The EFF's damage to Bitcoin continues.

[julz]

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

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.



 

[stevegee58]

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.

[misterbigg]

I suppose the natural human response of "fear the unknown" applies here.

This has nothing to do with fear of the unknown, and everything to do with fear of losing tax-exempt status.

Avoiding taxes is so valuable that organizations will do backflips to preserve the ability. This is an indictment of a corrupt Federal government more than anything.

[The_Duke]

I suppose the natural human response of "fear the unknown" applies here.

This has nothing to do with fear of the unknown, and everything to do with fear of losing tax-exempt status.

Avoiding taxes is so valuable that organizations will do backflips to preserve the ability. This is an indictment of a corrupt Federal government more than anything.

The same goes for TBF. Search their bylaws for tax-exempt.

[julz]

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.

[The_Duke]

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.

If their statements are so untrue, then why are people following their advice 

[VeeMiner]

Fuck the EFF

Frontier my ass

+1

[stevegee58]

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.

If their statements are so untrue, then why are people following their advice 

H. L. Mencken once famously said "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people".
I'm going to stretch here and say this applies to people in general.

[The_Duke]

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.

If their statements are so untrue, then why are people following their advice 

H. L. Mencken once famously said "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people".
I'm going to stretch here and say this applies to people in general.

Can we go as far as saying that people are quite likely to believe anything a foundation, which they consider to be "important", says?

[GernMiester]

if we ship ASICs.

You mean WHEN, right? RIGHT?

[Malophor]

The EFF is on the forefront of defending digital rights. And they are damn good at it. They've done a lot for the internet before bitcoin even existed. If they decide not to accept donations in BTC then that's their business. I seem to remember reading that another one of the reasons why they had stopped BTC donations was because of the possibility of a conflit of interest should they be called upon to defend BTC.

[RodeoX]

I sent them a letter months ago stating that I will continue my donations to them when they start taking bitcoin. Their loss, in the past I have given them hundreds of dollars. If they are only going to fight for rights that are profitable to them, then who needs them?

[axus]

If Bitcoin can't survive a little corporate hegemony, then what good is it?  I thought the whole point was to have something as durable as the Internet.

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".

We just want Bitcoin to survive as long as possible. Corporate hegemony can end things if we let it.

[reeses]

The EFF is legitimate in its concerns.  It doesn't exist to protect itself from annoying taxation and accounting issues.

They have priorities and a charter.  "Accepting bitcoin" satisfies neither.

Ask them if they would consider something like bitpay if you want to donate to their very noble cause.

Otherwise, we all owe the FSF a huge debt, and each of us should consider allocating a portion of our charitable donations to them.

The smartest move is to figure out why the EFF is not accepting BTC and work to resolve those issues.

[RodeoX]

...
Otherwise, we all owe the FSF a huge debt, and each of us should consider allocating a portion of our charitable donations to them.
...

Done. They can come and get their money anytime. But I only donate in BTC now, sorry.

[BitPay Business Solutions]

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.

[reeses]

...
Otherwise, we all owe the FSF a huge debt, and each of us should consider allocating a portion of our charitable donations to them.
...

Done. They can come and get their money anytime. But I only donate in BTC now, sorry.

Lazy much?

http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/bitcoins-a-new-way-to-donate-to-the-fsf

[RodeoX]

...
Otherwise, we all owe the FSF a huge debt, and each of us should consider allocating a portion of our charitable donations to them.
...

Done. They can come and get their money anytime. But I only donate in BTC now, sorry.

Lazy much?

http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/bitcoins-a-new-way-to-donate-to-the-fsf

Oh, that is the FSF not the EFF.  I do donate to the FSF.

[BitBlitz]

As a card carrying supporter of the EFF, I was disappointed when they made that announcement.  However, it was an understandable decision.  Whether accepting rare seashells, gold bars, or bitcoins, they need to account for donations in their taxes, etc, and there are no guidelines or precedent for accounting for conversion.  They are highly visible, and need to maintain credibility in the court system.  Risking a lawsuit over their tax status was not worth it for them. 

[reeses]

As a card carrying supporter of the EFF, I was disappointed when they made that announcement.  However, it was an understandable decision.  Whether accepting rare seashells, gold bars, or bitcoins, they need to account for donations in their taxes, etc, and there are no guidelines or precedent for accounting for conversion.  They are highly visible, and need to maintain credibility in the court system.  Risking a lawsuit over their tax status was not worth it for them. 

They have enough to point their legal force at, in my arrogant opinion.

Any of you who have dissed the EFF in this thread can nibble lovingly on my assfruit.  You have no idea the debt you owe.