You all worry far too much about governments and laws.
You should try this book
http://www.amazon.com/How-Found-Freedom-Unfree-World/dp/0965603679
PDF for cheapskates:
http://eiiiforum.com/picsfromusers/howifoundfreedom.pdf
Stop worrying about the freedom of other people, just become free yourselves. You cannot change anything, so stop worrying. Stop trying to convince other people your method or theory of government will work for them, just disentangle yourself from the system you dislike and become free.
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 24907. (Read 26711749 times)
October 24, 2014, 10:20:19 AM
October 24, 2014, 10:18:59 AM
No mate. They don't have to convince consumers. That's the point. They'll never know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network just like people don't know anything about http works when they're surfing the web now. To the consumer, the infrastructure and methodology they use will be the same as it is now. There's no leap of faith they have to make.
https://stripe.com/blog/bitcoin-the-stripe-perspective
https://stripe.com/blog/bitcoin-the-stripe-perspective
I don't really see a whole lot in there that explains why bitcoin will be so much better for your average consumer than credit cards.
Remittances for less than 1% cost as opposed to 10-15%. Not better? Really?
October 24, 2014, 10:18:23 AM
My point was that (1) Europe used to be extremely decentralized for most of its History and (2) that the title of "King" did not mean that you own anything.
http://i-magesdemarc.pagesperso-orange.fr/Images/lagaule.gif
October 24, 2014, 10:16:43 AM
No mate. They don't have to convince consumers. That's the point. They'll never know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network just like people don't know anything about http works when they're surfing the web now. To the consumer, the infrastructure and methodology they use will be the same as it is now. There's no leap of faith they have to make.
https://stripe.com/blog/bitcoin-the-stripe-perspective
https://stripe.com/blog/bitcoin-the-stripe-perspective
Oh I'm sorry but this is a wrong and myopic way to see Bitcoin's future.
There is NO hiding Bitcoin from the consumer unless Bitcoin essentially becomes a Ripple adopted by banks and this is not the goal here.
To fully realises the promises of Bitcoin they absolutely will have to convince consumers to use Bitcoin.
Fortunately the arguments will be many and greed will do the heavy lifting.
It represents a transitional period IMO. Consumers will never be able to use bitcoin directly. 1. Technical issues - payments aren't instant, not very good for micropayments, volatility, etc. 2. Regulatory issues - nobody will use a currency they have to declare CGT on.
This doesn't mean the future isn't p2p. BitUSD (on BitsharesX) offers instant payments at almost zero volatility vs USD for example. Consumers will be able to use something like that. Or a bitUSD sidechain to the bitcoin blockchain possibly.
October 24, 2014, 10:16:33 AM
I swear, this thread is worse than a Communist kindergarten 
I swear some people should learn History before opening their mouth :
there are no historical examples that survived for a meaningful length of time.
Start from the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 to Early Modern France in 1453 (beginning of what a state look like but still not a state).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Roman_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_France
October 24, 2014, 10:15:48 AM
There were regional kings and High Kings that sat on large Iron Thrones made from the swords of their slain enemies.
The hierarchy doesn't tell about your wealth or power. It is only a title.
During feudalism, Kings where most of the time less powerful that rich Duchies.
Obama is not a government. What's your point ?
My point was that (1) Europe used to be extremely decentralized for most of its History and (2) that the title of "King" did not mean that you own anything.
The king is also not the government. Like the king, being a president does not mean you own anything.
I swear, this thread is worse than a Communist kindergarten
October 24, 2014, 10:15:23 AM
No mate. They don't have to convince consumers. That's the point. They'll never know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network just like people don't know anything about http works when they're surfing the web now. To the consumer, the infrastructure and methodology they use will be the same as it is now. There's no leap of faith they have to make.
https://stripe.com/blog/bitcoin-the-stripe-perspective
https://stripe.com/blog/bitcoin-the-stripe-perspective
I don't really see a whole lot in there that explains why bitcoin will be so much better for your average consumer than credit cards.
October 24, 2014, 10:09:08 AM
There were regional kings and High Kings that sat on large Iron Thrones made from the swords of their slain enemies.
The hierarchy doesn't tell about your wealth or power. It is only a title.
During feudalism, Kings where most of the time less powerful that rich Duchies.
Obama is not a government. What's your point ?
My point was that (1) Europe used to be extremely decentralized for most of its History and (2) that the title of "King" did not mean that you own anything.
The king is also not the government. Like the king, being a president does not mean you own anything.
I swear, this thread is worse than a Communist kindergarten
October 24, 2014, 10:05:55 AM
No mate. They don't have to convince consumers. That's the point. They'll never know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network just like people don't know anything about http works when they're surfing the web now. To the consumer, the infrastructure and methodology they use will be the same as it is now. There's no leap of faith they have to make.
https://stripe.com/blog/bitcoin-the-stripe-perspective
https://stripe.com/blog/bitcoin-the-stripe-perspective
Oh I'm sorry but this is a wrong and myopic way to see Bitcoin's future.
There is NO hiding Bitcoin from the consumer unless Bitcoin essentially becomes a Ripple adopted by banks and this is not the goal here.
To fully realises the promises of Bitcoin they absolutely will have to convince consumers to use Bitcoin.
Fortunately the arguments will be many and greed will do the heavy lifting.
October 24, 2014, 10:04:00 AM
this is why states and borders exist, and some kind of enforced regulation has to exist so people can live with each other.
Here's the problem - you're confusing yourself for humanity. That's called projection.Maybe you need enforced regulations in order to get along with other people. If so, that's a personal problem you should discuss with a competent psychotherapist.
October 24, 2014, 10:02:21 AM
There were regional kings and High Kings that sat on large Iron Thrones made from the swords of their slain enemies.
The hierarchy doesn't tell about your wealth or power. It is only a title.
During feudalism, Kings where most of the time less powerful that rich Duchies.
Obama is not a government. What's your point ?
My point was that (1) Europe used to be extremely decentralized for most of its History and (2) that the title of "King" did not mean that you own anything.
Sorry, I consider myself pretty hardcore libertarian. Feudalism does not really connote freedom. Sure, if you were a lord or king or whatnot, it was probably a pretty fun time (until your rival ran a sword through your gizzards) but the common man had it pretty rough. It wasn't really until firearms came along and started to level the playing field that that was redressed.
However, there were regions and times where freedom was more prevalent and we can see its positive effects within the societies that exist currently. Control? Soviet Russia, North Korea, Communist China. More freedom? South Korea, current hybrid China. Even more freedom? 20th century US and UK. Bit less freedom? Declining 21st century US and UK.
However, there were regions and times where freedom was more prevalent and we can see its positive effects within the societies that exist currently. Control? Soviet Russia, North Korea, Communist China. More freedom? South Korea, current hybrid China. Even more freedom? 20th century US and UK. Bit less freedom? Declining 21st century US and UK.
Yes that's right if you compare to now but in Feudalism, people were no more "slaves" like they were during the Roman Empire.
It was still very hard but they had the right to own land and trade which make a big difference.
October 24, 2014, 10:01:56 AM
You think you're kidding but it's true.
At that time, being a kind give no power at all.
There are no state and no frontiers.
Allegiance to the King is only temporarily.
Power is extremely decentralized between many European Noble families.
Each family divide land between members.
Anyone can claim a land at any time.
Sorry, I consider myself pretty hardcore libertarian. Feudalism does not really connote freedom. Sure, if you were a lord or king or whatnot, it was probably a pretty fun time (until your rival ran a sword through your gizzards) but the common man had it pretty rough. It wasn't really until firearms came along and started to level the playing field that that was redressed.
However, there were regions and times where freedom was more prevalent and we can see its positive effects within the societies that exist currently. Control? Soviet Russia, North Korea, Communist China. More freedom? South Korea, current hybrid China. Even more freedom? 20th century US and UK. Bit less freedom? Declining 21st century US and UK.
October 24, 2014, 10:00:42 AM
October 24, 2014, 10:00:40 AM
...
No mate. They don't have to convince consumers. That's the point. They'll never know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network just like people don't know anything about http works when they're surfing the web now. To the consumer, the infrastructure and methodology they use will be the same as it is now.
...
No mate. They don't have to convince consumers. That's the point. They'll never know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network just like people don't know anything about http works when they're surfing the web now. To the consumer, the infrastructure and methodology they use will be the same as it is now.
...
... thus learning nothing about Bitcoin, which brings us back to
...
Why and how will this transition take place? Consumers have grown to trust these payment services, not Bitcoin.
Why and how will this transition take place? Consumers have grown to trust these payment services, not Bitcoin.
Infrastructure will be built that allows the consumer the freedom to not to have to use a gateway. Also greater awareness, confidence, etc. Do you always make everyone repeat themselves?
Repeating yourself doesn't help to make your point. If the consumers don't know how "know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network," how are they learning about Bitcoin? How are they in a better position to use Bitcoin without relying on the infrastructure they have grown to trust, i.e. for-profit gateways providing it?
They know it works and will be provided with the tools to not need gateways for security, insurance, risk-assumption, etc. Repeating myself doesn't help make my point but your irrelevant rebuttals force me to. This is the last time I'll do it.
October 24, 2014, 09:59:08 AM
There were regional kings and High Kings that sat on large Iron Thrones made from the swords of their slain enemies.
The hierarchy doesn't tell about your wealth or power.
It is only a title.
During feudalism, Kings where most of the time less powerful that rich Duchies.
Err... Obama is less wealthy than a number of Americans, what's your point?
October 24, 2014, 09:58:29 AM
Repeating yourself doesn't help to make your point. If the consumers don't "know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network," how are they learning about Bitcoin? How are they in a better position to use Bitcoin without relying on the infrastructure they have grown to trust, i.e. for-profit gateways providing it?
They will learn Bitcoin is better money, with more features and eventually the same security they have grown accustomed to.
October 24, 2014, 09:57:05 AM
There were regional kings and High Kings that sat on large Iron Thrones made from the swords of their slain enemies.
The hierarchy doesn't tell about your wealth or power.
It is only a title.
During feudalism, Kings where most of the time less powerful that rich Duchies.
October 24, 2014, 09:54:12 AM
...
No mate. They don't have to convince consumers. That's the point. They'll never know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network just like people don't know anything about http works when they're surfing the web now. To the consumer, the infrastructure and methodology they use will be the same as it is now.
...
No mate. They don't have to convince consumers. That's the point. They'll never know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network just like people don't know anything about http works when they're surfing the web now. To the consumer, the infrastructure and methodology they use will be the same as it is now.
...
... thus learning nothing about Bitcoin, which brings us back to
...
Why and how will this transition take place? Consumers have grown to trust these payment services, not Bitcoin.
Why and how will this transition take place? Consumers have grown to trust these payment services, not Bitcoin.
Infrastructure will be built that allows the consumer the freedom to not to have to use a gateway. Also greater awareness, confidence, etc. Do you always make everyone repeat themselves?
Repeating yourself doesn't help to make your point. If the consumers don't "know their money is being sent using the bitcoin network," how are they learning about Bitcoin? How are they in a better position to use Bitcoin without relying on the infrastructure they have grown to trust, i.e. for-profit gateways providing it?
October 24, 2014, 09:53:59 AM
Lol, thanks 4 teh link. The d00d wearing a crown, he b liek the King Libertarian, right? 
http://s16.postimg.org/zb30y0fl1/Capture.jpg
http://s16.postimg.org/zb30y0fl1/Capture.jpg
You think you're kidding but it's true.
At that time, being a kind give no power at all.
There are no state and no frontiers.
Allegiance to the King is only temporarily.
Power is extremely decentralized between many European Noble families.
October 24, 2014, 09:49:28 AM
Lol, thanks 4 teh link. The d00d wearing a crown, he b liek the King Libertarian, right?
http://s16.postimg.org/zb30y0fl1/Capture.jpg
http://s16.postimg.org/zb30y0fl1/Capture.jpg
You think you're kidding but it's true.
At that time, being a kind give no power at all.
There are no state and no frontiers.
Allegiance to the King is only temporarily.
Power is extremely decentralized between many European Noble families.
Each family divide land between members.
Anyone can claim a land at any time.
Jump to: