Topic: Roger Ver and Jon Matonis pushed aside now that Bitcoin is becoming mainstream - page 3. (Read 46570 times)

Best laugh I've had all week! Horrible analogy and an even worse article!
This guy is about as dangerous as a grandma running you down with her electric wheelchair...

Back on topic...

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/most-dangerous-people/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&pid=1696

"The Wiki Weapon project is not the work of a dispassionate techie seeking to push the outer limits of modern technology. Instead it is a blatant, undisguised attempt to radically alter our system of government."

This is a perfect example of exactly why Bitcoin would be harmed by listing people like Matonis on anything portrayed as official.

Bitcoin is the work of "passionate techies seeking to push the outer limits of modern technology", but having radicals as "spokespersons" would be an "undisguised attempt to radically alter our system of government."

This is a perfect example of exactly why Bitcoin would be harmed by listing people like Matonis on anything portrayed as official.

Your misinterpretation is crazy, and contrary to the infallible teaching magisterium of the Church

If you're obedient just because you like to be, that's your problem.

I hear you're a Christian. You do know that when Jesus said "Render unto Caesar...", what he was actually saying was the nothing is Caesar's and we don't owe anything to the government.

I say that only because some Christians get confused and think the suggestion was that Caesar should get taxes. Far from it.

✝*Then the Pharisees departing, consulted among themselves for to entrap him in his talk. ✝And they send to him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art a true speaker, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man. for thou dost not respect the person of men. ✝Tell us therefore what is thy opinion, is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? ✝But JESUS knowing their naughtiness, said: What do you tempt me, Hypocrites? ✝Show me the tribute coin. And they offered him a penny. ✝And JESUS saith to them; Whose is this image and inscription? ✝They say to him: Caesar's. Then he saith to them, Render therefore the things that are Caesar's to *Caesar: and the things that are Gods, to God.

21. To Caesar.] Temporal duties and payments exacted by worldly Princes must be paid, so that God be not defrauded of his more sovereign duty. And therefore Princes have to take heed, how they exact: and other, how they give to Caesar, that is, to their Prince, the things that are due to God, that is, to his Ecclesiastical ministers. Whereupon St. Athanasius receiveth these goodly words out of an epistle of the ancient and famous confessor Hosius Cordubensis to Constantius the Arian Emperor: Cease I beseech thee, and remember that thou art mortal, fear the day of judgment, intermeddle not with Ecclesiastical matters, neither do thou command us in this kind, but rather learn them of us. To thee God hath committed the Empire, to us he hath committed the things that belong to the Church: and as he that with malicious eyes carpeth thine Empire, gainsaith the ordinance of God: so do thou also beware, lest in drawing unto thee Ecclesiastical matters, thou be made guilty of a great crime. Is is written, Give ye the things that are Caesars, to Caesar: and the things that are Gods, to God. Therefore neither is it lawful for us in earth to hold the Empire, neither hast thou (O Emperor) power over incense and sacred things. Athan. Ep. ad Solit. vita agentes. And St. Ambrose to Valentinian the emperor (who by the ill counsel of his mother Justina, an Arian, required of St. Ambrose to have one Church in Milan deputed to the Arian Heretics) saith: We pay that which is Caesars, to Caesar: and that which is Gods, to God. Tribute is Caesars, it is not denied: the Church is Gods, it may not verily be yielded to Caesar: because the Temple of God cannot be Caesars right; which no man can deny but it is spoken with the honor of the Emperor. For what is more honorable than that the Emperor be said to be the son of the Church? For a good Emperor is within the Church, not above the Church. Ambr. lib. 5. Epist. Orat. de Basil trad.

17. To God.] These men were very circumspect and wary to do all duties to Caesar, but of their duty to God they had no regard. So Heretics, to flatter temporal Princes, and by them to uphold their heresies, do not only inculcate mens duty to the Prince, dissembling that which is due to God: but also give to the Prince more than due, and take from God his right and duty. But Christ allowing Caesar his right, warneth them also of their duty toward God. And that is it which Catholics inculcate, Obey God, do as he commandeth, Serve him first, and then the Prince.

Cum huius versionis ac aeditionis authores, nobis de fide & eruditione sint probè cogniti, aliique S. Theologiae & linguae Anglicanae peritissimi viri contestati sint, nihil in hoc opere reperiri, quod non sit Catholicae Ecclesiae doctrinae, & pietati consentaneum, vel quod ullo modo potestati ac paci civili repugnet, sed omnia potius veram fidem, Reip. Bonum, virtaeque ac morum probitatem promovere: ex ipsorum fide censemus ista utiliter excudi & publicari posse.

PETRUS REMIGIUS Archidiaconus maior Metropolitanae insignes Ecclesiae Rehemsis, Iuris Canonici Doctor, Archipeiscopatus Rhemensis generalis Vicarius.

HUBERTUS MORUS, Rhemensis Ecclesia Decanus, & Ecclesiastes, & in sacratissimae Theologiae facultae Doctor.

JOANNES LE BESGUE, Canonicus Rhemensis, Doctor Theologus, & Canceliarius Academiae Rhemensis.

GUILELMUS BALBUS, Theologiae professor, Collegis Rhemensis Archimagister.


Paupertate spiritus pervenitur ad Scripturarum cognitionem: ubi oportet hominem semitem praebere, ne pervicacibus concertationibus indocilis reddatur.

We come to the understanding of Scriptures through povertie of spirit: where a man must show himself meek-minded, lest by stubborn contentions, he become incapable and unapt to be taught.

If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.

No, dipshit. This is violence:
...

Even a caricature of a dictator wouldn't say that.

If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.

 Since I find your bizarre assertion that everything which effect you negatively is 'violence' amusing, that means that I Love Big Brother.

The difference between a sadist and a run of the mill thug is the sadist is not content to cause harm merely on one level. The thug just steals your wallet, but the sadist will steal it and attempt to humiliate you as well. Perhaps by implying the victim is upset, not because he got robbed, but because he has some weird hangup about theft. That's sadism in a nutshell: inflict harm and then avoid responsibility by blaming the victim.

That's the team tvbcof is cheerleading for.

That's sadism in a nutshell: inflict harm and then avoid responsibility by blaming the victim.

Government and its agents are the ones with the weird hang-up about violence. They keep employing it, like any organized criminal racket does.

All this weird hangup-type nonsense about 'violence' had me confused for a while. 

When you strip away all the lies, euphemisms, and obfuscation, it all comes down to a basic moral question. Threatening violence in order to compel other people to obey is either morally justifiable or it isn't. There is no in between. Whether you're talking about threatening violence in order to compel someone to have sex, or threatening violence in order to compel them to surrender money, the underlying principle is the same.

When you strip away all the lies, euphemisms, and obfuscation, it all comes down to a basic moral question. Threatening violence in order to compel other people to obey is either morally justifiable or it isn't. There is no in between. Whether you're talking about threatening violence in order to compel someone to have sex, or threatening violence in order to compel them to surrender money, the underlying principle is the same.

Some people are willing to call the evil out for what it is. That's fine. Other people people are too afraid to speak up. That's fine too. The very worst sort of people are the ones who can see the evil, recognize it, and are afraid to speak up but instead of just remaining silent help give it intellectual and linguistic cover. They help to blur the lines by spreading lies, euphemisms and obfuscation.

One of the reasons these debates are so tiring is the insistence people sometimes have on seeing everything as black or white.

A bunch of anarchists turn up and want the project to explicitly support their viewpoints, often by promoting illegal activities. A bunch of other people who are actually forming businesses or writing software turn up and want the project to stay apolitical and certainly steer clear of illegal activity.
...
It's that our common spaces get overrun by anarchists who spend all day engaging in edit wars and trying to spray-paint as much illegal activity over Bitcoin as they can, any way they can.