The battle lines are drawn, and the players are beginning to choose sides:
http://valleywag.gawker.com/silicon-valleys-ultimate-exit-is-a-fantasy-of-seceding-1449199349
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303661404579175712015473766
Topic: 10-25-2013 YCombinator: Silicon Valley's Ultimate Exit (Read 1862 times)
Specie drastically limits one's options when it comes to exit. I can move far more value through an international airport via a brainwallet than I can carry in gold or silver.
For that example, I heartily agree with you. Having carried significant value of gold and silver through international airports, I can attest that it is not effortless.
Your example speaks to physical exit rather than monetary system exit.
No argument against brain wallets, I leave argument that to Gavin.
They each have uses. Both are "Exits".
For example, it may be hard to leave a brain wallet where, if you are incapacitated, someone you want to find it will find it.
Sure, the protocol allows for coins to be spent automatically after a time, and one could program a dead-man switch to push inheritance out. Its just something you get for free with material commodities. Its exists outside a head and outside a computer. For some purposes, that is a feature, for others it is a bug.
The two are almost opposite in function but united in purpose, and so are excellent compliments to each other.
there's only going to be one winner in the end.
If you have only one, you are fairly sure to lose in the end. Resilience is all about the plan B, and the plan C, D, E, F
no, it just means you're confused.
No life-vests allowed on your speedboats, eh? They'll just weigh it down.
Specie drastically limits one's options when it comes to exit. I can move far more value through an international airport via a brainwallet than I can carry in gold or silver.
For that example, I heartily agree with you. Having carried significant value of gold and silver through international airports, I can attest that it is not effortless.
Your example speaks to physical exit rather than monetary system exit.
No argument against brain wallets, I leave argument that to Gavin.
They each have uses. Both are "Exits".
For example, it may be hard to leave a brain wallet where, if you are incapacitated, someone you want to find it will find it.
Sure, the protocol allows for coins to be spent automatically after a time, and one could program a dead-man switch to push inheritance out. Its just something you get for free with material commodities. Its exists outside a head and outside a computer. For some purposes, that is a feature, for others it is a bug.
The two are almost opposite in function but united in purpose, and so are excellent compliments to each other.
there's only going to be one winner in the end.
If you have only one, you are fairly sure to lose in the end. Resilience is all about the plan B, and the plan C, D, E, F
no, it just means you're confused.
Specie drastically limits one's options when it comes to exit. I can move far more value through an international airport via a brainwallet than I can carry in gold or silver.
For that example, I heartily agree with you. Having carried significant value of gold and silver through international airports, I can attest that it is not effortless.
Your example speaks to physical exit rather than monetary system exit.
No argument against brain wallets, I leave argument that to Gavin.
They each have uses. Both are "Exits".
For example, it may be hard to leave a brain wallet where, if you are incapacitated, someone you want to find it will find it.
Sure, the protocol allows for coins to be spent automatically after a time, and one could program a dead-man switch to push inheritance out. Its just something you get for free with material commodities. Its exists outside a head and outside a computer. For some purposes, that is a feature, for others it is a bug.
The two are almost opposite in function but united in purpose, and so are excellent compliments to each other.
there's only going to be one winner in the end.
If you have only one, you are fairly sure to lose in the end. Resilience is all about the plan B, and the plan C, D, E, F
Specie drastically limits one's options when it comes to exit. I can move far more value through an international airport via a brainwallet than I can carry in gold or silver.
For that example, I heartily agree with you. Having carried significant value of gold and silver through international airports, I can attest that it is not effortless.
Your example speaks to physical exit rather than monetary system exit.
No argument against brain wallets, I leave argument that to Gavin.
They each have uses. Both are "Exits".
For example, it may be hard to leave a brain wallet where, if you are incapacitated, someone you want to find it will find it.
Sure, the protocol allows for coins to be spent automatically after a time, and one could program a dead-man switch to push inheritance out. Its just something you get for free with material commodities. Its exists outside a head and outside a computer. For some purposes, that is a feature, for others it is a bug.
The two are almost opposite in function but united in purpose, and so are excellent compliments to each other.
there's only going to be one winner in the end.
Also, I noticed that Norfolk Island is now becoming ripe for a new colonising of "Exiters" ... they are suffering an exodus due to a tourism downturn, now population less than 2,000, even with zero income taxes.
So a majority of Exiters (approx. 1,000) could basically take over the place ... to the extent that they don't piss off Australia in the extreme. There's also a long running streak of hard core independence seekers amongst the locals ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norfolk_Island
... here's the kicker, it sounds like a new subsea fibre is soon going to be touching down there
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=11127203&ref=rss
Quote
Norfolk Island is the only non-mainland Australian territory to have achieved self-governance. The Norfolk Island Act 1979, passed by the Parliament of Australia in 1979, is the Act under which the island is governed. .... A Legislative Assembly is elected by popular vote for a term of not more than three years, although legislation passed by the Australian Parliament can extend its laws to the territory at will, including the power to override any laws made by the Norfolk Island Legislative Assembly.
So a majority of Exiters (approx. 1,000) could basically take over the place ... to the extent that they don't piss off Australia in the extreme. There's also a long running streak of hard core independence seekers amongst the locals ...
Quote
The exact constitutional status of Norfolk Island is controversial. Despite the island's status as a self-governing territory of Australia[8] administered by the Attorney-General's Department,[38] some islanders claim that it was actually granted independence at the time Queen Victoria granted permission to Pitcairn Islanders to re-settle on the island
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norfolk_Island
... here's the kicker, it sounds like a new subsea fibre is soon going to be touching down there
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=11127203&ref=rss
Wow! The Force is strong in this One.
Speak softly and carry a big stick.
Great talk.
Speak softly and carry a big stick.
Great talk.
Specie drastically limits one's options when it comes to exit. I can move far more value through an international airport via a brainwallet than I can carry in gold or silver.
For that example, I heartily agree with you. Having carried significant value of gold and silver through international airports, I can attest that it is not effortless.
Your example speaks to physical exit rather than monetary system exit.
No argument against brain wallets, I leave argument that to Gavin.
They each have uses. Both are "Exits".
For example, it may be hard to leave a brain wallet where, if you are incapacitated, someone you want to find it will find it.
Sure, the protocol allows for coins to be spent automatically after a time, and one could program a dead-man switch to push inheritance out. Its just something you get for free with material commodities. Its exists outside a head and outside a computer. For some purposes, that is a feature, for others it is a bug.
The two are almost opposite in function but united in purpose, and so are excellent compliments to each other.
Excellent video. The "exit" vs "voice" framing reminds me a lot of the "innovation" vs "(political) agitation" discussion from a TED talk that was posted here a while back.
Specie drastically limits one's options when it comes to exit. I can move far more value through an international airport via a brainwallet than I can carry in gold or silver.
Wall St is not only holding Silicon Valley back, it is holding the rest of us back. as in the entire country is being held hostage for a continuous stream of bailouts.
here was my update last May 17:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Conflict
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 08:22:19 -0700
From: xxxxx
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
I've detected a new dynamic that is setting up that I believe will be a significant factor in driving Bitcoin adoption. I have not heard this "concept" framed in this manner on the Forums or anywhere else so I believe you're hearing it formally stated here first:
Wall Street vs. Silicon Valley.
I first detected this in Chris Dixon's first interview at TechCrunch here: http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/29/chris-dixon-plans-on-investing-in-more-bitcoin-startups-says-more-entrepreneurs-are-getting-involved/
Then again in another of his videos yesterday: http://pandodaily.com/2013/05/16/for-chris-dixon-the-next-big-thing-might-be-bitcoin/
And finally, it came thru again in the GigaOM event last nite which I attended.
The bottom line is this: The powers to be in Silicon Valley are anxious to snatch the reins of their financial destiny away from the banks and Wall Street upon who've they've depended on forever. And they are going to use Bitcoin as a launching pad to develop a myriad of technical tools to accomplish this task. They will also contribute their talents in making sure Bitcoin is secure from attack. They will also use their considerable monetary war chest to lobby Congress to protect Bitcoin for the long term. These events are how it's going to play out even though they might not exactly realize it yet.
This is another play on the theme of how "geeks are taking over the world"
I believe they will be successful.
here was my update last May 17:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Conflict
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 08:22:19 -0700
From: xxxxx
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
I've detected a new dynamic that is setting up that I believe will be a significant factor in driving Bitcoin adoption. I have not heard this "concept" framed in this manner on the Forums or anywhere else so I believe you're hearing it formally stated here first:
Wall Street vs. Silicon Valley.
I first detected this in Chris Dixon's first interview at TechCrunch here: http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/29/chris-dixon-plans-on-investing-in-more-bitcoin-startups-says-more-entrepreneurs-are-getting-involved/
Then again in another of his videos yesterday: http://pandodaily.com/2013/05/16/for-chris-dixon-the-next-big-thing-might-be-bitcoin/
And finally, it came thru again in the GigaOM event last nite which I attended.
The bottom line is this: The powers to be in Silicon Valley are anxious to snatch the reins of their financial destiny away from the banks and Wall Street upon who've they've depended on forever. And they are going to use Bitcoin as a launching pad to develop a myriad of technical tools to accomplish this task. They will also contribute their talents in making sure Bitcoin is secure from attack. They will also use their considerable monetary war chest to lobby Congress to protect Bitcoin for the long term. These events are how it's going to play out even though they might not exactly realize it yet.
This is another play on the theme of how "geeks are taking over the world"
I believe they will be successful.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOubCHLXT6A
Balaji Srinivasan at the Startup School 2013
This video is a watershed moment, and then the roaring applause. "Holy shit. It'shappening.jpg."
Balaji Srinivasan at the Startup School 2013
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cOubCHLXT6A&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DcOubCHLXT6A
Watch this carefully.
Back in May, while at the Silicon Valley conference, I penned an update to my subs entitled Silicon Valley versus Wall Street.
Guess who I'm putting my money on?
Watch this carefully.
Back in May, while at the Silicon Valley conference, I penned an update to my subs entitled Silicon Valley versus Wall Street.
Guess who I'm putting my money on?
This video is a watershed moment, and then the roaring applause. "Holy shit. It'shappening.jpg."
A thoughtful presentation.
Bitcoin enters at 9:20 as an example of "Exit", a part of the "opt-in" society.
Specie is another often overlooked example of "Exit". As a no-tech result of both digital and mechanical technology for manufacturing, the product is a durable companion currency to any zero counterparty risk transaction base, plays well with others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOubCHLXT6A
Balaji Srinivasan at the Startup School 2013
This video is a watershed moment, and then the roaring applause. "Holy shit. It'shappening.jpg."
Balaji Srinivasan at the Startup School 2013
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cOubCHLXT6A&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DcOubCHLXT6A
Watch this carefully.
Back in May, while at the Silicon Valley conference, I penned an update to my subs entitled Silicon Valley versus Wall Street.
Guess who I'm putting my money on?
Watch this carefully.
Back in May, while at the Silicon Valley conference, I penned an update to my subs entitled Silicon Valley versus Wall Street.
Guess who I'm putting my money on?
This video is a watershed moment, and then the roaring applause. "Holy shit. It'shappening.jpg."
Jump to: