the social Bitcoin

[obfuscatory]

Wonderful thread, very interesting read. I would quote some people as I have some questions about your points but I thought I would generally state my views that are relevant here.

Society is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to have a passport, birth certificate or social security number. These are documents of registration which mean that the confer ownership from the individual to the agency managing the document (government, the financial corporations and central agencies. In the UK, every birth certificate is owned by crown copyright. This is what enables prosecution under Acts and Statutes and the payment of Taxation. Stephan Molyneux has some interesting material on this but stated in brief: The system of wage slavery and prosecution outside Common Law is perpetuated by registering your children at birth, identifying to tax accounts, saying 'Yes that's me, I UNDERSTAND (stand under the authority of Act and Statue) you officer' to the police. To live once again as humans, we have to refuse to accept the Legal authority of such documents (leaving the farm so to speak). Whilst this is the dream for many of us here in cryptoland, practically in can be difficult to acquire the minimum assets to move somewhere in the world where freedom is more fruitfully implemented. Furthermore many of us might wish to adapt/reconstruct the current systems of control to enable the kind of civilization that we want for children and loved ones (that too is a long term goal that requires huge shifts in the social understanding of current human society, and CryptoHumanity 2.0)

1- When you identify to a document (passport, ID card) by saying 'I (this human being) BOB of the family SMITH am (accept legal responsibility for) MR BOB SMITH (the legal document/ personal corporation owned by Crown Copyright, the Social Security Service etc)', you make yourself liable for any title, fine or prosecution upheld by a court or legal corporation.

2- Associating your crypto assets to these legal entities (MR BOB SMITH's tax account) is a legal grey area. However even doing so states a fundamental complicity with the systems by which these legal entities are enabled. For me, that stands in direct opposition with the reason I got into cryptoculture (independence from the 'farm' of legal entities) and thus cannot be treated as an end in itself. I intend to become incorporated as cryptoasset manager under UK law but it is going to take come creativity and Legal knowhow, but this is an interim solution until I can afford self sufficiency and and internet connection somewhere outside the remit of the financio-corporate-governance cartel : )

3- Cryptocurrency represents a new socio-economic sphere of action in which citizens can facilitate their needs. Those who are disengaged from mainstream politics, and see the malevolent and controlled nature of the current fiat economy for what it is (wage slavery& soul destroying consumerism) have the opportunity to free their assets and livelihood from the current socio-economic arrangement. This is a threat to the illusory system of control enforced upon nearly the entirety of humankind by government and corporations, so they will be resistant enabling it in policy.

What are the options? Move to an island and start again, or pull together and push for CryptoLife in the current matrix of control?

[Rassah]

just leaving you a text from Bessie A. Stanley:

"What is Success?

To laugh often and love much; to win the respect of intelligent persons and the affection of children; to earn the approbation of honest citizens and endure the betrayal of false friends; to appreciate beauty; to find the best in others; to give of one’s self; to leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a garden patch or a redeemed social condition; to have ?played and laughed with enthusiasm and sung with exultation; to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived—this is to have succeeded"

I guess we should consider many large corporations to have succeeded then, since they have made much of the third world wealthier, healthier, and better off socially.

[capoeira]

haters gonna hate:

http://www.videosdodia.com/vida-da-muitas-voltas/

[Rassah]

haters gonna hate:

http://www.videosdodia.com/vida-da-muitas-voltas/

Are you implying that free market capitalists are against this?

I think a version of this video that would fit the current socialist government model would involve someone in a police uniform approaching every one of those people, forcing them to give up some of their money under the treat of authority, and using it to pay some designated "helper" to provide help to the next person in line. Because that's how government works, not with people being nice enough to help each other, but with government taking everyone's money so that the government can hire public employees to help people.

[capoeira]

haters gonna hate:

http://www.videosdodia.com/vida-da-muitas-voltas/

Are you implying that free market capitalists are against this?

Or this, or they are just to innocent to realize that people are not like this in the video.

cause reality is this:

[Rassah]

haters gonna hate:

http://www.videosdodia.com/vida-da-muitas-voltas/

Are you implying that free market capitalists are against this?

Or this, or they are just to innocent to realize that people are not like this in the video.

cause reality is this:

http://placemanagementandbranding.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/favela1.jpg

The immage is of a favela, a shanty town in Brazil. It is also an example of what you get if your country ranks 126th out of 181 in "ease of doing business" rankings from excessive regulations which prevent private investment,  and a corruption score that places Brazil 72nd in the world, worse than Italy, which is known for its mafias and corrupt government officials, and even worse than African nations like Ghana and Rwanda.

Yes, this is a perfect example of what happens when there is the exact opposite of a "free market" in a country.

[Lethn]

I've never understood the appeal of living in a multi-story death trap without any land to call your own and being far too close to your neighbours so they can hear your conversations through the wall.

[capoeira]

haters gonna hate:

http://www.videosdodia.com/vida-da-muitas-voltas/

Are you implying that free market capitalists are against this?

Or this, or they are just to innocent to realize that people are not like this in the video.

cause reality is this:

http://placemanagementandbranding.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/favela1.jpg

The immage is of a favela, a shanty town in Brazil. It is also an example of what you get if your country ranks 126th out of 181 in "ease of doing business" rankings from excessive regulations which prevent private investment,  and a corruption score that places Brazil 72nd in the world, worse than Italy, which is known for its mafias and corrupt government officials, and even worse than African nations like Ghana and Rwanda.

Yes, this is a perfect example of what happens when there is the exact opposite of a "free market" in a country.

you mean the favelas would stop existing in a 100% free market? that's stupid. they were formed in a 100% free market: slavery and after

[Rassah]

you mean the favelas would stop existing in a 100% free market?

Yes! Because outside investment (foreign corps and businesses) would come in and employ the hell out of all those poor workers, since they are already used to being paid almost nothing, then over time (noot a very long time) these workers would learn skills on the job, demand higher pay for hiquer quaality work, and because there will be fewer of them available to employ (unemployment will go down), and many of them would end up in lower-middle class status. Exactly as it happened in many of the Southeast Asian countries, where people were poorer than they are even in Brazilian favelas, but are now way richer than them.

[capoeira]

you mean the favelas would stop existing in a 100% free market?

Yes! Because outside investment (foreign corps and businesses) would come in and employ the hell out of all those poor workers, since they are already used to being paid almost nothing, then over time (noot a very long time) these workers would learn skills on the job, demand higher pay for hiquer quaality work, and because there will be fewer of them available to employ (unemployment will go down), and many of them would end up in lower-middle class status. Exactly as it happened in many of the Southeast Asian countries, where people were poorer than they are even in Brazilian favelas, but are now way richer than them.

wow...so easy? genious. Brazlian Government must be stupid ;-)

[Rassah]

wow...so easy? genious. Brazlian Government must be stupid ;-)

They wouldn't be having favelas, or riots, if it wasn't.

[capoeira]

wow...so easy? genious. Brazlian Government must be stupid ;-)

They wouldn't be having favelas, or riots, if it wasn't.

when slavery ended, government did nothing for the now free slaves. if the government had had social programs like the actual government has, they would never have formed. 

[elchelito]

Let us assume that our "Utopia " from Bitcoin as the dominant currency becomes reality .

Most here say Bitcoin is liberal. Is it really liberal ? The majority decides (51%), so it is democratic. Would it be liberal, the richest would decide .

Now, if Bitcoin is predominant currency that will unfortunately have changed little in the world. The Rothschilds and the likes are out of the game , yet we would probably have a situation again where at the end 5% of the people own 95% of the Bitcoins .

Now only theoreticly , without considering the technical feasibility:
What if now the majority decides that every individual can have only one Bitcoinwallet ? Now what if the majority further decides that each wallet can only contain a certain number of Bitcoins , and all the wallets exceeding this maximum, automaticly distribute the surplus evenly to all wallets?

The majority would benefit , so why should the majority not decide for it?

This is just a hypothesis which ignores any technical consideration.

(i know this is probably a very unpopular post for liberals; try to be kind please)



Thoughts?

I think your idea is great and straight to the point. Just posted this here before reading your post. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=382645.0

Distribution of wealth through technology and democracy, good stuff!

[capoeira]

new food for thoughts:

once BTC is dominant currency, and 95% of BTCs are in the hand of 5% of world population. why would those 95% who got the rest stay with Bitcoin? they will abandon it and simply adopt another coin, wouldn't they? BTC will have only value between the richs, which would make them useless.
(just beginning to think about this, a guy on facebook gave me that "food" 10min ago; sharing this "food" with you guys)

people are allready dicussing "horizontal mining". a coin in the hand of few people wont survive in the end. write it down

[capoeira]

new food for thoughts:

once BTC is dominant currency, and 95% of BTCs are in the hand of 5% of world population. why would those 95% who got the rest stay with Bitcoin? they will abandon it and simply adopt another coin, wouldn't they? BTC will have only value between the richs, which would make them useless.
(just beginning to think about this, a guy on facebook gave me that "food" 10min ago; sharing this "food" with you guys)

people are allready dicussing "horizontal mining". a coin in the hand of few people wont survive in the end. write it down

plus: coins like ComunityCoin are apearing.

[Kiki112]

because it's stealing, the rich bitcoiners invested lots of money fair and square for those coins..