg7716631#msg7716631.

Thank you for responding, however. Even though you are trying to throw some bad light on the REAL common law by advocating that I am wrong about it, your posts are keeping this topic near the top of the forum, where lots more people will get a chance to view it. Some of them will use Karl's info to beat the "system."

Common law is essentially tradition, and usually local tradition. Its greatest formal example is in the Maxims of Law, which can be found in many places on the Internet, such as http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/bouvier/maxims.shtml.

Common law is also a term that has been codified into a separate thing from the original common law. It includes the results of court cases. However, to use the codified common law, one must step out of the original common law, except when he uses the examples of codified common law without the citations or references to it the "argument" he uses.

This isn't my idea. The three websites I listed in my https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=677338.msg7716631#msg7716631 post, describe how Karl Lentz is helping people all over the place fight in the courts outside of the government "system," using original common law, within the basic 3 areas of original common law:
1. Harm nobody;
2. Don't damage any property that is not yours;
3. Fulfill your contractual obligations.

Nobody is expected to understand this if he/she has been in court. The more a person has been in court, the harder it will be for him/her to understand this. It took Karl 9 years of constant legal study, and a lot of coaching by members of the legal community, plus a bunch of special circumstances, to find out this important, almost completely hidden, truth.

The thing that is destroying the freedom of people is the fact that they are unfamiliar with the ways to understand and use original, non-governmental common law. If the people were completely using original common law, there would be no need for attorneys, government would be tiny, we wouldn't have the U.S. interfering in the affairs of all kinds of other countries, there wouldn't be any such thing as income taxes or central banks, and people would rule as REAL, LITERAL kings and queens on their own land.

Listen to the way Karl says it in the websites in my post above. Check the law out. Realize that codes are not law except that a person agrees that they are law for him (Often a person says things to government and in court that let the court treat him/her as though he/she were under the jurisdiction of the court, and the person doesn't even know that he/she said such.). Get out from under the thumb of government and the banks. Let Bitcoin thrive.

Probably the most important words in this topic are "code as Law." Here's why.

The United States, Canada and Britain, along with Australia, are common law nations. The CODE is not computer program scripting. Rather, it is the so-called laws that are made by governments. We need to learn that government laws are not laws. Rather, they are code. Try untangling government legal codes some time. It's harder that reverse engineering a computer script.

IF A PERSON IN A COMMON LAW COUNTRY HAS NOT CONTRACTUALLY AGREED TO THE CODES OF A GOVERNMENT, THEN THE CODE DOES NOT APPLY TO HIM AS A LAW.

So, why is it that we have to obey the laws of the country or the State? It's because government tricks us into make agreements with them through the words we use and the government papers we sign without understanding. For example. If you ever used an attorney for something, did you know that an attorney is an officer of the court? Did you know that the attorney's first obligation is to the court and not to you? If the judge says jump, the attorney needs to jump, and maybe on the way up ask, "How high?" The attorney's last obligation is to you.

Under common law, if you haven't entered into agreements with government by what you have said or signed, the only laws you are obligated to obey are:
1. Harm nobody;
2. Don't damage any property that is not yours;
3. Fulfill your contractual obligations.
That's it, PERIOD. The courts get you through #3. NOTE: If you are incorporated with a corporation, you are in contract with government who gave you permission to incorporate.

If you are interested in getting out from under all the thumbs of the government's non-law codes - like traffic tickets, and income taxes, and whatever the requirement government may have laid on you - and if you want to make a lot of money off of government at the same time, listen to the audios and the videos on the following three websites. If you have a situation, contact Karl.

http://www.broadmind.org/

http://www.unkommonlaw.co.uk/

http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Karl-Lentz.html

There is a lot of "wasted" time and space on those audios and videos before you get to the nuggets of gold, but be patient. The rewards are great. They have to do with getting governments off our back so that we can use Bitcoin to get the banks out of our finances.

C'mon. we need a funds transfer system that is controlled by the market rather than by some group. Don't we have enough fiats and controllers already?

The blockchain is great.

Time to make a Bitcoin-like wallet transfer system for payments, rather than paying for things with bitcoins themselves. What I mean is this:

1. Make yourself 100,000 wallets.
2. Place a small amount of bitcoins - like 0.0001 - in each.
3. Transfer the wallets between folks using a yet-to-be-invented Wallet Transfer Protocol.

This makes a whole new kind of blockchain. The original one changes/grows less rapidly. Anonymity is increased.

Make another, additional protocol, additional to the one mentioned above, for handling groups of wallets. In other words, a wallet wallet. That is, a wallet that holds many multiple wallets that hold the bitcoins. Then transfer THAT wallet through this second protocol. Soon the wallet wallet idea will be the bitcoin thing, and people will forget all about bitcoins... something like you don't think about binary in a computer, but rather about some programming language that rides a bunch of layers above binary. Yet, binary is the foundation for all of it.

When are people going to wake up to the fact that making something legal is always an attempt to control it.

In the United States, all the rights that are not spelled out for government to do are reserved for the States and the people. In other words, Bitcoin and anything else is legal without government doing anything.

The thing that isn't legal is people harming other people or damaging their property. People can harm others with Bitcoin, guns, fists, cars, and a million other ways.

So, do you see what I just said? Attempting to legalize Bitcoin or anything is is simply a way for GOVERNMENT to harm and damage people. It's a way for one group of people to harm another group.

Bitcoin legalization won't work. Why not? It may look like it is working, but then the devs - or somebody - will turn it into something that is impossible for government to control.

Remember, legalization is a trick to make you think that you need to be under someone else's control.

In other words, a miner, who already received bitcoins virtually for free from his mining efforts, needs a fee to coax him into parting with some of those bitcoins, right?

I understand that mining isn't free - equipment purchases, electricity, upkeep, a place to keep and run the equipment. But if the bitcoins that are mined don't pay for it, the whole thing isn't worth doing.

If enough miners quit mining, the difficulty will drop, and then it will be profitable again. And while the mining is down, sort of, some mining pool that is out to take over will rule the Bitcoin world, and Bitcoin will flop. So, are we going to attempt to prop Bitcoin up with fees? Bitcoin is supposed to be serving us, not we serve Bitcoin. Supply and demand.

Now, here I go, picking on supply and demand by commenting thusly. After all, all the fees, and all the discussion are part of the supply and demand. The need for Bitcoin is all about supply and demand. If Bitcoin flops, something will take its place, and it will be about supply and demand. Wars are fought over supply and demand. Dictators and kings attempt to control the markets, and their controls are part of supply and demand.

Thanks for listening.

There's a difference between being a tax haven island, and a country that harbors a completely new kind of currency, a currency that could possibly destroy the banking system if allowed to continue out of control. It would all depend on if an example were needed to be made.

"Illegal" comes from a position of power. There are a lot of things in my life that I consider illegal. Yet, even though I don't do them, lots of other people do. I don't attempt to stop them because (besides that it wouldn't do any good) I allow freedom, as long as it doesn't harm me or damage my property... but even then a little, once in awhile.

If Bolivia has the strength to stop or control Bitcoin within her borders, great. Personally, I don't think she has that kind of power. If she is a true republic, then she doesn't really even have the authority to try. Same said with the United States.



EDIT: Remember your Pledge of Allegiance. "... and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands ..." The United States is a republic, not a democracy.

This is the whole point. "MAJORITY!" How big of a majority does a mining company really need? And if we want to change the protocol, what percent of the users and developers need to be in the majority? 51%? 66%? 75%?

If 51% of the people want some kind of protocol change, and I am in the 49% who want a different change, will I be happy? Now we're starting to talk politics, and we're heading for semantics.

20 / 20 hindsight. The guys who put the whole thing together used a lot of hindsight from previous programming experience, right along with the hindsight of living life experience. Yet, we now see that their hindsight didn't cover some things, and it is only this present hindsight that is uncovering those things.

What we need is a conference made up of anyone who has hindsight experience. It needs to be a cool, logical discussion, with as many points as possible being brought into view. Advantages and disadvantages need to be weighed. The scary thing about doing it this way is, we may find that the whole Bitcoin project might need to be scrapped, replaced by something different and better.

If we were only a handful of devs, sitting around the table and brainstorming, things would be different. As it stands now, the fortunes of many people are tied up in Bitcoin, and whomever takes it upon themselves to make changes, better do a real good job of it.

If any small island country like Jersey got serious and did this, they just might be attacked like Iraq one way or another. Watch Iceland over the next 5 or 10 years, and see if they don't get hit somehow for taking down their bankers.

Remember Viet Nam? Iraq, Afghanistan, and the whole Middle East are being facilitated into the thing that was behind Viet Nam. Here's what it is.

The banks didn't have clear strength in Viet Nam. There were too many powerful individuals there, who would not work with the banks. The war was about subduing those individuals by either removing them, or by incorporating them - more or less voluntarily under threat - into the world banking system.

Google "Viet Nam." Today that country has a higher standard of living than it has ever had before... with regard to the general public, that is. Of course, they have the same minor slavery that Europe and America have - the slavery of having to pay a portion of their funds to the banks through taxes.

The bankers have come to understand that if you want to enslave the people, you need to let the people think that they have freedom. And in order to do this, you have to give them some REAL freedom. In fact, almost all the wars of the 1900s were about the bankers taking over, so that they could give the nations of the world, say, 90% freedom, while enslaving them through taxes of one form of another to the tune of 10% that would be turned over to the bankers. That's what WWI, WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, Kroatia, etc., and now the Middle East, Yemen, Pakistan, and now, also, the Ukraine are all about. It's all about the bankers retaining control to keep the people free enough so that they unknowingly and unwittingly hand over a certain percentage of their labor to the banks.

Governments are secondary. Virtually all wars are bankers' wars. Banks rule.

What will bankers do when they have established themselves securely in power over the whole world? Who knows? But, they are aware that if they don't have the strength of direct force to use on the people, the people will rebel.

Bitcoin will have to be removed. Bitcoin has the potential strength to destroy the banking system, worldwide.

Good point. Can the bots be made good enough to do the job on really difficult captchas?

For example, the captcha could be made with parts of the captcha string located all over the captcha screen. There would be guiding numbers that suggest which captcha symbol would have to be typed next, the one in this block of the screen or the one in that block. The guiding numbers would change, randomly, each time a symbol was typed. This in addition to goofy looking symbols that bots would have a hard time reading or recognizing.

There is no Javascript here. We are open to anything that we can program. The devs would have a team designing new kinds of captcha types for the next version of CaptchaCoin. Users who felt that they had been discriminated against by fellow users, would be ready to point out flaws. Complicated captchas would slow down the whole process of typing in the symbols. This would keep CaptchaCoin inflation from rising too fast.

CaptchaCoin is an idea. If it's not practical, it will fall by the wayside. But don't be surprised...

Perhaps, a little. The idea in CaptchaCoin is to bypass the mining machines altogether, and use people labor instead. Now, I wouldn't join a mining pool with captchaCoin, unless I were a slow typist. But we'd ALL be slow typists in a pool, because fast typists would make more coins typing on their own.

This is a PEOPLE JOB, not a machine-used mining gimmick. All it does is to free up employment for multitudes of BitcoinTalkers who don't have anything better to do than sit around and wait for Bitcoin to do something big. With CaptchaCoin, they can sit around and earn money by working, all the while keeping an eye on what is happening to Bitcoin.