Donate bitcoins to Adam Curry and help get a DSC episode dedicated to bitcoin.

[Anonymous]

Adam wrote this blog post today and mentioned it on sundays noagenda show http://blog.curry.com/stories/2011/05/09/bitcoinGoodAsGold.html

His bitcoin address is in the article. I think it deserves a few bitcoins.

(postscript) I'll up the ante here. Upon a total receipt of 100 BTC's, I will do a new episode of the Daily Source Code podcast. Value for value!

I am sending 33 btc to kick it off.  Want to help get a daily source code dedicated to bitcoin ?




P.S. redirected http://www.noagendamarket.com

[jon_smark]

Though Curry may indeed bring much welcome publicity to Bitcoin, I cannot agree with your statement that he deserves our donations.  I was once swindled into listening to his "No Agenda" podcast, and Oh. My. Goodness.  The guy is borderline schizophrenic with his crazy conspiracy theories.  Moreover, I have never seen anyone so proud about spouting their ignorance to the world.  And I'm not talking about harmless stuff, either.  He went on rants against vaccines and the science of anthropogenic global warming. In the developing world there have been outbreaks of measles and pertussis because parents are not vaccinating their kids as they should.  Children have died, for goodness sake!  And don't even get me started on the wacky global warming denialism...

Anyway, for the reasons above I most certainly won't be donating any money to the likes of Adam Curry.

[FreeMoney]

Though Curry may indeed bring much welcome publicity to Bitcoin, I cannot agree with your statement that he deserves our donations.  I was once swindled into listening to his "No Agenda" podcast, and Oh. My. Goodness.  The guy is borderline schizophrenic with his crazy conspiracy theories.  Moreover, I have never seen anyone so proud about spouting their ignorance to the world.  And I'm not talking about harmless stuff, either.  He went on rants against vaccines and the science of anthropogenic global warming. In the developing world there have been outbreaks of measles and pertussis because parents are not vaccinating their kids as they should.  Children have died, for goodness sake!  And don't even get me started on the wacky global warming denialism...

Anyway, for the reasons above I most certainly won't be donating any money to the likes of Adam Curry.

Children die from cars. Every day. Every day. Every day. Every day. Don't use that scare mongering, save the children BS. Or, if you actually believe that things that kill children are bad then spout it consistently at least.

I haven't listened to this guy. But maybe if he did a bitcoin episode...

[jon_smark]

Children die from cars. Every day. Every day. Every day. Every day. Don't use that scare mongering, save the children BS. Or, if you actually believe that things that kill children are bad then spout it consistently at least.

Talk about completely missing the point.  Stating that Curry's tirades against vaccines are part of a science denialism movement which has already caused the needless deaths of children is not scaremongering or engaging in frivolous "will-someone-think-of-the-children" arguments.  The expression scaremongering implies a certain degree of exaggeration and of drumming up innate fears for ideological purposes.  It is a fact that a decrease in vaccination rates in western countries has already lead to an increase in the incidence of diseases like measles and pertussis, and actual deaths have already been reported.  How does pointing out this fact can possibly be construed as scaremongering?

Moreover, you are making an unreasonable demand in stating that anyone who wishes to criticise factor X1 because X1 causes Y must also in the same message criticise factors X2, X3, X4, ..., Xn which also cause Y.  If one were to apply that standard consistently, then any message in this forum would have to consist of several chapters with appendices and an index at the end.

I haven't listened to this guy. But maybe if he did a bitcoin episode...

Then I suggest you actually listen to his show at least once before you start suggesting that people give him donations.  This, by the way, is an advice that extends beyond this debacle about Mr Curry.  By donating to someone you are endorsing and enabling them.  It is therefore an ethical imperative for that donation to be an informed act, won't you agree?

[fetokun]

Though Curry may indeed bring much welcome publicity to Bitcoin, I cannot agree with your statement that he deserves our donations.  I was once swindled into listening to his "No Agenda" podcast, and Oh. My. Goodness.  The guy is borderline schizophrenic with his crazy conspiracy theories.  Moreover, I have never seen anyone so proud about spouting their ignorance to the world.  And I'm not talking about harmless stuff, either.  He went on rants against vaccines and the science of anthropogenic global warming. In the developing world there have been outbreaks of measles and pertussis because parents are not vaccinating their kids as they should.  Children have died, for goodness sake!  And don't even get me started on the wacky global warming denialism...

Anyway, for the reasons above I most certainly won't be donating any money to the likes of Adam Curry.

Dude, now you'll certainly be crucified by the Glen Becks of this forum!

[jon_smark]

Dude, now you'll certainly be crucified by the Glen Becks of this forum!

You joke, but even though I do love the technology behind Bitcoin, one of the few things that still has me a little on the fence about its future prospects is precisely the feeling that this community is dominated by kooks.

I will concede that early adopters of any disruptive technology are likely to be people on the fringes, which increases the odds they will also be kooks.  However, I reject the proposition that Bitcoin implies kookiness.

I certainly do not count myself as a crank. I'm allergic to conspiracy theories. I have a scientific and sceptical outlook on the world, which also shapes my views on economics.  And guess what, this has resulted in me gravitating towards Keynesianism as the economics theory that is most consistent with empirical observations of economic history and what we know about human nature.  And yes, I do cringe every time the "hive mind" in this forum spouts market-fundamentalism or Austrian mentality.  It may seem paradoxical, but that is precisely why I still hang around here and continue to support Bitcoin.  The concept is too important to let it die because the crackpots took over.

[error]

Hey, Keynesianism is great - it works very well for centrally controlling a large population via the monetary system. Until it collapses, anyway.

[MoonShadow]

I certainly do not count myself as a crank. I'm allergic to conspiracy theories. I have a scientific and sceptical outlook on the world, which also shapes my views on economics.  

Everyone considers themselves to be the rational moderate.

[MoonShadow]

 And I'm not talking about harmless stuff, either.  He went on rants against vaccines and the science of anthropogenic global warming. In the developing world there have been outbreaks of measles and pertussis because parents are not vaccinating their kids as they should.  Children have died, for goodness sake!  And don't even get me started on the wacky global warming denialism...

Children have died because of taking vaccines, which is why not all of them are given to children in developed nations anymore.  Polio is a great example, the illness is deadly, if you get it.  But the vaccine is potentially deadly, again if you get it.  The idea of vaccinating everyone is to wipe out an illness from the face of the Earth so that no more children have to risk death or injury from the vaccine, but most illnesses cannot be wiped out so simply.  My father was messed up by the polio vaccine, and he was an adult at the time.  But back then, nobody really told the parents the real risks of giving their children the vaccines.  Now this is more widely known, and some parents refuse to give their children risky, or any, vaccines.  My own children have only had about half of the "reccommended" set for school children, because they are homeschooled and I can do as I want.  My wife and I choose between them based on the risks of real harm if infected times the odds of actual infection in the modern world and weigh that against the odds of a particular vaccine causing harm.  We live in the US, which means that our children benefit from the 'herd immunity' effect from being in a city wherein most of the other children are vaccinated, and therefore there is no infection vector that could likely reach them anyway.  The public school kids bear the risks, while my kids benefit.  It's not fair, but that's life.

[FreeMoney]

Moreover, you are making an unreasonable demand in stating that anyone who wishes to criticise factor X1 because X1 causes Y must also in the same message criticise factors X2, X3, X4, ..., Xn which also cause Y.  If one were to apply that standard consistently, then any message in this forum would have to consist of several chapters with appendices and an index at the end.

Fair point.

Then I suggest you actually listen to his show at least once before you start suggesting that people give him donations.  This, by the way, is an advice that extends beyond this debacle about Mr Curry.  By donating to someone you are endorsing and enabling them.  It is therefore an ethical imperative for that donation to be an informed act, won't you agree?

I wasn't really saying people should pay him. I was saying I wasn't likely to pay him until after he did a bitcoin show.

I do agree and I don't donate to people who I have fundamental disagreements with. Informed/uninformed is a false dichotomy. You never have all the information and you rarely have none.  When I tip a programmer I just assume he's not a white supremacist negro murderer. I don't think I have an obligation to find out for sure, playing the odds is fine in my ethics handbook.

[fetokun]

Dude, now you'll certainly be crucified by the Glen Becks of this forum!

You joke, but even though I do love the technology behind Bitcoin, one of the few things that still has me a little on the fence about its future prospects is precisely the feeling that this community is dominated by kooks.

I will concede that early adopters of any disruptive technology are likely to be people on the fringes, which increases the odds they will also be kooks.  However, I reject the proposition that Bitcoin implies kookiness.

I certainly do not count myself as a crank. I'm allergic to conspiracy theories. I have a scientific and sceptical outlook on the world, which also shapes my views on economics.  And guess what, this has resulted in me gravitating towards Keynesianism as the economics theory that is most consistent with empirical observations of economic history and what we know about human nature.  And yes, I do cringe every time the "hive mind" in this forum spouts market-fundamentalism or Austrian mentality.  It may seem paradoxical, but that is precisely why I still hang around here and continue to support Bitcoin.  The concept is too important to let it die because the crackpots took over.

I feel the exact same way you do!

[jon_smark]

Everyone considers themselves to be the rational moderate.

It is true we all have our biases and an over-inflated sense of self-worth.  However, it would also be a mistake to assume the relativist position that therefore we are all equally skewed.  Different people occupy different positions in the rational-irrational spectrum.  Furthermore, our innate biases only reaffirm the need for a method of understanding the world based on empirical observation and logic.  This method goes by the name of Science.  Hence -- and going back to the original topic of this discussion -- why I strongly discourage donations to people like Adam Curry who wallow in their ignorance and disdain of the scientific consensus.

[MoonShadow]

Everyone considers themselves to be the rational moderate.

It is true we all have our biases and an over-inflated sense of self-worth.  However, it would also be a mistake to assume the relativist position that therefore we are all equally skewed.  Different people occupy different positions in the rational-irrational spectrum.  Furthermore, our innate biases only reaffirm the need for a method of understanding the world based on empirical observation and logic.  This method goes by the name of Science.  Hence -- and going back to the original topic of this discussion -- why I strongly discourage donations to people like Adam Curry who wallow in their ignorance and disdain of the scientific consensus.

I have no idea who Adam Curry is, but if you think that there is anything close to a scientific consensus on the climate, you're deluded.

[FreeMoney]

I certainly do not count myself as a crank. I'm allergic to conspiracy theories. I have a scientific and sceptical outlook on the world, which also shapes my views on economics.  

Everyone considers themselves to be the rational moderate.

Ha! Not me. I'm an occasionally rational extremist!

[Anonymous]

Everyone considers themselves to be the rational moderate.

It is true we all have our biases and an over-inflated sense of self-worth.  However, it would also be a mistake to assume the relativist position that therefore we are all equally skewed.  Different people occupy different positions in the rational-irrational spectrum.  Furthermore, our innate biases only reaffirm the need for a method of understanding the world based on empirical observation and logic.  This method goes by the name of Science.  Hence -- and going back to the original topic of this discussion -- why I strongly discourage donations to people like Adam Curry who wallow in their ignorance and disdain of the scientific consensus.

I have no idea who Adam Curry is, but if you think that there is anything close to a scientific consensus on the climate, you're deluded.

We are all denialists now. 

Its all moot because it looks like he raised the 100 btc he was wanting to do an episode of the daily source code.

Dont conflate people who listen to different opinions on things with 'kooks'. Pointing out things such as tsa workers not being allowed to wear radiation badges while operating body scanners at the airport does bring up questions as to why. The mass media manipulation that they expose is also a valuable thing.

At least the guys are listener supported unlike pbs who claim to be while taking advertising dollars hand over fist. They dont take corporate "sponsorship" or advertising. Using bitcoin to support less of that is something worthwhile.

[Anonymous]

Though Curry may indeed bring much welcome publicity to Bitcoin, I cannot agree with your statement that he deserves our donations.  I was once swindled into listening to his "No Agenda" podcast, and Oh. My. Goodness.  The guy is borderline schizophrenic with his crazy conspiracy theories.  Moreover, I have never seen anyone so proud about spouting their ignorance to the world.  And I'm not talking about harmless stuff, either.  He went on rants against vaccines and the science of anthropogenic global warming. In the developing world there have been outbreaks of measles and pertussis because parents are not vaccinating their kids as they should.  Children have died, for goodness sake!  And don't even get me started on the wacky global warming denialism...

Anyway, for the reasons above I most certainly won't be donating any money to the likes of Adam Curry.

 I hear someone support "global warming " and they seem like a religious convert. I guess it depends which side of the fence you stand on.

Personally I support vaccines for certain diseases such as polio,measles and whooping cough however what curry is ranting about is the way they bring out vaccines for idiotic things such as smoking. You know that they have made vaccine manufacturers immune from legal responsibility dont you ?

This means you only have to classify something as a "vaccine" and you are in the clear as a drug company from responsibility for harming people. That is incredibly wrong in my book because if you injure someone you should not be protected from making them whole.

[NghtRppr]

We are all denialists now. 

No, I'm not!

[Anonymous]

We are all denialists now. 

No, I'm not!

If you use bitcoin you are ...you deny the banksters their ounce of blood.

[Anonymous]

Dude, now you'll certainly be crucified by the Glen Becks of this forum!

You joke, but even though I do love the technology behind Bitcoin, one of the few things that still has me a little on the fence about its future prospects is precisely the feeling that this community is dominated by kooks.

I will concede that early adopters of any disruptive technology are likely to be people on the fringes, which increases the odds they will also be kooks.  However, I reject the proposition that Bitcoin implies kookiness.

I certainly do not count myself as a crank. I'm allergic to conspiracy theories. I have a scientific and sceptical outlook on the world, which also shapes my views on economics.  And guess what, this has resulted in me gravitating towards Keynesianism as the economics theory that is most consistent with empirical observations of economic history and what we know about human nature.  And yes, I do cringe every time the "hive mind" in this forum spouts market-fundamentalism or Austrian mentality.  It may seem paradoxical, but that is precisely why I still hang around here and continue to support Bitcoin.  The concept is too important to let it die because the crackpots took over.

Bitcoin doesnt care who uses it. Crackpots or not. Thats why we like it.

[shooter_mcgavin]

So...we give him free money........and he'll promote the currency so he can make more money?  Come on -_-