BTW, I consider Roger Ver's criminal conviction a badge of honor that demonstrates the evil and violence of the State towards peaceful, mutually voluntary relations. He paid a high price and has my highest respect.
Topic: Roger Ver and Jon Matonis pushed aside now that Bitcoin is becoming mainstream - page 15. (Read 46570 times)
hero member
Activity: 836
Merit: 1007
"How do you eat an elephant? One bit at a time..."
April 20, 2013, 09:06:28 PM
hero member
Activity: 836
Merit: 1007
"How do you eat an elephant? One bit at a time..."
April 20, 2013, 08:59:23 PM
For what it's worth, Gavin, Matonis, Ver, Voorheese, Mayer, and Berwick are about the only ones I have any interest in listening to. They represent the essence of Bitcoin. They speak truth to power - regardless of how uncomfortable it may be for those who wish to stay in The Matrix.
Bitcoin is about freedom. These individuals don't hide the fact. We need more of them! A strong argument can be made that these ideas are what primarily attracted people to bitcoin in the first place. I know they were for me.
Keep up the great work guys!
Bitcoin is about freedom. These individuals don't hide the fact. We need more of them! A strong argument can be made that these ideas are what primarily attracted people to bitcoin in the first place. I know they were for me.
Keep up the great work guys!
April 20, 2013, 08:49:33 PM
Here's the link to the forum's thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2013-04-15-consult-hyperion-podcast-jon-matonis-bitcoin-foundation-177631
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2013-04-15-consult-hyperion-podcast-jon-matonis-bitcoin-foundation-177631
April 20, 2013, 08:47:04 PM
Quote
Matonis last podcast interview with David Birch is an excellent example of his clarity of thinking and his ability to answer difficult questions.
Do you happen to have a link. I'd love to listen
April 20, 2013, 08:36:17 PM
For an inherent change in government, you need political innovation - that's not Bitcoin.
Sorry to break this to you: Bitcoin is The Rebellion. It's as political as it gets.
April 20, 2013, 08:08:55 PM
Jeff Garzik, gmaxwell and Lukejr turned this into an issue by moving to strike Jon Matonis and Roger Ver, two established Bitcoin community members who present themselves competently and articulately, based solely on their political ideas. Now, instead of discussing the topic of strategy and purpose for the Press Center, jgarzik wants to silence any debate. I think that determining the press strategy is very important.
No, the problem (in this case) is not their political ideas.The problem is that they project their political ideas on Bitcoin, with things such as representing Bitcoin as being a tool used to bring about
Why do you think the goal of the Press Center should be to project or advocate any particular ideas?
I think the goal of the Press Center should be to assist journalists in finding sources that are competent and articulate for whatever particular ideas [Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Pirate Party, whatever, etc.] for their story or segment. To accomplish that goal any particular ideology or agenda of the individual would be irrelevant so long as they are competent and articulate because it will assist the journalists in the performance of their duties.
For example, if a particular member of the press wants to setup a debate between a Republican, Democrat and Libertarian then how is the Press Center going to help assist that journalist if it only includes Potential Interviewees who can competently present objectively or subjectively from only two of three major political parties?
The intentional limiting of the marketplace of ideas does a great disservice to the members of the press that are the intended beneficiaries of this resource. The goal should be to have enough Potential Interviewees that members of the press can find one to fit whatever vignette they need for their story or segment.
Quote
The general objection against Roger Ver is that he has a criminal history. And not just some debatable crime (eg, drug-related or statutory), but selling explosives. For all I know, maybe he was just selling fireworks - or even wrongly accused and railroaded. However, the media doesn't care about the truth: this is a tool they can simply say "Bitcoin spokesman Roger Ver, who holds a conviction for selling explosives to terrorists, blah blah blah". Maybe they can say it regardless of who we put up as a press contact, but having him listed will serve to re-affirm such detraction when it happens.
AGAINST INCLUSION
The criminal record could be used to taint arguments against Bitcoin by showing that one of the community's most ardent proponents is a convicted criminal and Bitcoin should be opposed or stop in order to keep people safe.
But this type of argument by the press would be a logical fallacy of association and an appeal to emotion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy). Nevertheless, the press can act in a way to mould public opinion irrespective of the underlying logic or facts. And the press has stronger facts to use such as Silk Road since it involves current activities.
Notwithstanding, for those reasons Mr. Ver should not be included. If there are additional reasons then please articulate them.
I am only concerned about Bitcoin as a whole and rather unconcerned about the use of the conviction against Mr. Ver on a personal basis as he can pull up his big boy pants and handle himself. Plus, as discussed in the for inclusion section, he could frame the argument in a way that is could help mitigate the damage for both himself and Bitcoin.
FOR INCLUSION
Mr. Ver's conviction happened while he was a young adult, is stale since it is over ten years old, was relatively minor because it involved neither violence nor moral turpitude such as fraud and resulted in only 10 months of jail time, a $2,000 fine and some probation.
A stated intent of the criminal justice system is rehabilitation. Mr. Ver has, to the best of my knowledge, not been convicted of anything else since and has not become a repeat offender. To the contrary, he has built a reputable and profitable company, Memory Dealers, that does millions of dollars of gross revenue with several employees, has been tax compliant and has invested and provided guidance to several Bitcoin companies. Absent the conviction, Mr. Ver would be a great role model. With the conviction, he is a fine example of rehabilitation by showing what those who have had a criminal record can do to become legitimate, useful, productive and contributing members of society.
Additionally, if the press wants to disparage Bitcoin regardless of logic or facts and instead appeal to emotion then who we suggest to them as Potential Interviewees is irrelevant because they will find whoever they want anyway to craft the narrative they want. On the contrary, if Mr. Ver wanted to engage in further criminal activity then he would likely not be seeking such a public profile by running a successful company or giving interviews with FOX Business and other media outlets.
Additionally, while I am not sure whether Mr. Ver was wrongfully convicted, Ohio State University reported that annually over 10,000 innocent people are convicted of serious crimes.
Consequently, Mr. Ver's inclusion would be beneficial because he exemplifies rehabilitation which is a very positive message to be sent, is an articulate and competent speaker who also has business and managerial experience and exclusion for a stale conviction is based merely on an appeal to emotion but not a weighing of the benefits and potential risks resulting from the underlying facts and logic.
April 20, 2013, 06:48:56 PM
They are very great representatives for Bitcoin ! They are well infromed, master in the field, one is well invested and dedicated, the other wrotes tons of quality article, well documented, and he's very respected as a writer. Nice job, nice articles.. Do not have anything against any of them, and I'm always happy to read/listen to a piece from them !
Congratulations folks, keep up the good work, the community owe you respect !
Long life to Bitcoin !
Congratulations folks, keep up the good work, the community owe you respect !
Long life to Bitcoin !
April 20, 2013, 05:51:33 PM
Matonis last podcast interview with David Birch is an excellent example of his clarity of thinking and his ability to answer difficult questions.
No one currently on the list can come close to doing as well as he.
No one currently on the list can come close to doing as well as he.
April 20, 2013, 05:34:01 PM
It seems to me that using Bitcoin.org to promote certain individuals is a bad idea. This entire thread demonstrates exactly why.
April 20, 2013, 04:55:43 PM
In fact, Matonis's biggest contribution might just be sheer civility, precluding many instances of the kind of thoughtless flame war that plagues most beginnings.
The fact he no longer needs to shoulder so much of the burden as 'spokesman' is testimony to bitcoin's success, not to his or the community's failure.
/pb
The fact he no longer needs to shoulder so much of the burden as 'spokesman' is testimony to bitcoin's success, not to his or the community's failure.
/pb
April 20, 2013, 04:53:17 PM
Quote
Projecting such things onto Bitcoin is precisely why Matonis should not be included in the press center.
Bitcoin is a technological revolution, like asymmetric cryptography or global networking.
Bitcoin is a technological revolution, like asymmetric cryptography or global networking.
You are projecting your ideals onto bitcoin, heavily so imho. Jon Matonis rather projects forward the implications of bitcoin/crypto-currencies from his own academic work in the field dating back nearly 3 decades. He has been thinking about these things long before bitcoin was invented and is in a group of very select few visionaries to anticipate such a development. Casting aspersions as to Mr. Matonis's political motivations is a low blow given the amount of his prior work in the cryptological and economic aspects of the technology.
You shouldn't need reminding that Satoshi specifically sought out Jon Matonis (contacted by email) for his input/feedback on technical/economic aspects of bitcoin in early development days. Jon Matonis is a stand-out leader and visionary giant for thinking in the field of monetary freedom ... why anybody would disagree to having him talk about bitcoin, or crypto-currencies in general, is completely beyond me and just comes across as petty and egoistical or maybe ignorant of the history of the field. I think initially Jon may have been reluctant to stand up and speak out about bitcoin but salute him for courage and acumen in delivering a resoundingly truthful account when he does speak ... moar Jon Matonis please.
Money is inherently an apolitical tool, it is an accident of history that we have lived through the last days of a period of heavily politicised money, that bitcoin lights the way for us to escape from. Blinkering yourself to look only backwards on a dark period and be bound by its now antiquated norms surrounding how to think about money is to wantonly ignore the complete vista now being revealed.
April 20, 2013, 04:48:41 PM
Quite apart from his own fluency in the domain, Matonis provides newbies with a convenient initial source of links to credible others who comment on bitcoin and crypto- in general, including views divergent from his own.
/pb
April 20, 2013, 04:27:21 PM
I think a diversity of views is good, as long as the people expressing their views are honest, trustworthy, and respectable.
I still think Luke causes more trouble and strife than he is worth. And I wish people would stop implying he is part of the core development team.
I still think Luke causes more trouble and strife than he is worth. And I wish people would stop implying he is part of the core development team.
So maybe we need a list on the bitcoin.org page or the bitcoin foundation page.
An international list
Think of the German, Russian, and Indian medias as well (and any country in which Bitcoin is likely to generate interest).
April 20, 2013, 04:16:53 PM
Gunpowder utterly changed the economics of warfare, in due course transforming the political landscape of medieval Europe. Cannons obsoleted city walls and did away with what used to be limited-size conflicts fought with mercenary armies. The scale of conflicts escalated and the nation state was born from the ashes of a landscape once populated with hundreds of independent city states.
Cryptocurrencies carry within them no fewer implications for political change than did gunpowder. For future historians looking back on the present day, the Internet and Bitcoin (whether in its current incarnation or an eventual improved one) will no doubt be seen to have been as transformative as were the printing press and gunpowder half a millennium earlier.
Cryptocurrencies carry within them no fewer implications for political change than did gunpowder. For future historians looking back on the present day, the Internet and Bitcoin (whether in its current incarnation or an eventual improved one) will no doubt be seen to have been as transformative as were the printing press and gunpowder half a millennium earlier.
One hopes those historians also see the modern nation-state for the monstrosity it is, like most of us now view chattel slavery.
April 20, 2013, 04:11:18 PM
The fact that Roger Ver was/is a criminal also just boils down to politics. What he did wasn't hurting anyone and shouldn't be illegal. Now you are excluding him because of his political ideology.
Far be it from Luke to ever tolerate one who offends the King. April 20, 2013, 04:09:41 PM
While it is true that my interest in Bitcoin is for the purpose of furthering the Tonal system, I don't pretend that Bitcoin's reason for existence is to promote Tonal.
Ah, right. This crackpottery again. Your analogy fails, in that talk of revolution and/or anarchism (or a lack thereof) actually matter.
Matonis, at least, seems to be encouraging people to break the law almost every time he talks about Bitcoin.
Every revolution is illegal. By definition. For whatever reason, you're finding yourself on the wrong side of this one.Bitcoin is a technological revolution, like asymmetric cryptography or global networking.
Go read the history of the cypherpunks, in their own words. Bitcoin is explicitly political. Heck, go read the genesis block, it's right there!
Quote from: Luke-Jr
I hate political correctness as much as everyone else.
Speculating here, I suspect what you really hate is the fear you feel when you contemplate the idea of a society without top-down control, without rulers and without a comfy hierarchy you can wed yourself to -- and this in your political as well as religious beliefs. There are cures for what ails you!
April 20, 2013, 04:05:19 PM
Gunpowder was an incredible scientific accomplishment, but its real impact was forever changing war. The Bitcoin will forever change money if it succeeds.
But neither gunpowder nor bitcoin necessarily imply change in government.War innovation changes war. Money innovation changes money.
For an inherent change in government, you need political innovation - that's not Bitcoin.
To the contrary. Gunpowder utterly changed the economics of warfare, in due course transforming the political landscape of medieval Europe. Cannons obsoleted city walls and did away with what used to be limited-size conflicts fought with mercenary armies. The scale of conflicts escalated and the nation state was born from the ashes of a landscape once populated with hundreds of independent city states.
Cryptocurrencies carry within them no fewer implications for political change than did gunpowder. For future historians looking back on the present day, the Internet and Bitcoin (whether in its current incarnation or an eventual improved one) will no doubt be seen to have been as transformative as were the printing press and gunpowder half a millennium earlier.
April 20, 2013, 04:03:06 PM
The problem is that they project their political ideas on Bitcoin, with things such as representing Bitcoin as being a tool used to bring about anarchy. Matonis, at least, seems to be encouraging people to break the law almost every time he talks about Bitcoin.
Political correctness is also political ideas. It's not that the ideas of Matonis is political that bothers you, it's that they don't fit your idea of the ideal ideology. By only allowing mainstream / political correct individuals to represent bitcoin, you have already made a political choice.I hate political correctness as much as everyone else.
Roger Ver would, I suppose, be a good example of an anarchist who may be able to be non-political (in public at least), but he's got the whole (unrelated) criminal history problem.
Feel free to suggest other candidates... I can't speak for others, but at least I won't oppose them for merely being anarchists.
April 20, 2013, 03:58:39 PM
Quote
If you really think that, then you have no need to promote anarchy along with Bitcoin - you'll get the same result faster just by keeping your expected end result secret.
(I do disagree, however, with your assessment)
(I do disagree, however, with your assessment)
Do the police and military work for free? Does the government get its weapons for free? Are the courts filled with volunteers. People have to be paid and the government pays them. It controls the underlying asset and thus can compel people with it. They cannot control the Bitcoin and will have to live within the means of the people it taxes instead of just printing more money.
Anyhow, this has deviated from the thread topic now...
April 20, 2013, 03:53:42 PM
Quote
If you really think that, then you have no need to promote anarchy along with Bitcoin - you'll get the same result faster just by keeping your expected end result secret.
(I do disagree, however, with your assessment)
(I do disagree, however, with your assessment)
Do the police and military work for free? Does the government get its weapons for free? Are the courts filled with volunteers. People have to be paid and the government pays them. It controls the underlying asset and thus can compel people with it. They cannot control the Bitcoin and will have to live within the means of the people it taxes instead of just printing more money.
Jump to: