🌀 [banned mixer] - CoinJoin Mixer | Your Anonymity Is Our Priority!

[letteredhub]

when it comes to Phil Zimmermann and his pgp, i would recommend you this german thread: Phil Zimmermanns Gedanken zu PGP - Wir alle sollten sie lesen
for all others interested here is the original thread from GazetaBitcoin: Phil Zimmermann's thoughts about PGP - We all should read them

In this regard I recommend a quick visit to foxpup's first post on the forum.

At same time, let's mention though not just the Twitter post, but also the direct link to the article, from UniJoin's Medium blog:

The Radical History of Bitcoin

In my case I have also enjoyed this week's article that delves into the prehistory of Bitcoin, or the background that made it possible, showing us how wwhen the internet as we know it had not yet been invented the foundations of Bitcoin were already being laid by people committed to privacy and distrustful of large centralized organizations. Of course, governments saw in these movements a threat to their power and tried to put stones in the way but history shows that they did not achieve their goal.

With all that energy and efforts put together by governments over the ast decades to distablize and stagnate the success of decentralization but couldn't achieve their aim. The conviction every lover of privacy and decentralization should hold to heart is that if they the government's couldn't succeed prior to this time when the internet hasn't gained this global acceptance and usage then they will never be able to tarnish decentralization in this internet age. They can only keep on trying based in their pride.

[1714594425]

1714594425

[1714594425]

1714594425

[1714594425]

1714594425

[1714594425]

1714594425

[UniJoin]

I'll leave this here in case someone hasn't seen the raffle announcement!

We still have quite a few places open. 

[paid2]

Unijoin posted a new article : Bitcoin: The story of early versions of digital money

This is an extremely interesting subject and, IMO, unfortunately too under-documented!

We all owe a lot to these trials and these attempts - also unsuccessful - of creating a perfect digital money which opened the way to Bitcoin.

This reminds me this other excellent article from Gazeta: Bitcoin: The dream of Cypherpunks, libertarians and crypto-anarchists

[GazetaBitcoin]

In my case I have also enjoyed this week's article that delves into the prehistory of Bitcoin, or the background that made it possible, showing us how wwhen the internet as we know it had not yet been invented the foundations of Bitcoin were already being laid by people committed to privacy and distrustful of large centralized organizations. Of course, governments saw in these movements a threat to their power and tried to put stones in the way but history shows that they did not achieve their goal.

I am very glad to hear that you enjoyed this essay as well! And, if you are interested about ancient times, "when the internet as we know it had not yet been invented" then I can also recommend you a book: Underground: Tales of Hacking, Madness and Obsession on the Electronic Frontier. You can learn from that book about Australian hackers which activated before TCP/IP era (Australians, just like our queen ), how they managed to hack so many important networks and, of course, you will also learn about Julian Assange's (known as Mendax in that period) group of hackers.

In this regard I recommend a quick visit to foxpup's first post on the forum.

Hehe, that was nice catch, PokerPlayer But... what is the connection between our queen's first post and the blog articles?

Unijoin posted a new article : Bitcoin: The story of early versions of digital money

Thank you for sharing this new material, iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2! I hope that you will also subscribe and like

This is an extremely interesting subject and, IMO, unfortunately too under-documented!

True...

This reminds me this other excellent article from Gazeta: Bitcoin: The dream of Cypherpunks, libertarians and crypto-anarchists

Blushing 

[cygan]

i might have an idea for the next UniJoin x Icarus cards free raffle. how would you like it, that again 16 spots (a-f & 0-9) are given away and this time only the users can participate, who are also participants in the UniJoin signature campaign from icopress in the current week (in which the raffle starts)?
that would be 20 participants with 16 spots and i would also make the announcement in the campaign thread, start the raffle itself again in the collectibles section - would be worth a consideration

[GazetaBitcoin]

how would you like it, that again 16 spots (a-f & 0-9) are given away and this time only the users can participate, who are also participants in the UniJoin signature campaign from icopress in the current week (in which the raffle starts)?
that would be 20 participants with 16 spots

I am not sure I understand... You want to make a 16 spots raffle, I get that. I also understand that you want to be eligible only the users which are enrolled this week in UniJoin campaign. But then I don't understand the part "that would be 20 participants with 16 spots". 20 users won't fit in 16 spots, right...? So 4 will be left out.

From my perspective I would rather switch again to a 16 spots raffle, as the first raffle was done, but allow everybody to participate. It seems it takes a while to fill a 100 spots raffle but I am sure that a 16 spots one will be filled very fast (first raffle was filled in only 43 minutes).

[cygan]

@GazetaBitcoin with the 20 participants i meant the participants in the signature campaign. so there would be the possibility to fill the 16 spots completely with these 20 users

[GazetaBitcoin]

@GazetaBitcoin with the 20 participants i meant the participants in the signature campaign. so there would be the possibility to fill the 16 spots completely with these 20 users

I understand -- and this is exactly what I said: if there are 20 participants and only 16 spots then 4 of them will be left out, right? And this does not seem fair for all, considering that the basic idea was to dedicate the raffle to the campaign participants... For applying such idea, in my opinion, all campaign participants should have a chance, but this can't be done in this case, as they are 20 while the spots are only 16...

This is why I suggested, instead, to allow everybody to participate and make the raffle with only 16 spots. It would look incorrect to say "the raffle is for the campaign participants", considering that not all of them can participate...

[ajiz138]

@GazetaBitcoin with the 20 participants i meant the participants in the signature campaign. so there would be the possibility to fill the 16 spots completely with these 20 users

I understand -- and this is exactly what I said: if there are 20 participants and only 16 spots then 4 of them will be left out, right? And this does not seem fair for all, considering that the basic idea was to dedicate the raffle to the campaign participants... For applying such idea, in my opinion, all campaign participants should have a chance, but this can't be done in this case, as they are 20 while the spots are only 16...

This is why I suggested, instead, to allow everybody to participate and make the raffle with only 16 spots. It would look incorrect to say "the raffle is for the campaign participants", considering that not all of them can participate...

Even at the moment there are 20 participants in the Unijoin signature campaign and icopress is opening up a few more slots which have been announced in the thread, maybe there will be more than 20, maybe 23 or 25 participants for next week.

I will not oppose it even if you say it is unfair, but cygan for the next raffle prioritizes the signature campaign, of course all Unijoin participants have a chance if they know that this raffle is for Unijoin participants only, so whoever he/she is among the 20 participants must quickly take a position to take the slot.

I am not discouraged because there are still many Unijoin x Icarus, so there are still many chances to win for us in the future.

[paid2]

Otherwise you could use the same method as Krogoth

You put 100 places, a deadline for participation, and the draw takes place between those who will participate. With a one-week deadline, that leaves time for everyone, and apparently that fits into 100 places.

[GazetaBitcoin]

but cygan for the next raffle prioritizes the signature campaign, of course all Unijoin participants have a chance if they know that this raffle is for Unijoin participants only [...]

The highlighted part is exactly the issue here, as not all campaign participants would have a chance, lol. Only 16 of them will have that chance, meaning that only 75% of them will actually have a chance.

Otherwise you could use the same method as Krogoth

Indeed, that is a viable alternative. krogoth runs these raffles for a long time now and, although at some point he used to make 16 spots raffles (that was years ago), he later switched to 100 spot raffles and there was no problem if not all spots got filled, because after a week he always announced that he will roll no matter if not all spots are filled... So I believe that this would also be a good alternative if 16 spot raffles will not be chosen.

[cygan]

back to the 20to16 topic... the 20 users have to be quick to secure a spot.
in my opinion, it would not be so good if there were fewer potential candidates than the number of spots on offer.
btw there will be another 17 card raffles and UniJoin can create few more rules

[GazetaBitcoin]

btw there will be another 17 card raffles and UniJoin can create few more rules

Well... if UniJoin takes this decision there is nothing to do about that and we all will respect it. However, from you earlier post I understood that you are looking for some feedback about the new proposed idea... So I wrote my opinion.

So far 3 feedbacks were provided (by iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2, by ajiz138 and by me) and, hopefully, more will come In the end, all these ideas can help for a better organization, right?

[cygan]

✂️
In the end, all these ideas can help for a better organization, right?

right and should be and become the target of a discussion.
i also wanted to write that in the coming numerous raffles may have also applied other variants... i am also curious how UniJoin organizes everything else

[Poker Player]

So far 3 feedbacks were provided (by iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2, by ajiz138 and by me) and, hopefully, more will come In the end, all these ideas can help for a better organization, right?

If the icarus cards are, as I understand, physical cards that have to be sent to me by regular mail, count on one less. I don't want anyone to know my address, and until recently I had a post office box but recently cancelled it. I guess I'm not the only one who thinks this way, so I think 16 for 20 or so participants will be enough.

I guess the logical thing to do is count as participating only those who sign up, as iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2 comments.

[LoyceV]

i might have an idea for the next UniJoin x Icarus cards free raffle. how would you like it, that again 16 spots (a-f & 0-9) are given away and this time only the users can participate, who are also participants in the UniJoin signature campaign from icopress in the current week (in which the raffle starts)?

As much as I like the free raffles, I think it's a terrible idea to combine the slogan "Your Anonymity Is Our Priority" with physical items delivered to your doorstep.

[paid2]

Personally, when I need to have something delivered from the forum, I choose a letterbox belonging to a third party, or I use an empty box in a building and put the name of my choice on it (in my country, postman's key-passes are legal to buy as an individual).

People can always choose to have their items delivered where they want and with someone else's name on it. What I mean is that there's no proof that the cards are sent to the users' real addresses.

[hopenotlate]

I took the liberty of translating the initial post into Italian since it wasn't there yet
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5468405.0

Please have a look at it and let me know if I have messed up something in the formatting or if you notice that something is wrong.

[paid2]

I took the liberty of translating the initial post into Italian since it wasn't there yet
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5468405.0

Please have a look at it and let me know if I have messed up something in the formatting or if you notice that something is wrong.

Well done for the translation !

But you are affiliated with Unijoin in some way, as your are part of the sig campaign  

Disclaimer : non sono affiliato in alcun modo con questo progetto, ho solo provveduto a tradurlo in Italiano.
Deepl translation : Disclaimer: I am not affiliated in any way with this project, I have only translated it into Italian.

[hopenotlate]

I took the liberty of translating the initial post into Italian since it wasn't there yet
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5468405.0

Please have a look at it and let me know if I have messed up something in the formatting or if you notice that something is wrong.

Well done for the translation !

But you are affiliated with Unijoin in some way, as your are part of the sig campaign  

Disclaimer : non sono affiliato in alcun modo con questo progetto, ho solo provveduto a tradurlo in Italiano.
Deepl translation : Disclaimer: I am not affiliated in any way with this project, I have only translated it into Italian.

You are correct on this.
My participation in their campaign is necessarily temporary (either because the campaign will end, or because I could withdraw my participation or the campaign manager could kick me out at any time) while that thread will remain on the internet basically forever. Once I will not be part of the campaign anymore it will be true.

Do you think I should add a further mention regarding my participation to the signature campaign?