Bitcoin Forum
June 24, 2018, 05:40:17 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 ... 125 »
641  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 04, 2012, 07:01:35 AM
Interesting.
This certainly seems like an endorsement of Stripe:  https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/10/payment-provider-stripe-levels-transparency

Quote
There are only a handful of payment providers available, and yet at least one is necessary so that donations, payments, advertisements, auctions, and online stores can function.
gosh.. someone should tell the EFF about Bitcoin  Roll Eyes


Well, it does imply to me that they should in theory be open to using an intermediary such as Bitpay or Paysius. Perhaps they weren't aware of such intermediaries when they did their about-face on Bitcoin.

Anyway.. I now suspect directly (or indirectly via ranting threads like this) needling the EFF on this isn't likely to be productive.

Perhaps a fundraiser in the legal subsection of the forum to get a lawyer to write up a basic overview of tax & legal implications for non-profits operating via Bitcoin intermediaries would be a better approach... then we could have something to point people to, which counters the EFF's statements.
642  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 04, 2012, 12:07:58 AM
They are a legal advocacy group - so their situation is undoubtedly different to most non-profits who are simply receiving donations.
Their public statement should not be such a vague pompous load of "it's scary"... it would be better if they had a much shorter statement saying they weren't using it for reasons specific to 'legal advocacy'.
Nice strawman, but it is not accurate.  Go read the EFFs statement.  They did not say anything close to Bitcoin=scary.

Other groups accepting donations came to their own conclusions, and at most, stated that they came to the same conclusion.  Show me one group that said, "We're not doing it because they told us not to."..


From the EFF's statement:
Quote
1.   We don't fully understand the complex legal issues involved with creating a new currency system. Bitcoin raises untested legal concerns related to securities law, the Stamp Payments Act, tax evasion, consumer protection and money laundering, among others. And that’s just in the U.S. While EFF is often the defender of people ensnared in legal issues arising from new technologies, we try very hard to keep EFF from becoming the actual subject of those fights or issues. Since there is no caselaw on this topic, and the legal implications are still very unclear, we worry that our acceptance of Bitcoins may move us into the possible subject role

From the Humble Bundle founders:
Quote
"Hey there, we have talked with the EFF and an attorney about this and it is very complicated to say the least. The stakes are very high and there are some extremely serious unknowns about using Bitcoins. While the concept is great, we are not prepared to be its first major test case, after listening to the advice we’ve been given."


I stand by my interpretation regarding "it's scary".

No - I don't literally think the EFF is '*telling* them not to' in terms of legal advice - I just think they're effectively warning them off - and I think they're doing so based on legal uncertainty.

That is rich coming from an organisation forged in the fires of legal uncertainty.  Do/did they warn people against using any encryption due to lack of legal clarity?

Let's check that:

from: https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq.html.en
Quote
Can EFF promise that I won't get in trouble for running a Tor relay?

No. All new technologies create legal uncertainties, and Tor is no exception. Presently, no court has ever considered any case involving the Tor technology, and we therefore cannot guarantee that you will never face any legal liability as a result of running a Tor relay. However, EFF believes so strongly that those running Tor relays shouldn't be liable for traffic that passes through the relay that we're running our own middle relay.

So the EFF not only  uses Tor despite the 'legal uncertainties' - and that 'no court has ever considered any case involving the Tor technology'  but, they give detailed instructions on how Tor works and how to use it on their 'Surveillance Self-Defense' site:
https://ssd.eff.org/tech/tor


The EFF's SSD site gives a whole load of information about protecting yourself from *government* surveillance.  Here it seems - they're ready to push the envelope right up to the legal frontier - as their name suggests.  

Am I wrong in seeing a double standard here??


There is quite a contrast to their stance on Bitcoin.
I understand they may not have the resources or interest to take it on - in which case - silence would have been preferable to what they've said on the issue so far.








643  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 10:56:55 PM
FWIW I've pointed adainitiative.org to Bitpay's page where they offer to process donations free of charge for 501(c)(3) registered organisations:

https://bitpay.com/bitcoin-for-charities

I also mentioned paysius as a possible intermediary in my initial query - but I'm not aware of a specific page regarding their handling of charities.

I think the bitpay charities page is a good start, but it would be good if it was more descriptive as to the 'tax implications' (or lack thereof!) that these organisations seem to be scared of, and it would be nice also if it showed an example or two of charities which are already using it.


Thank you julz.  The whole point of using a packaged service like BitPay is that we take all of the financial risk, volatility risk, security risk, and legal uncertainties away from the organization.  They can simply accept bitcoin with the gross amount, net amount, and commissions all recorded in dollars.

I get that - but I don't think a Bitcoin-suspicious 501(c)(3) will immediately understand this from looking at that page.
Their fears of massive accounting changes, process changes / staff training,  tax and legal implications  need to be allayed.
Perhaps it's not Bitpay's job to clarify all that on this page - and maybe it does even require a lawyer to write up... but it'd be nice to be able to point them somewhere which states things very plainly.
644  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 10:40:30 PM
I get a strong sense not many people in this thread read the linked article about the EFF (http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/effs-own-chilling-breeze.html )

Quote
For the bitcoin community, a sense of betrayal doesn’t seem entirely unreasonable here. It is not that the EFF should be expected to ‘endorse’ bitcoin – but that the EFF should be perfectly happy to use frontier technologies within the space where they are not specifically legally prohibited, and be willing to work with the community in helping users (or at least not discouraging them) as they move up close to the legal lines. Did the EFF need to eschew all encryption when defending our rights to use it?


To be clear, because people in this thread seem to be seeing this as purely a criticism of the EFF's own decision not to use it - this is more about their effect on other organisations.

They are a legal advocacy group - so their situation is undoubtedly different to most non-profits who are simply receiving donations.
Their public statement should not be such a vague pompous load of "it's scary"... it would be better if they had a much shorter statement saying they weren't using it for reasons specific to 'legal advocacy'.


Please piss off with the moronic comments about not understanding the value of the EFF. They do good work - as strongly stated in the article above. That doesn't put them above critique and public review.
645  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Stripcoin losing popularity? on: October 03, 2012, 10:24:47 PM

There's little point trying to get more girls there - if there aren't enough guys there giving good tips.
Chicken - egg .. yeah yeah..  but there have been some fit girls try it out, and apparently not enough incentive for them to stick around.
I suspect there just isn't enough BTC flowing there to make it worthwhile.
If there was - they'd be posting pics/shows all the time and it would be growing.

I doubt this scene will be particularly vibrant until there is a really large Bitcoin userbase - as presumably it's only a pretty small proportion of folk who are interested in tipping for this sort of thing.
It wouldn't surprise me if a good slice of the tips so far are given by BTC enthusiasts more out of encouragement for the whole idea/industry, rather than any particular enthusiasm for what the girls are showing. (that's my excuse for throwing a few bitcents in anyway!)
646  Bitcoin / Press / 2012-10-03 guardian.co.uk - Bitcoin Foundation hopes to revive reputation of onl on: October 03, 2012, 02:46:02 PM
Quote
Bitcoin Foundation hopes to revive reputation of online currency
Universal anonymity of virtual currency is both its advantage and disadvantage, attracting allegations of fraud and criminality

Peter Beaumont
2012-10-03

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/03/bitcoin-foundation-online-currency?newsfeed=true

...

Now, following these controversies, some of the currency's leading supporters have launched a new foundation designed to rehabilitate the reputation of the fledging online "currency".

...

"There's a lot to love [but] … there are botnet operators, hackers, and ponzi-scheme runners floating around our space," explained chairman Peter Vessenes.

He also alluded to the fact that some governments are far from delighted with the prospect of an online alternative to state-issued currencies. "We occasionally hear threatening statements from government representatives that don't seem to understand the law, much less how great Bitcoins are for the world.

… There are legal questions to be answered about Bitcoins, different ones in different jurisdictions."

...

647  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 02:13:38 PM
Maybe the EFF doesn't consider BTC important enough to warrant their attention.  They have limited resources and have to choose their battles based on their own agenda.

Fine - except that their public statement is a nebulous pile of FUD and their direct statements to other non-profits downright discouraging of adoption.
They should be more cognizant of their effect on the rest of the non-profit community.

648  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 02:01:36 PM
Bitcoin is interesting, but I really can't identify with this religious fanaticism that requires companies, organizations etc to either be "true believers" or "heretics".

Usually I'm accepting if someone has no interest in Bitcoin.
The EFF case is galling because of the 'chilling effects' outlined in the article: http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/effs-own-chilling-breeze.html
It's hypocritical.

I guess I find the Ada Initiative's response a little annoying because
a) they've cited the EFFs FUD

b) The type of technology they say they want to encourage women to get involved in is
Quote
Open source/Free/Libre software
Creative commons, open content, and free culture
Wikipedia and other wiki projects
Open data, including open government data and data portability
Open standards and the “open web”¯
Open education, open access journals
Remix, mashup, and creative fan culture
Grassroots online participation, including online activism
Open, decentralized alternatives to Facebook and other social media

Bitcoin is open,decentralized,grassroots, perhaps somewhat 'activist' - and seems like a good fit.  Well they obviously don't see it. So be it. I tried.



 


649  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: "Avalon" ASIC, announcement & pre-order. second wave @ 9:00am EDT, 10/03 on: October 03, 2012, 01:01:41 PM
Yeah.. umm. How do I order?
650  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 08:24:05 AM
Nothing is stopping from women joining in. People having certain opinions about humanoids with vaginas isn't banning women from this forum.  

If they can't tolerate people having their own perspective, that's just too damn bad.

I'm not against a bit of 'harden the f**k up' as far as online speech goes, but I'm also not averse to initiatives to bring counter-voices in to verbally smack them down.
As we saw with the whole jessy/vegetta thing - that can work pretty nicely.

In the meantime - anyone should be able to smack down that crap whether or not they have penis and identify as male,female or something else; without retarded claims of 'white knighting'.   Well - claim it if you want - but it's dumb.

Nobody's *forcing* you to be a nice person Atlas, I'm just arguing for it in general as a measure which will
a) make this place a little more representative of society as a whole (nearly half the potential population avoiding it isn't a good start)
b) grow the Bitcoin userbase

Do you really have a problem with that?



651  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 07:46:43 AM
I agree this forum is awful in that regard.

The only way around this is for women to be involved in the technology itself. When more women have visibility as code contributors and Bitcoin entrepreneurs - the misogynistic voices here will be smacked down quicker and harder.


It would be pointless for me to try to hide this forum from a womens advocacy group such as Ada Initiative when discussing Bitcoin with them.
It's got to start somewhere - and I don't apologize for holding this forum up as an example of something that's a bit broken, and that they may have the potential to begin to address.



You know, maybe if we didn't white knight women and treat them like some special kind of endangered creature, there wouldn't be a problem to perceive at all.

There's a problem when I'd be embarrassed to tell my girlfriend,mum and/or sister to join up to this forum to join in the discussion - and I would be.
The imbalance is a historical social effect that some are obviously too young and/or ignorant to appreciate.
It's a problem if women themselves see that what is stopping them join in is not so much technical hurdles - but social and community ones.
The existence of organisations such as the Ada Initiative demonstrates this.

Atlas - your ability to see problems where they don't exist and miss real problems is prizeworthy.

652  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 07:13:05 AM
I agree this forum is awful in that regard.

The only way around this is for women to be involved in the technology itself. When more women have visibility as code contributors and Bitcoin entrepreneurs - the misogynistic voices here will be smacked down quicker and harder.


It would be pointless for me to try to hide this forum from a womens advocacy group such as Ada Initiative when discussing Bitcoin with them.
It's got to start somewhere - and I don't apologize for holding this forum up as an example of something that's a bit broken, and that they may have the potential to begin to address.

edit: my comment above regarding 'risk taking' gender differences only reflects my *current* understanding.
From what I see, studies bear this out: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268111001533
I have no opinion on whether this is genetic or social in basis though - it's just something I see as a plausible explanation for a gender imbalance in a technology such as Bitcoin which (largely due to bad press) has a reputation as being edgy/risky.

Once that imbalance exists though - it's accelerated by the obnoxious comments which go unchallenged. Perhaps my discussion of 'risk taking' gender effects isn't helpful either - but if so - I wish there were more women around here to correct any misconceptions I have in that regard!
653  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 06:34:04 AM
Respond and point out that Mark Warden, State Rep for New Hampshire, is accepting bitcoin donations for his campaign:

http://www.markwarden.com/page/contribute-campaign

He's had legal council, etc... One could possibly make the argument that if it's being accepted for state-level campaign contributions, that sets a decent precedent since, obviously, campaign donations are subject to quite a bit more scrutiny than your average non-profit donation.

Thanks - I did point that out to them, as well as Jeremy Hansen in Vermont.

Their latest response:
Quote
The main reason to re-visit it would be a large potential income in
Bitcoin, of which we do not have evidence (although I appreciate it's a
vicious cycle to some degree). Otherwise we'll consume the value of the
donations by orders of magnitude in staff and advice costs to integrate
Bitcoin into our workflow.

I've now pointed out to them the underrepresentation of women in the bitcoin community - along with how misogynistic it can be in here:
"How do we get the women on board?' https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=32386.0

Not the greatest advertisement for this community I'll admit; but if their mission really is to get females more involved in open source Technology - you'd think they'd be interested in addressing this imbalance.

I also pointed out that it was quite likely they'd be eligible for over $1000 USD in initial donations via bitcoin100  which would help offset any implementation costs (which I think would be small anyway).

Really - I think there is an unfortunate imbalance of the sexes here, and it's sad to see this organisation fail to understand that Bitcoin is an important technology.
At the risk of being sexist myself - I can't help but wonder if  the relative scarcity  of females involved in Bitcoin is due to the differences between the sexes as far as 'risk taking'. Certainly by allowing themselves to be swayed by EFF FUD - they appear to be approaching it in a timid fashion.
(I'm sure they'd say 'prudent'/'cautious' - but I'm calling it as I see it).








654  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 04:33:01 AM
FWIW I've pointed adainitiative.org to Bitpay's page where they offer to process donations free of charge for 501(c)(3) registered organisations:

https://bitpay.com/bitcoin-for-charities

I also mentioned paysius as a possible intermediary in my initial query - but I'm not aware of a specific page regarding their handling of charities.

I think the bitpay charities page is a good start, but it would be good if it was more descriptive as to the 'tax implications' (or lack thereof!) that these organisations seem to be scared of, and it would be nice also if it showed an example or two of charities which are already using it.
655  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues. on: October 03, 2012, 04:23:05 AM
Today I received this response from adainitiative.org, regarding my query as to whether they would accept Bitcoin donations:

Quote
Thanks so much for your interest in supporting the Ada Initiative. We've
had a couple of donors interested in donating via Bitcoin but for the
foreseeable future the legal and tax overhead of Bitcoin donations is too
high for us. We've added information to our FAQ:
http://donate.adainitiative.org/donation-faq/#bitcoin

Notice in the FAQ - they cite EFF's stance:

Quote
Do you accept donations in Bitcoin?

Bitcoin is a online payment system and digital currency. Some donors have expressed interest in donating in Bitcoin, but we have decided not to accept Bitcoin donations for the foreseeable future. The legal and tax issues surrounding a non-profit accepting and spending Bitcoins remain unclear and therefore the overhead of accepting Bitcoin donations and spending them on our programs would be very high. In 2011, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) made a similar decision for similar reasons.

It's one thing for the EFF not to accept Bitcoin for it's own reasons specific to legal advocacy - but from the above, we see that their about-face and public statements continue to damage Bitcoin's reputation in the non-profit sphere.

From earlier this year: ( http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/effs-own-chilling-breeze.html )
Quote
When the founders of Humble Bundle were approached they replied:
"Hey there, we have talked with the EFF and an attorney about this and it is very complicated to say the least. The stakes are very high and there are some extremely serious unknowns about using Bitcoins. While the concept is great, we are not prepared to be its first major test case, after listening to the advice we’ve been given."


also:
Quote
A statement from someone at Kiva.org (a technical person, not a legal rep) was particularly illustrative of the chilling effect:
"We talked to some fellow non-profits, and the lawyer from one particular organization gave us some strong reasons to not move forward. We then talked some with our lawyer, who cautioned against doing anything that could distract from Kiva’s core mission by bringing about controversy."
I'm not completely certain - but pretty sure the 'particular organization' referred to above is the EFF.

So... is it any wonder the bitcoin100.org project (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=52543) has struggled to find recipients for Bitcoin charity?


The EFF is an asset to the online community  - but their stance here from 2011 (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/06/eff-and-bitcoin) seems to be an ongoing impediment to Bitcoin adoption amongst non-profits.
Does anyone have any inside contacts at the EFF to see if they're ready to revisit their public position - and just as importantly, the obvious behind the scenes advice they have been giving to 'steer clear' of Bitcoin?






656  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: "Avalon" ASIC, announcement & pre-order. second wave @ 9:00am EDT, 10/03 on: October 03, 2012, 01:13:02 AM
Where did you quote that from? I didn't receive any announcement through the newsletter, as promised.

From the newsletters. It might have been filtered to your spam inbox.

I also received nothing on the original email address I subscribed to the list. No sign of failed delivery in my mailserver logs either - so it may be worth checking your systems Avalon guys.

I recently subscribed my gmail address as a backup - and it got the announcement.
657  Bitcoin / Press / 2012-10-03 bbc.co.uk - Digital currency: Brave new world or criminal haven? on: October 03, 2012, 12:17:46 AM
Quote
Digital currency: Brave new world or criminal haven?

James Melik
2012-10-03

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19785935


Quote
According to Donald Norman, co-founder of the Bitcoin Consultancy, there is $10bn (£6.2bn) worth of the currency in circulation.
Did Donald Norman really say that?


Quote
Greek economist Yanis Varoufakis says in the US even pizza parlours and High Street shops accept bitcoins.


However, Yanis Varoufakis also said on Twitter:
Quote
Bitcoin is based on a brilliant algorithm but the idea of an unregulated digital currency is bound to destroy those who trust it.
( https://twitter.com/yanisvaroufakis/status/252921848180928512 )
658  Bitcoin / Press / 2012-10-02 techradar.com - Google Wallet enters microtransaction market on: October 03, 2012, 12:15:11 AM
single mention.

Quote
Google Wallet enters microtransaction market
Service allows users to pay for digital articles


Clint Demeritt
2012-10-02

http://www.techradar.com/news/phone-and-communications/mobile-phones/google-wallet-enters-microtransaction-market-1101412

...
Many services have tried to create systems where buying content online is easy and safe. But attempts by companies such as CyberCash, DigiCash, and Bitcoin to create such digital microtransaction economies haven't had much success.
...

Another one confused/ignorant about the nature of Bitcoin. Interesting that a tech journalist on a fairly large site is making such a fundamental mis-statement.

659  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: "Avalon" ASIC, announcement & pre-order. second wave @ 9:00am EDT, 10/03 on: October 02, 2012, 11:09:40 PM
Please use UTC for announcements. EDT = UTC-4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC

Yes please.
Even though USD is the de facto yardstick for valuing BTC - it's a shame (and timewasting ) to use US-centric time abbreviations on such a global forum.

Please consider using ISO 8601 date formats too.
10/03 is only unambiguous because March this year happens to have passed.   If you'd said say 11/10  - I'd have been genuinely confused as to your meaning.

C'mon people - Bitcoin is global. Some minor adjustments to parochial habits isn't that hard.
660  Bitcoin / Press / 2012-10-01 nbcnews.com - 3-D printed gun project derailed by legal woes on: October 02, 2012, 01:45:33 AM
Again Bitcoin only gets a passing mention in this story...but it's a good one.

Quote
3-D printed gun project derailed by legal woes

Devin Coldewey
2012-10-01


http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/futureoftech/3-d-printed-gun-project-derailed-legal-woes-6213570

...
The group originally tried to raise money to develop the Wiki Weapon, as they call it, on the crowd-funding website IndieGoGo. The site pulled the plug, however, before the $20,000 the group was hoping to collect was pledged. Undeterred, Defense Distributed solicited donations in the Bitcoin virtual currency, and soon achieved their funding goal.
...
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 ... 125 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!