Bitcoin at LewRockwell.com

[hugolp]

I was very surprised and pleased to see an article at LewRockwell.com about bitcoins. Did anyone from here wrote it or at least knew about it?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/luongo7.1.1.html

Also, I think this could count as reference for the wikipedia article.

[FreeMoney]

Nice, I used to read LRC. He's got a lot of readers.

[kiba]

LRC site seem to be full of strange, loony, or simply alternative ideas, at least that what I heard from another libertarian. (To be honest, bitcoins is probably perceived as loony to the rest of the population)

But it's still nice to know that bitcoin is being covered.

[joechip]

I was very surprised and pleased to see an article at LewRockwell.com about bitcoins. Did anyone from here wrote it or at least knew about it?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/luongo7.1.1.html

Also, I think this could count as reference for the wikipedia article.

I wrote it.  I hope you enjoyed it.  Let's see if it results in some new interest.

Ta,

[Traktion]

I was very surprised and pleased to see an article at LewRockwell.com about bitcoins. Did anyone from here wrote it or at least knew about it?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/luongo7.1.1.html

Also, I think this could count as reference for the wikipedia article.

I wrote it.  I hope you enjoyed it.  Let's see if it results in some new interest.

Ta,

That's a great read - thanks!

[hugolp]

I wrote it.  I hope you enjoyed it.  Let's see if it results in some new interest.

Ta,

Yep, it was a great surprise to see it there.

LRC site seem to be full of strange, loony, or simply alternative ideas, at least that what I heard from another libertarian. (To be honest, bitcoins is probably perceived as loony to the rest of the population)

But it's still nice to know that bitcoin is being covered.

LRC is great. People like Marc Faber and Jim Rogers write there.

Lew Rockwell is the founder of the Mises Institute. I usually read the Mises Institute webpage more because its more academic and historical stuff, while LRC is more day to day stuff, also from a libertarian perspective. LRC is more casual, but its great.

[NewLibertyStandard]

LRC site seem to be full of strange, loony, or simply alternative ideas, at least that what I heard from another libertarian. (To be honest, bitcoins is probably perceived as loony to the rest of the population)

But it's still nice to know that bitcoin is being covered.

Revolutionary movements are always started by the loonies.

[joechip]

LRC site seem to be full of strange, loony, or simply alternative ideas, at least that what I heard from another libertarian. (To be honest, bitcoins is probably perceived as loony to the rest of the population)

But it's still nice to know that bitcoin is being covered.

Revolutionary movements are always started by the loonies.

Bitcoin is a natural outgrowth of the types and kinds of ideas that LRC and the Mises Institute spread.  Earlier versions of the article went into that in more detail, but for brevity's sake had to be cut.  It was obvious to me 5 minutes after I first got to the homepage that there was an Austrian influence in the design and that's what sparked my interest.

The thread about the wikipedia page got me off my ass to start writing for LRC again.  What better audience than that one to pollinate with the ideas behind bitcoin.

Ta,

[FreeMoney]

LRC site seem to be full of strange, loony, or simply alternative ideas, at least that what I heard from another libertarian. (To be honest, bitcoins is probably perceived as loony to the rest of the population)

But it's still nice to know that bitcoin is being covered.

Revolutionary movements are always started by the loonies.

That's like a tautology.

[kiba]

Revolutionary movements are always started by the loonies.

For every 100 nutcase loonies that are totally wrong, there are one nutcase who is actually right, non obviously but seriously right. So we ought to be asking ourselves, are we the the right kind of loonies?

[Bitcoiner]

LRC site seem to be full of strange, loony, or simply alternative ideas, at least that what I heard from another libertarian. (To be honest, bitcoins is probably perceived as loony to the rest of the population)

But it's still nice to know that bitcoin is being covered.

I don't read LRC or refer others to LRC, myself, for that reason. However, I find that sites such as Mises.org are able to present these same ideas in a way which can be communicated effectively to mainstreamers without coming across as "kooky" or "loony".

[Bitcoiner]

I was very surprised and pleased to see an article at LewRockwell.com about bitcoins. Did anyone from here wrote it or at least knew about it?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/luongo7.1.1.html

Also, I think this could count as reference for the wikipedia article.

I wrote it.  I hope you enjoyed it.  Let's see if it results in some new interest.

Ta,

Nice, I finished reading it and I did enjoy reading this article. Any chance of getting it cross-posted to Mises.org or another site with less of a stigma attached to it? I've found that unfortunately, the quickest way to get labelled as a loon is to refer someone to a site like LRC. It sucks but I prefer to be able to inject ideas into people's minds without them shooting the messenger!

[joechip]

I was very surprised and pleased to see an article at LewRockwell.com about bitcoins. Did anyone from here wrote it or at least knew about it?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/luongo7.1.1.html

Also, I think this could count as reference for the wikipedia article.

I wrote it.  I hope you enjoyed it.  Let's see if it results in some new interest.

Ta,

Nice, I finished reading it and I did enjoy reading this article. Any chance of getting it cross-posted to Mises.org or another site with less of a stigma attached to it? I've found that unfortunately, the quickest way to get labelled as a loon is to refer someone to a site like LRC. It sucks but I prefer to be able to inject ideas into people's minds without them shooting the messenger!

Thanks for the feedback. 

As for the cross-posting, that's completely up to Lew, since he's in charge of both of them.  I have no control over that.  I see LRC as no more loony than the HuffPo, WND, or OpinionJournal.com  All are unapologetic in their agendas and equally polarizing.  I gave up years ago about worrying about being labeled anything.  I'm a full-on anarchist so LRC is the appropriate site for when the spirit moves to write.  LRC is the politically aggressive site, Mises.org is more of the pure intellectual one.  They both have their uses.  I would argue that LRC is more influential.  By a long shot.  I refer people to both depending on which approach will work better with that person. 

In the end, though, those that do not have eyes to see or ears to hear won't listen to either.  I've learned that planting seeds is all you can do and you'd be amazed at how long it takes for some people to sprout.  But, it happens.

Ta,

[Bitcoiner]

I was very surprised and pleased to see an article at LewRockwell.com about bitcoins. Did anyone from here wrote it or at least knew about it?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/luongo7.1.1.html

Also, I think this could count as reference for the wikipedia article.

I wrote it.  I hope you enjoyed it.  Let's see if it results in some new interest.

Ta,

Nice, I finished reading it and I did enjoy reading this article. Any chance of getting it cross-posted to Mises.org or another site with less of a stigma attached to it? I've found that unfortunately, the quickest way to get labelled as a loon is to refer someone to a site like LRC. It sucks but I prefer to be able to inject ideas into people's minds without them shooting the messenger!

Thanks for the feedback. 

As for the cross-posting, that's completely up to Lew, since he's in charge of both of them.  I have no control over that.  I see LRC as no more loony than the HuffPo, WND, or OpinionJournal.com  All are unapologetic in their agendas and equally polarizing.  I gave up years ago about worrying about being labeled anything.  I'm a full-on anarchist so LRC is the appropriate site for when the spirit moves to write.  LRC is the politically aggressive site, Mises.org is more of the pure intellectual one.  They both have their uses.  I would argue that LRC is more influential.  By a long shot.  I refer people to both depending on which approach will work better with that person. 

In the end, though, those that do not have eyes to see or ears to hear won't listen to either.  I've learned that planting seeds is all you can do and you'd be amazed at how long it takes for some people to sprout.  But, it happens.

Ta,

You can't just throw someone into an ice-cold lake. You gotta ease their minds into it. I find it's easier to get people to listen and learn when you start from a point of common reference. Agreed about planting seeds

[joechip]

I was very surprised and pleased to see an article at LewRockwell.com about bitcoins. Did anyone from here wrote it or at least knew about it?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/luongo7.1.1.html

Also, I think this could count as reference for the wikipedia article.

I wrote it.  I hope you enjoyed it.  Let's see if it results in some new interest.

Ta,

Nice, I finished reading it and I did enjoy reading this article. Any chance of getting it cross-posted to Mises.org or another site with less of a stigma attached to it? I've found that unfortunately, the quickest way to get labelled as a loon is to refer someone to a site like LRC. It sucks but I prefer to be able to inject ideas into people's minds without them shooting the messenger!

Thanks for the feedback. 

As for the cross-posting, that's completely up to Lew, since he's in charge of both of them.  I have no control over that.  I see LRC as no more loony than the HuffPo, WND, or OpinionJournal.com  All are unapologetic in their agendas and equally polarizing.  I gave up years ago about worrying about being labeled anything.  I'm a full-on anarchist so LRC is the appropriate site for when the spirit moves to write.  LRC is the politically aggressive site, Mises.org is more of the pure intellectual one.  They both have their uses.  I would argue that LRC is more influential.  By a long shot.  I refer people to both depending on which approach will work better with that person. 

In the end, though, those that do not have eyes to see or ears to hear won't listen to either.  I've learned that planting seeds is all you can do and you'd be amazed at how long it takes for some people to sprout.  But, it happens.

Ta,

You can't just throw someone into an ice-cold lake. You gotta ease their minds into it. I find it's easier to get people to listen and learn when you start from a point of common reference. Agreed about planting seeds

I'm usually a big enough splash of cold-water.  The recommendations to LRC and Mises.org happen after a fair bit of ground work has been laid.  What I've found is as events unfold people start coming to you looking for answers b/c you've established yourself as an 'expert' on these things that they've never spent a minute caring about.

Ta,