Anyone have a take on how long before btc withdrawn from Mt Gox to Mybitcoin takes? Btc withdrawn to my wallet were almost immediate, but those withdrawn a few minutes earlier to Mybitcoin account haven't shown up yet.

From: Jay Hanson's [America2Point0] Digest Number 2130    Thursday, June 2, 2011 4:30 AM


Re: HYPOTHETICALVILLE
Posted by: "Jay Hanson" JayHanson@hawaii.rr.com   emy8rq
Wed Jun 1, 2011 6:55 pm (PDT)

I think we showed that it was fairly easy to devise a simple economic
system without the need for banks, interest, and endless economic
growth. Perhaps "bitcoin" is the answer. Only time will tell...

It seems to me that the economy is going down the toilet again -- my
guess is for the /last time /because of net energy constraints.

Let's hope some bright, honest people are able to reinvent our country before it collapses in anarchy or global war.

Jay

Any video I saw of him, he walked on his feet. So I only walk on my hands.

He's just plain wrong about what money. Instead of gold (under the control of the bullion dealers/bankers as used by the Athenians, the Spartans used iron that had been heated and then pitted to make it useless   as a commodity or for any practical purpose. The Yap Islanders used huge stone rings, and would agree that a man was rich even if his stone ring (quarried on another island) had sunk to the bottom of the sea during a crossing. As long as everyone agreed that he was the owner of the stonne ring at the bottom of the oceran, he was rich.

Bitcoin has everything needed to be currency, and is far superior to any commodity money or any fiat mony (superior for people in general, not for a privileged elite who control access to a commodity, or who can emit by "fiat".

Probably   `agents provocateurs`. Not much you can do about it.

See you-tube video:       
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow

Please check your wallet for my contribution (I was inspired ny your words and would like to see more of them)

Since there was no reference at the the thread opening, I assumed it was a joke (and still do).

I sent them a donation, but I had to use PayPal. They had no option to donate with btc! Here`s hoping they get with the program!

+1

Do they take btc donations? Could they use btc to fund their work?

Let's not be naive. Politicians are just the hired help. As are/will be many "geeks" (the new warriors?). Unless/until the new bitcoin paradigm reaches critical mass, the old paradigm in which the Powers That Be can `create` as much `money` as they choose, in control of an `asleep at the wheel` populace, has them in the driver`s seat. They can buy the regulation or shutdown of whatever they choose.  What are you going to do about it? The eG8 Forum recommendations to the G8 politicians was written out before any disenting presentaitons (windnowdressing) were even given.

more from George Ure at Peoplenomics:

There are essentially three key reasons why control of the Internet is most certainly in our future, it being only a matter of timing until it is rolled out and independent, unregulated servers will have to be outlawed.
The first reason - the superficial reason - will be to deny terrorists and WikiLeakers a platform for the distribution of information.  No doubt the mandatory aspects of this will come in company with some horrific crime or attack on America's heartland using the internet in some crucial and highly visible role.

This will provide the ostensible justification.

The second and third reasons, however, are the real reasons why such measures must occur.

Reason #2, you see, is that the Internet allows people to spontaneously organize and for an alternative government to come to power. Few have thought this through, but imagine for a moment what would happen if the internet suddenly sprouted a larger portal which claimed to be the legitimate government of the United States.

We're not talking a simple Koch brother's funded buying of Tea Party DNS addresses; no we'd be talking a whole new government structure complete with online legislatures, online Congress and a new president - all operated online.

That threat is real,  but so far, most civilians who could roll out such an alternative government with no corporate control and based on human values and those of the Framers, has not happened because of a lack of imagination.

I've modeled it out, and interestingly, such a movement "Second Government" to put a name to it, would be an alternative government where votes would be cast and publicized online.

That's why government is so anxious to get into licensing of the internet in one sense; it isn't the discussion of various points of disagreement.  No biggie that.  It's the organization capability of the platform to declare an additional layer of governance where popular opinion would really matter.

This frightens the hell out of everyone in corpgov:  In such a system, people would simply invalidate decisions made in Washington that don't have popular support; like bailing out those too big to fail" companies, or being involved in Libya, or other parts of the sandbox.  Worse:  People wouldn't stand for corporate tax breaks as a legitimate way of spending what is supposed to be un employment funds.  

As we speak, states are converting money once intended to give people a minimal way to buy food and hang onto their homes and converting it into tax breaks for corporations that are already profitable.  Do you really think a wide-open discussion of such hijinks on Second Government would allow such nonsense?  Why, of course not.

But, as long as there is no Second Government in place, headlines like "Florida Senate approves business tax cut that shrinks unemployment benefits" will be the new 'normal' in what's left of America.

Of course Reason #3 is then also obvious.  The eG8 is designed to give the ruling PowersThatBe a way to keep control of money since peer-to-peer alternative money systems are quickly coming online. ...

Yes, precisely. That would mean the collapse of their own system (gotterdamerung). But, being power addicts, they would prefer the hope of being able to control whatever emerged from the ruins to giving over power to freedom addicts like us 

So, not "imposiible". Not even "unlikely" given who controls the dominant world sytems. Shall we say 50/50?

Power being the ultimate addiction, they most certainally will try. First they (governments and corpgovs) will attempt mostly futile methods (regulations, laws, harassment of innovators and leaders), but when that fails they will undoubtledly, in my opinion, do whatever it takes to hang on to power (exclusivity over money) - up to and including the gotterdammerung of shutting down the internet. In my opinion it is naive to think that the powers that be could not or would not shut down the internet before letting go of control. For this reason, in addition to buying and using bitcoins, I grow food and consider ways to live off the grid if I have to.

Below is an excerpt from the George Ure newsletter Peoplenomics. What do you guys think? Will (corprate controlled)governments worldwide shut down the internet before acquiescing to their loss of control over moeny?

"...The eG8 is designed to give the ruling PowersThatBe a way to keep control of money since peer-to-peer alternative money systems are quickly coming online.

Because they don't use worlds like US Dollar, it's a horrific problem for the Secret Service and other anti-free money agencies which are sworn to uphold the singularity of the ruling paradigm's concept of "money" and central to that is the notion of exclusivity.

Once again, the agenda is carefully held close, but when I tell you that some future cyber crime will be used to justify closing down peer-to-peer money systems  - like BitCoin.org  or any other attempt at a peer-to-peer virtual currency - I think it's a fairly safe prediction.

Governments hate competition.

That only leaves open the matter of timing.  And we should see it in headlines before the year it out.  That paradigm defenders need to have it all done and in place well prior to the 2012 "election" is a kind of article of faith.

That Iran has moved to disconnect its internet from the rest of the world is a curious development; seems governments all over the world are awakening, at some level to the same threat.  And why not?  Only by keeping the global mass consciousness divided against itself can the have/have-not, good-vs.-evil paradigm be maintained.

Why if that failed, what would religions and governments do to maintain control?  You see the problem, I trust.  And quite laughably:  It put's Iran in league with the G8 on the subject of 'net control': Just when you thought "Things can't get much stranger."

 They just did.  Paradigm controllers make the damnedest strange bedfellows. ..."

A few weeks ago on the Urban Survival Daily News Update

                   http://urbansurvival.com/week.htm
                 

I have no problem with anyone wanting to keep their assets private. But I question the ethics of then using the system you do not support. A parasite is locked in to a dance with the (hated?) host, and if the host perishes, the parasite must find a new host or perish as well. Doesn't sound like freedom to me.