Gavin will visit the Council on Foreign Relations

[coinrevo]

genjix +1
dewdeded +1

genjix has phrased it well. This is important stuff. Actions and decisions matter. Nobody is neutral here. The work of the developers is build on their beliefs how information systems should operate. bitcoin was the dream of crypto anarchists since the late 80's and now this "foundation" marks it as non-political money? seriously - what a shame. this is quint essential politics - how are people in the future going to co-operate and co-ordinate.

all of this 1 month after Wikileaks leak about TPP
https://wikileaks.org/Second-release-of-secret-Trans.html
http://www.cfr.org/trade/trans-pacific-partnership/p29303

[Elwar]

Gavin, while I do not support the CFR and believe that a majority of their members support war, I will give some constructive advice.

Since the subject is Bitcoin your audience is not expecting war talk like if Dick Cheney or John McCain were speaking. Most likely their concern is the US dollar as the world reserve currency. It is very vital to the US economy that the US dollar remain the world currency because that is basically all we have anymore, that and our military might.

So your approach should be to explain Bitcoin, assure them that it is very unlikely to replace the dollar any time soon and emphasize that the US is currently winning against China when it comes to Bitcoin adoption and that if we want to stay the world's dominant economy we need to embrace Bitcoin and encourage its use in the US lest other countries embrace it sooner and leave the US behind.

You can show some statistics showing the United States as having the most Bitcoin activity which likely means the most Bitcoin adoption which means that supporting Bitcoin in the US will keep us ahead of the Chinese who are right behind us in adoption.

Here are a few links with graphs showing adoption by country:
http://nikola.pekas.org/wp0/
http://bitcoinstatus.rowit.co.uk/countryHosts.html
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=how%20buy%20bitcoins (Google trends: how buy bitcoins)

CFR folks will eat up a US vs China argument and want to beat the Chinese, even in Bitcoin use.

[coinrevo]

bitcoin has nothing to do whatsoever with the United States. the citizens of the US don't own this currency. bitcoin is the first global, truly international currency. its the first in history, so some people ought to get some perspective what this means. the history of money has always been connected to the history of rule, ever since the first gold coins were minted in ancient turkey 2500 years ago. its truly amazing that human beings have all this knowledge and yet are effectively blind to the tides of history.

[guybrushthreepwood]

bitcoin has nothing to do whatsoever with the United States. the citizens of the US don't own this currency. bitcoin is the first global, truly international currency. its the first in history, so some people ought to get some perspective what this means. the history of money has always been connected to the history of rule, ever since the first gold coins were minted in ancient turkey 2500 years ago. its truly amazing that human beings have all this knowledge and yet are effectively blind to the tides of history.

True, but that isn't going to stop the government from putting regulations and trying to tax it. They're not gonna sit back and watch us launder money freely.

[genjix]

I'm usually pretty careful not to call people names.  Did I screw up?

I DO think there are lots of crazy conspiracy theories. I might even believe some of them myself, but that doesn't make me crazy (just "almost certainly wrong.").

RE: child exploitation:  Good example.  We all agree that child exploitation is BAD, right?

We might disagree about what (if anything) we should DO about it, but isn't it worth discussing whether or not there is something we MIGHT do about it?  For example, maybe offering mostly-anonymous bounties to reward anybody who gives information that leads to the arrest and conviction of people abusing children for profit or pleasure is a good idea.  Maybe those bounties could be paid in Bitcoin.

Maybe that is a terrible idea that will have awful consequences, but instead of rational discussion there's a knee-jerk GOVERNMENT BAD! that, in my humble opinion, is counter-productive to making the world a better place.

I don't like people assuming that they know what I'm thinking, or assume that because I'm willing to talk to people that I agree with those people, or assume that because I'm pragmatic about regulation I "want regulation."  For the record:  I'm mostly libertarian, I think we'd be just fine if we replaced 99.911% of regulations with voluntary, private, market-based solutions. But that ain't gonna happen any time soon.

This logic is deeply flawed. Note, nobody is not telling you not to meet with people. But this stance of currying favour by being willing to sacrifice your sovereignty in exchange is fucking dangerous! It's the same story why in the UK for instance, we ended up the IWF (a fake charity and shadow organisation) who censors the internet - despite no laws or regulation existing. It was an organisation formed preemptively by ISPs worried about the threat of censorship... Well we can see how that's turned out; it's ended up being the foot in the door for control freaks and now the UK internet is basically unusable with default filters on every new internet connection that requires national ID to opt-out to a weaker blacklist.



You're willing to compromise on Bitcoin's fundamentals to help a few exchange businesses?! You can't trivialise regulation of cryptocurrency (possibly as fundamental as the internet) by comparing it to something meaningless. All this talk about placating to power is part of a deeper issue in Bitcoin. There's this dangerous attitude among the elite Bitcoin class that the anarchists invented this nice plaything but now it needs to be taken away from them and legitimised in order to become acceptable for everyone else. Note, this same attitude has played out with the internet. And anytime we didn't hold steadfast and resist, we lost our integrity forever.

Do you honestly believe giving the people in power "warm fuzzies" does anything but empower them? Do you see yourself as a keizer soze type figure moving in powerful circles undermining their standing from within? Or is the reality more that you're compromising on what Bitcoin stands for in the name of pragmatism.

Pragmatism is what people tell you when you try to do the right thing. It's an excuse to divert your attention from doing whats right because of fear. Fear of failure, fear of retribution, fear of whatever. "be pragmatic, be realistic", but in your heart you know that is only corruption speaking. It is through being "pragmatic" that we accept the situation as unchangeable and end up supporting a situation we don't support.

You are being used as a figurehead to represent the viewpoints and interests of others to push their agenda. By remaining silent on issues, and remaining in their circles, you are consenting to their actions.

[bitcad4u]

Well.. if Gavin fucks up Bitcoin.. there is always Litecoin

[guybrushthreepwood]

Well.. if Gavin fucks up Bitcoin.. there is always Litecoin

Then people will start crying when Charles Lee is invited to speak with da big bad government.

[coinrevo]

As Andreas pointed out first one on the blacklist would be Wikileaks, and last would be HSBC (money laundering inc.). Wondering what the CFR has to say about that. Its really the question what the goals of the project/network/developers have. Problem is SSH access to the repository should be a different mechanism and how do developers respond to outside ideas/pressure/suggestions/....

[mmitech]

Well.. if Gavin fucks up Bitcoin.. there is always Litecoin

if Bitcoin somehow is ruined pretty much all alts will follow.... as simple as that

[guybrushthreepwood]

As Andreas pointed out first one on the blacklist would be Wikileaks, and last would be HSBC (money laundering inc.). Wondering what the CFR has to say about that.

If they ask about problems with money laundering or drugs ask them what they're doing about the problem with banks laundering drug money. Simple.

[knight22]

For those who might be interested

http://www.cfr.org/economics/crs-bitcoin-questions-answers-analysis-legal-issues/p32148
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43339.pdf

[Carlton Banks]

Another angle you're all forgetting is that the CFR may take this opportunity to subtly propagandise their preferred direction of development for cryptocurrencies. Who knows what that could be.

But apparently the very unsubtle strategy of beckoning Gavin towards the Dark Side in a pre-publicised meeting is the only thing that's possible.

I do not see how sabotaging bitcoin itself could possibly work, and anyone who believes otherwise is underestimating the intelligence of this class of people who they dislike/fear so much. My opinion is that we will get to see a cryptocurrency-ubiquitous world monetary system, the concept is too powerful to ever be restrained. If you've spent enough time thinking all the consequences through, you should see that.

But what other changes can we expect to accompany such a world? We would be wise to consider the range of possible changes, as it's much more of an imaginitive leap than "Gavin helps kills bitcoin and we'll be stuck in 2014 type-world forever". That's just about the least likely scenario.

[justusranvier]

I do not see how sabotaging bitcoin itself could possibly work, and anyone who believes otherwise is underestimating the intelligence of this class of people who they dislike/fear so much. My opinion is that we will get to see a cryptocurrency-ubiquitous world monetary system, the concept is too powerful to ever be restrained. If you've spent enough time thinking all the consequences through, you should see that.

The most effective way to sabotage Bitcoin is to allow critical portions of the codebase to bitrot and block or delay critical improvements such that an alternative that is more palatable to the establishment would appear artificially viable by comparison.

Did you know, for example, that parts of the script validating code relies on undefined compiler behaviour that effectively makes gcc-specific quirks part of the Bitcoin protocol?

Instead of this being treated as an important bug that should be fixed it's just used an an example of why there shouldn't be diversity in implementations. After a while bugs like that start looking less accidental and more weaponized.

It's also kind of funny that when you collect quotes from the core dev team you find that Bitcoin inhabits a state of superposition between two states: it's simultaneously "just an experiment" and also a "critical piece of code which a lot of money is tied up in" depending on whether you're asking for quality accountability or asking for innovation.

[coinrevo]

My opinion is that we will get to see a cryptocurrency-ubiquitous world monetary system, the concept is too powerful to ever be restrained. If you've spent enough time thinking all the consequences through, you should see that.

I agree, but there are many problems which haven't been solved yet, some of which are very hard. For example: how do you make changes to a code repository such that you have an agreement of users? the current model is: there is a repo which is sealed by private keys of a few individuals, every since satoshi handed over the keys. it looks some kind of steady state is reached. secondly, how do you distribute hashing power so that alternatives are not vulnerable? new alts can be easily crushed in a PoW scheme.

[JohnsonRobinson]

I think it is critical to recognize the dangerous psychology of groups such as the CFR and the individuals of whom they are comprised.

The Book 'Political Ponerology' explains it well.  As sobering and nasty as this reality may be, we the masses have to figure out a way to protect ourselves / the planet from the present ultra elite, which is devoid of a capacity for compassion / caring and comes from a position of ultra-exceptionalism.

If we can wrest away the money power from them by implementing crypto currency for the masses, that's a great place to start!  The next step is to imprison them / remove them from society, figure out psychological tests against psychopathic / sociopathic tendencies for those holding positions of power (government / large corporations), and get rolling with a much more consensus-based world (possibly driven the technology underlying cryptos).

The path we are on now just has to be changed, but I believe it is very possible, it just starts with good values (which I do believe most of us have) and good tools (fair money for the masses; and psychological tests for those in power).

"Do not seek authority."  paraphrasing Jiddu Krishnamurti
"There is ALWAYS hope."  Aragorn

[FandangledGizmo]

Question: What do you call a Bitcoin which has the advantage of full compliance but the disadvantage of freezable wallets, fully traceable transactions and black-listable coins?

Answer:  A traditional bank account.


I.e If any change is implemented that effects the principals on which Bitcoin was founded it will just fork and take 80% of it's user base with it.
It will be so obvious it is no longer 'Bitcoin' that it's one of the biggest non-threats I've come across.  
I think what Gavin is doing is very smart, it buys Bitcoin (Which does have some actual weak spots - like  the centralisation of mining) a lot of time to expand & address issues without being curtailed.

In fact I'd encourage him to offer them a Bitcoin that has everything they could possibly want and more to be included in single update with 6 months notice. (Of course this will set him up as Dr. Evil in the eyes of the Bitcoin community but it looks like it's a sacrifice his willing to make.)

Question: Should I stay on the original Bitcoin fork or switch over to Bitchcoin?

Answer: Hmm, such a tough decision...

Personally, my response is, thank you.

[yatsey87]

Has anybody thought that the Gavin that goes in to the CFR lair might not be the Gavin that comes out? 

[coinrevo]

I.e If any change is implemented that effects the principals on which Bitcoin was founded it will just fork and take 80% of it's user base with it.

"just forking" is not an option. there are very few capable developers and they all are currently working on bitcoin. guess why. principles of which bitcoin was founded - sounds nice, but reality is somewhat more sobering. satoshi could easily fork a version he wants and hand keys to someone, but everyone else would have a very hard time establishing credibility.

[Patel]

Why does the Bitcoin Foundation want to suck on regulation's dick so bad?

Our developers are turning into regulation puppets by mixing in with the politics.

[coinrevo]

Patel, haven't figured this out yet? Imagine you own, say 10'000 BTC. what will make the price go up? its the natural incentive structure. however we haven't really seen this kind of wealth creation before, so it will be interesting to see if there are other protocols that are possible.