Topic: Has anyone seen this paper from 1995? (Read 1689 times)
the Silicon Valley 'startup' scene was literally built around a program to shut this movement down. Today virtually all of this overblown, overhyped activity really has the invasion of privacy at it's core agenda. Some of the people posing as 'Bitcoin Experts' are from this network of people and are attempting to steer the Bitcoin community.
It's no accident that the second issue of Wired magazine(owned by Condé Nast) featured the Cypherpunks on the 2nd issue.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden
What Satoshi Nakamoto was doing in 1995 ? Just wondering
If he is a single person, he was probably just a kid in 1995
Quote
How do you think regulation could affect cryptocurrency? Also do you think goverments will go after Dark Wallet, and Zerocoin, if they achieve complete anonymity in cryptocurrency?
Not sure, if bitcoins do actually survive the transition into a currency, then it will have to be regulated to some degree so it will become less speculative and more stable to make everyday purchases. And if an alt-coin becomes too popular, there's nothing preventing someone from just making another anonymous coin to replace it. Can't really be more specific I'm afraid because I'm not Nostradamus
I think it depends on where the government's position is with regard to regulation. If it's embracing the cryptocurrency then it could be a good thing for Bitcoin. For instance maybe it could set a more stable price for Bitcoin, or it could help maintain some of these Bitcoin sites to prevent all the fraudsters from popping up and scamming people. Or they could regulate it away by making it so hard to, for instance, be a currency exchanger that no entity wants to do it.
What Satoshi Nakamoto was doing in 1995 ? Just wondering
If he is a single person, he was probably just a kid in 1995
Quote
How do you think regulation could affect cryptocurrency? Also do you think goverments will go after Dark Wallet, and Zerocoin, if they achieve complete anonymity in cryptocurrency?
Not sure, if bitcoins do actually survive the transition into a currency, then it will have to be regulated to some degree so it will become less speculative and more stable to make everyday purchases. And if an alt-coin becomes too popular, there's nothing preventing someone from just making another anonymous coin to replace it. Can't really be more specific I'm afraid because I'm not Nostradamus
What Satoshi Nakamoto was doing in 1995 ? Just wondering
The technology was already there for the most part, but an interesting outlook 20 years before its time.
Quote
The State will of course try to slow or halt the spread of this technology, citing national security concerns, use of the technology by drug dealers and tax evaders, and fears of societal disintegration. Many of these concerns will be valid; crypto anarchy will allow national secrets to be trade freely and will allow illicit and stolen materials to be traded. An anonymous computerized market will even make possible abhorrent markets for assassinations and extortion. Various criminal and foreign elements will be active users of CryptoNet. But this will not halt the spread of crypto anarchy.
-- Timothy May, in The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto (1) Yes! Very interesting.
So old, yet it feels like it was written just a few years ago.
Same thing I said.
Even back in 95' I don't think it really took a genius to see where the state of things were headed. No one really doubts or doubted, that at some point currency will become fully digitized and will be integrated within all possible means. We've already started this trend long before bitcoins were even conceptualized. Notice how many people purchase items with debit or credit cards these days, without even handling the money physically? But if it's going to be 5, 10, 50, 100, 1000 years from now is harder to say. What replaces the traditional greenback currency is anyones guess, but it will happen at some point in time.
Also, I think crypto-anarchists very much under-estimated the nature of government in it's role in regulation.
Also, I think crypto-anarchists very much under-estimated the nature of government in it's role in regulation.
How do you think regulation could affect cryptocurrency? Also do you think goverments will go after Dark Wallet, and Zerocoin, if they achieve complete anonymity in cryptocurrency?
So old, yet it feels like it was written just a few years ago.
The technology was already there for the most part, but an interesting outlook 20 years before its time.
Quote
The State will of course try to slow or halt the spread of this technology, citing national security concerns, use of the technology by drug dealers and tax evaders, and fears of societal disintegration. Many of these concerns will be valid; crypto anarchy will allow national secrets to be trade freely and will allow illicit and stolen materials to be traded. An anonymous computerized market will even make possible abhorrent markets for assassinations and extortion. Various criminal and foreign elements will be active users of CryptoNet. But this will not halt the spread of crypto anarchy.
-- Timothy May, in The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto (1)
Even back in 95' I don't think it really took a genius to see where the state of things were headed. No one really doubts or doubted, that at some point currency will become fully digitized and will be integrated within all possible means. We've already started this trend long before bitcoins were even conceptualized. Notice how many people purchase items with debit or credit cards these days, without even handling the money physically? But if it's going to be 5, 10, 50, 100, 1000 years from now is harder to say. What replaces the traditional greenback currency is anyones guess, but it will happen at some point in time.
Also, I think crypto-anarchists very much under-estimated the nature of government in it's role in regulation.
Also, I think crypto-anarchists very much under-estimated the nature of government in it's role in regulation.
Jump to: