Pages:
Author

Topic: Roger Ver and Jon Matonis pushed aside now that Bitcoin is becoming mainstream - page 3. (Read 46558 times)

legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005
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...

It is an incredibly stupid article.  The flabbergasting hypocrisy of attacking this guy as some kind of menace is ridiculous.  All he is doing is distributing information.

Who is dangerous is the gun manufacturers of the United States selling deadly weapons to anyone and everyone, even enemies of the United States, to both sides of civil wars, to genocidal warlords, etc.  Or the National Rifle Association, which poses as a civil rights group but which is, in actuality, nothing more than an industry lobby. 

Distributed Defense presents no such threat.  They aren't seeking out and stoking wars in other countries to make a profit on them.  What they empower is the individual, by making information available.  The only thing this guy is dangerous to, other than a government regulatory scheme that was already broken before he came along, is corporate profits. 

You can fully expect the gun industry to hate this guy as much as the government.  After all, if the average Joe can provide for the means of his own defense, who needs them?
full member
Activity: 159
Merit: 100
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."

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...
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005
This is a perfect example of exactly why Bitcoin would be harmed by listing people like Matonis on anything portrayed as official.

That's a hoot coming from a scamming fruitcake.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
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."
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250

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

Pardon me for not taking the Church seriously.

Jesus said "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's." The logical implication is that nothing is Caesar's because all is God's. Since the Church has seen fit to divvy up the world with Caesar, trusting the Church is as foolish as trusting Caesar.

Please recall that it was a combination of the Church and the State of the day that killed Jesus. Institutional Christians gloss over that salient point.


legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.

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

(bold mine)
Quote from: The Gospel according to St. Matthew, chapter 22 verses 15-21
✝*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.
Quote from: Annotations for Matt 22:21, Rheims New Testament
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.
Quote from: Annotations for Mark 12:17, Rheims New Testament
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.

Quote from: Rheims New Testament: The Censure and Approbation
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.

S. August. Lib. I. C. 3. De serm. Do. in monte.

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.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.

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.
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
 Since I find your bizarre assertion that everything which effect you negatively is 'violence' amusing, that means that I Love Big Brother.
No, dipshit. This is violence:
...

Funny how you are now embracing the OWS people.  Libertarians had nothing but scorn and derision for these folks when they would not, en mass, move to you favorite crypto-currency solution.  (I don't remember you in particular, but that was my strong sense from the more hard-core Libertarians when this stuff was going down.)

BTW, you think that somehow BTC holders and not going to use 'violence' against the poor saps who didn't get them some back in the day?  I fail to see a particularly big distinction between Bitcoin and any other form of wealth in this respect frankly.  The only real distinction I can see is that Bitcoin has (and will probably lose) the potential for the 'have not's to use 'violence' right back.

legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
Even a caricature of a dictator wouldn't say that.
That's actually how people like that think. If you really want to see how deep the evil goes, just ask him about that enormous implied assumption in his statement. Try to get a straight answer as to precisely why anyone should obey in the first place, and even if that can be demonstrated, what's the exact difference between the people who should be obeyed and those who should not be obeyed.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.

Luke, you are just being trolly now.
Even a caricature of a dictator wouldn't say that.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
If you require a threat/gun to be obedient, that is your problem.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
 Since I find your bizarre assertion that everything which effect you negatively is 'violence' amusing, that means that I Love Big Brother.
No, dipshit. This is violence:





Everything dictate that comes down from those who have declared themselves rulers carries with it the implicit threat that those who disobey will be subjected to violence. Everybody knows it, everybody is afraid of it, and that's who everybody strenuously avoids talking about it.

"Law is an opinion with a gun behind it" is not hyperbole - the guns are real, and they use them, and it takes a nearly superhuman devotion to ignorance not to see them.

Of course the rulers don't want to actually use those guns more often than necessary - it cuts into their profits - so it's far better for their subjects to police themselves into obedience out of fear. That doesn't mean the coercion is gone though. It's still coercion if the rapist successfully intimidates the victim into compliance so that he doesn't need to actually use force.

That where you and other apologists act as such very faithful servants.  The last thing they want is for people to openly acknowledge and talk about the gun in the room and fortunately they have an army of bootlickers ready and eager to help them conceal the gun, divert attention away from it, and attack anyone who tries to point it out.
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
All this weird hangup-type nonsense about 'violence' had me confused for a while.  

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

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

Having some priorities in common, I've 'worked with' Libertarians enough over the years to understand how that makes perfect sense...to you...

edit: add word.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 116
Entrepreneur, coder, hacker, pundit, humanist.
The bitcoinpresscenter.org beta is 90% complete. I will be calling on those who volunteered to help to test run some of the functionality.

I would like to explain what I have been doing for the past three days. I have been building a platform, using a CMS (drupal, but the tech choice is not important) in order to implement a press center, the Internet way:

- Inclusive - the barrier to nominations is very low - if the person is interested in being on the list, and their information is filled in, they are on the list

- Highlighting, not filtering: A mechanism for positive endorsements, with qualitative comments allows the best to bubble to the top of the list.

- A minimal amount of moderation is applied only to the content of the endorsements to filter ad-hominem. Positive endorsements push people up the list. If people feel negatively, they can *not endorse*. That keeps less endorsed candidates at the bottom of the list - BUT they're on the list.

- A lot of metadata to help press choose: Languages spoken, timezone, area of expertise (HW, SW, crypto, economics, business etc.), Role in bitcoin community (miner, user, dev, media, author, merchant etc).

- A lot of press-relevant information that is missing from current efforts: Attribution, Large-res photos, one line bio, short bio, long bio, etc.

- A faceted search and filtering system (like the sidebar on Amazon.com). You want to see just Spanish speakers who are developers and in your own timezone? Easy!

All of the above is geared towards a press center with 500 contacts, not 8.

Beta testing starts late tonight or tomorrow, for functionality. First public preview with content by end of Monday as promised.

This announcement is posted in its own thread, for comments and discussion
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
That's sadism in a nutshell: inflict harm and then avoid responsibility by blaming the victim.

Sadists also get their jollies by inflicting harm and humiliation. This also describes some of the publicly funded civil servants I've encountered in my life.

To balance this equation out, sadists are equally at home in the private sector. They just have an easier time finding a job in the public sector.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
All this weird hangup-type nonsense about 'violence' had me confused for a while. 

Government and its agents are the ones with the weird hang-up about violence. They keep employing it, like any organized criminal racket does.
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.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
All this weird hangup-type nonsense about 'violence' had me confused for a while. 

Government and its agents are the ones with the weird hang-up about violence. They keep employing it, like any organized criminal racket does.
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276

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.

All this weird hangup-type nonsense about 'violence' had me confused for a while.  Now I get it!

  Q:  What is a Libertarian?
  A:  An Anarchist who got picked on in school.

(c'mon...I'm only at '7-11 ignores')

hero member
Activity: 731
Merit: 503
Libertas a calumnia
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.

+1

Very well said
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
One of the reasons these debates are so tiring is the insistence people sometimes have on seeing everything as black or white.

Mike, you complain about viewing things as "black and white", but look at yourself:

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.
Pages:
Jump to: