To carry on with the original thesis which is basically that Bitcoin raises
fundamental questions about political and economic structures, and can be
best analysed in light of the progression and evolution of civilization.
See also David Graebers in large parts quite mediocre book on the history
debt, but good for understanding ties to pre-history.

One thing most will assume that is constant is the infrastructure of a git
repo + SSH. I think there could be different models. As soon as one sees
that the question is how one could define properties of the software and
have different change models. SSH means somebody (or a group) has a key,
where the first creator of the repo has ultimate authority in that he
defines he will get the key. The authority to change code is all inclusive.
However, instead one could have a kind of genesis block type model, where
the initial code in the repo is preserved for all changes thereafter. This
would mean that some changes would be impossible, or would be impossible
without "consent". This kind of model would make sense for any future
crypto currency which learns from bitcoin. By this mechanism the useres of
the network will know that some changes will be impossible (or would
require a kind of hack).

This kind of model is much like a constitution defining a legal structure
where everything further is build on. And this makes a lot of sense,
because ultimately future layers of Bitcoin (a much better BIP70), will be
required to properly define rules which are somewhat similar to laws.
Question is where the fundamental layer stops and such an added layer
begins. And so these kinds of structures and questions are highly
isomorphic to the history of law (revolution originally meant going back to
a former state). The concept of law as understood today only exists since
around 1200-1500. Often it does not make sense to distinguish between
economic transactions and other transactions, so that economics as a
subject is a failed concept to begin with. Better to spend time with Smith,
Marx, Keynes, Popper, Chomsky, Plato, Hobbes, Locke, than most things
written after 1950.


On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Benjamin Cordes <
benjamin.l.cordes@???> wrote:

> In terms of DAC and assurance contracts and all that. Yes, in some cases
> these models might work. But there is a difference between all of the many
> agreements that make up the fabric of society and some of these ideas.
> There is the mountain of modern paper law, institutions, etc. But all these
> institutions in some ways make sense and in some ways they don't. For
> example in Europe some of these contracts work amazingly well. Some of the
> wealthiest nations, as measured by sensible terms (quality of life,
> sustainability, equality, etc.) have very good contracts and institutions.
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Benjamin Cordes <
> benjamin.l.cordes@???> wrote:
>
>> Well, it's not really a question of mechanism design, which is some
>> obscure idea of the absurdity that is modern economics. It's a question of
>> civilization, the state and the law. First one needs an idea of why states
>> exist in the first place. Why do people gather in groups instead of
>> isolated cells? Having purpose in live ultimately comes form goals which
>> lie outside the personal interest. It's just that kingdoms and nation
>> states as they exist are not worthy of this. But the ideals are, which come
>> from people from the Enlightenment. If you take the idea of freedom or
>> democracy or ethics, these topics we are all thought of the great thinkers
>> in history, not some limited point of view of some academic. The first
>> academies stood for something quite different and I believe much better
>> than modern universities. If one would do a poll of how many economists
>> have read Smith and Marx, the outcome will be that essentially no one reads
>> these books. Almost all the output of these institutions will not stand the
>> test of time and will be soon forgotten.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Daniel Larimer <
>> dlarimer@???> wrote:
>>

>>> Distributed Autonomous Corporations can be implemented on a block chain
>>> and with them I can create a decentralized bank and exchange that is able
>>> to store value denominated in tons of gold, corn, oil, silver or any other
>>> unit.    This decentralized bank lends banknotes (blockchain based assets)
>>> into existence, collateralized by shares of the bank itself.  It works just
>>> like the centralized creation of bank notes, but is entirely decentralized,
>>> electronic, and free from all contractual obligations.

>>>
>>> http://letstalkbitcoin.com/dac-revisited
>>>
>>> Associated Press, DAC
>>> http://invictus-innovations.com/dacs-whats-in-a-name
>>>
>>> This provides an alternative to copyright for the decentralized
>>> production and distribution of high quality articles that pays royalties to
>>> writers. A similar system could be adapted as an alternative to patents.
>>>
>>> With BitShares I show that honest price information can be discovered in
>>> a decentralized block-chain based manner that cannot be manipulated. With
>>> this I have created options, shorts, etc. This can then be the foundation
>>> for enforcing other kinds of automated contracts via blockchain based
>>> consensus.
>>>

>>> All you need to do to ensure that when you order the philosophic works
>>> of Diderot from a book store is have an automated crypto-graphic vetting of
>>> signed agreements to arbitrate disputes and a blockchain that holds your
>>> surety bond.    Make IDs expensive to build up and thus unprofitable to
>>> scam someone over a small purchase.   Have the escrow agents/arbiters set
>>> up with an appeal process and watch the market forces interact to get the
>>> desired result.

>>>
>>> Mike Hearn has some interesting ideas. The key field of study is
>>> Mechanism Design (manipulating market forces to produce the desired
>>> outcomes). Set up the proper incentive structure and people will compete
>>> to increase honesty and integrity.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2013, at 6:15 PM, Benjamin Cordes <benjamin.l.cordes@???>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> "Instead, we have the opportunity to re-imagine almost everything about
>>> how to do commerce, and then go and actually implement that in code"
>>>
>>> Code gets written by people who have beliefs. Protocols are higher order
>>> descriptions. Some of the categorical errors with regards to how economic
>>> transactions work are really comical. To use an analogy: if ten people
>>> declare an independent state, what validity does that declaration have? If
>>> I broadcast to the world: "I own 1 metric ton of gold", that does not make
>>> it so. It is through a system, which makes these declarations valid. In the
>>> Bitcoin network the declaration: I own 1 BTC, is valid. But that statement
>>> refers only to the virtual entity of Bitcoin. No other legal entities can
>>> be created this way. The Bitcoin network does not know of concepts such as
>>> a purchase contract, a service contract, an asset, a loan, etc. If I order
>>> the philosophic works of Diderot from a book store, I expect a certain
>>> result, namely that a new book is delivered on time, with a certain
>>> quality. This process works, because civilization is set up so that some
>>> properties are ensured (rights and obligations). Some of these newer
>>> systems with assurance are very far away from delivering such
>>> "functionality". It is the question what this really would mean. The only
>>> really sound work in this direction that I am aware of is Mike Hearn's, but
>>> there some major conceptual things missing there.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Andrew Miller <amiller@???>wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's totally non-trivial how to use blockchain stuff to accomplish all
>>>> this, but I think it's possible. It goes far beyond the scope of "move
>>>> value from A to B," which is why it requires a lot more thought.
>>>>
>>>> I like to link to these two academic papers a lot, they are the most
>>>> relevant theory IMO on how decentralized contract enforcement could
>>>> work.
>>>>
>>>> http://dimitrietal.com/trustdavis.pdf TrustDavis is a system of peer
>>>> to peer insurance. You can think of it as p2p escrow. Its very much
>>>> unlike the (impotent) escrows we see in Bitcoin today. For one thing,
>>>> the escrow does not insure strangers, it only makes sense to insure
>>>> people you trust. Second, the insurer *himself* may have to cover the
>>>> difference if there's a dispute and it's not possible to tell which
>>>> party is lying. You can opt to insure *a pair* of people transacting
>>>> and not just an individual to transact with anyone.
>>>>
>>>> http://emlab.berkeley.edu/~szeidl/papers/socialcollateral.pdf This is
>>>> an economics paper that makes the argument that p2p credit actually
>>>> *describes* how people *already* make transactions. It has a
>>>> theoretical model, but, unlike TrustDavis, it assumes that if there's
>>>> a dispute, everyone learns *correctly* which party is at fault. This
>>>> is not realistic for an online transaction, and it doesn't say how an
>>>> online transaction system would help.
>>>>
>>>> Implementing TrustDavis would be a start. The idea of actually making
>>>> yourself financially vulnerable (though in limited amounts) to your
>>>> friends seems to scare most people away... but that's what makes this
>>>> work. It's less clear how to make it work for anonymous transactions
>>>> that rely on collateral moving along preestablished links yet protect
>>>> privacy by obscuring the details.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Daniel Larimer
>>>> <dlarimer@???> wrote:
>>>> > The key to freedom is eliminating the need for courts to enforce
>>>> contracts.
>>>> > Giving the government even this single task already creates courts
>>>> outside
>>>> > the consent of the governed. From this monopoly over interpreting and
>>>> > enforcing (or not enforcing) contracts all other power of government
>>>> can be
>>>> > derived.
>>>> >
>>>> > Courts, Democracies and governments are all evolutions that enhance
>>>> tyranny
>>>> > by hiding it behind a mask of legitimacy and fairness. None of these
>>>> > systems has worked to enhance freedom or to protect the life,
>>>> liberty, or
>>>> > property of the people. At the core of monopoly courts is the
>>>> authority to
>>>> > reallocate property without the consent of the owners. At the core of
>>>> > democracy is that the majority can reallocate resources of the
>>>> minority.
>>>> > At the core of government is that they own everything and may kill
>>>> whom they
>>>> > like.
>>>> >
>>>> > I contend that it is unnecessary to rely on coercion to enforce
>>>> contracts or
>>>> > maintain law and order. This means that it is possible to operate
>>>> without
>>>> > the need for government courts and the key to all of this is
>>>> decentralized
>>>> > identity, reputation, arbitration, and surety bonds. Almost all of
>>>> this
>>>> > can be implemented with block-chain based consensus with a proper set
>>>> of
>>>> > rules.
>>>> >
>>>> > I am working on making this a reality and would love to work with
>>>> others
>>>> > interested in the same.
>>>> >
>>>> > Non Violent Law Enforcement:
>>>> > https://the-iland.net/content/nonviolent-law-enforcement
>>>> > Our Socialist Justice System:
>>>> > https://the-iland.net/content/socialist-justice-system
>>>> >
>>>> > Dan
>>>> >
>>>> > On Nov 2, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Benjamin Cordes <
>>>> benjamin.l.cordes@???>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > "I prefer to keep Bitcoin pure, simple and focused. Value transfer
>>>> from A ?
>>>> > B. "
>>>> >
>>>> > Almost all meaningful economic transactions involve third parties.
>>>> > Governments and courts evolved for precisely this reason. Contracts
>>>> are
>>>> > enforced by the law (and thereby the power of the state, as Mike
>>>> pointed
>>>> > out). The question very much remains how Bitcoin improves at all on
>>>> economic
>>>> > transactions. I think there is a lot of confusion about this, to put
>>>> it
>>>> > mildly. Much of what is written is not very well intellectually
>>>> grounded.
>>>> > Courts, democracies, governments evolved over roughly 1000 years.
>>>> >
>>>> > Mastercoin and BIP70 are good examples of how the Bitcoin community
>>>> really
>>>> > fails to acknowledge some basic fundamental principles of how economic
>>>> > transactions and contracts work. Which is why we haven't really seen
>>>> any
>>>> > major new use case, besides those which involve activities which
>>>> bypass laws
>>>> > (donating to political organizations which Visa & Mastercard don't
>>>> like).
>>>> > Bitcoin is very far away from changing any of this, especially if
>>>> does not
>>>> > add any layers which make it useful. However, once such layers would
>>>> exist
>>>> > the potential is almost unbounded.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:38 PM, jamileh s.t. <xiaziyna@???
>>>> >
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> a single signal,
>>>> >> far too old to hear
>>>> >> uncountable and yet more mutable
>>>> >> than mere breathing and vanishing,
>>>> >> too minimal for death.
>>>> >> singular and yet a unity
>>>> >> a multitude of the single celled
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 31 October 2013 11:48, Amir Taaki <genjix@???> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>>> >>> very busy, hard to keep up with email. both your explanations are
>>>> >>> correct. imagine a poker table. if everyone's collaborating, then
>>>> the
>>>> >>> game is rigged. same with tor. you need at least 1 hop to be honest
>>>> >>> for it to work. with mixing you need at least 1 other to be honest.
>>>> >>> this is the basis for byzantine fault tolerance working (see the
>>>> paper
>>>> >>> about NFS).
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On 31/10/13 12:45, Tristan Winters wrote:
>>>> >>> > Yeah, I am hoping to do the same thing with our Australian
>>>> >>> > Foundation. We may be far away, but we?ve got a kick-arse team.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > The more projects like this the better.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > I am pretty certain that Coin Punk funding is coming straight from
>>>> >>> > the foundation. Bitcoin magazine ran an article about Coin Punk
>>>> >>> > getting a grant from them.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > Anyway, did you get my email about the trustless mixer ??? I?m in
>>>> a
>>>> >>> > debate with a guy about it and I?d appreciate your feedback.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > Cheers,
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > TW.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > On 31 Oct 2013, at 12:37 pm, Amir Taaki <genjix@???
>>>> >>> > <mailto:genjix@riseup.net>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > his email: Kyle Drake <kyledrake@???
>>>> >>> > <mailto:kyledrake@gmail.com>>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > I think we can provide people a credible alternative to help good
>>>> >>> > projects we want to see thrive.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > On 31/10/13 12:34, Tristan Winters wrote:
>>>> >>> >>>> Cool Video.
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> But isn?t the "Coin Punk? wallet financed by the US
>>>> >>> >>>> Foundation?
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> TW.
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> On 31 Oct 2013, at 9:05 am, Cody R Wilson
>>>> >>> >>>> <codywilson@??? <mailto:codywilson@utexas.edu>
>>>> >>> >>>> <mailto:codywilson@utexas.edu>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> Trick or Treat, Western Civilization:
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bitcoin-dark-wallet/x/5141070
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> Render your contempt visible, your resistance invisible.
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> /While hitherto all valuations and ideals have been built
>>>> >>> >>>>> on ignorance of Bitcoin or in contradiction to it-
>>>> >>> >>>>> therefore long live Bitcoin!/
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:17 AM, jindq1 <jindq1@???
>>>> >>> >>>>> <mailto:jindq1@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> Email is inefficient for much more than general updates.
>>>> >>> >>>>> That's the gist of it.
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 3:59 AM, Amir Taaki
>>>> >>> >>>>> <genjix@??? <mailto:genjix@riseup.net>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> but we are all here now with a collective voice, creating
>>>> >>> >>>> projects, making a name and creative a voice for everyone.
>>>> >>> >>>> what is openbitco.in <http://openbitco.in/> offering better?
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>> On 31/10/13 04:50, jindq1 wrote:
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> While I may not always feel like the people on this list
>>>> >>> >>>> match my
>>>> >>> >>>>> own personal opinions on economics, politics and
>>>> >>> >>>>> technology, I'm here because I crave difference (it's how
>>>> >>> >>>>> you learn about
>>>> >>> >>>> yourself
>>>> >>> >>>>> and the world afterall). That's why even if I hear a
>>>> >>> >>>>> million
>>>> >>> >>>> things
>>>> >>> >>>>> I don't agree with, I won't ignore it, I'll either argue
>>>> >>> >>>> with it or
>>>> >>> >>>>> accept it. This has prompted me to take my own interests
>>>> >>> >>>>> in learning, being productive and useful, and my disgust
>>>> >>> >>>>> for corruption and hypocrisy and propose a new
>>>> >>> >>>>> decentralized organization that puts the voice of people
>>>> >>> >>>>> back into their own hands, and not a highly moderated forum
>>>> >>> >>>>> or rich dude's.
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> * Original openbitco.in <http://openbitco.in/>
>>>> >>> >>>> <http://openbitco.in <http://openbitco.in/>> proposal:
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1E-hLRcG0pejC4h02BCN_fdXJH3j9AAHziYZHivcmDbU/edit?usp=sharing
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> * Current development site: http://openbitco.in
>>>> >>> >>>> <http://openbitco.in/>
>>>> >>> >>>>> * Other site features under construction and
>>>> >>> >>>>> consideration:
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ajtx05YrHtIydGZFNzBZVTEtaldZXzNjUXRCZFc1RHc#gid=0
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> * Decentralized openbitco.in <http://openbitco.in/>
>>>> >>> >>>> <http://openbitco.in <http://openbitco.in/>> forum proposal:
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1E-hLRcG0pejC4h02BCN_fdXJH3j9AAHziYZHivcmDbU/edit?usp=sharing
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> * For more information or if you'd like to participate with the
>>>> >>> >>>> other
>>>> >>> >>>>> 30 members involved at the moment, PM me for the skype
>>>> >>> >>>>> chatroom.
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> I'd love your guys' opinion on it, even if it's "that will
>>>> >>> >>>>> never work", because it would only be more fun for me when
>>>> >>> >>>>> it does. :)
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> Hope everyone had fun at the Amsterdam conference we did
>>>> >>> >>>>> last month, we're working on the next 2 and I can't wait to
>>>> >>> >>>>> start the marketplaces up as OpenBitco.in!
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> Matthew
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM
>>>> >>> >>>>> mailing list: http://unsystem.net <http://unsystem.net/>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
>>>> >>> >>>>> list: http://unsystem.net <http://unsystem.net/>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
>>>> >>> >>>>> list: http://unsystem.net <http://unsystem.net/>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> - -- Sincerely,
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> Cody R. Wilson codywilson@???
>>>> >>> >>>>> <mailto:codywilson@utexas.edu>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> The University of Texas School of Law Class of 2014
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM
>>>> >>> >>>>> mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
>>>> >>> >>>> list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
>>>> >>> >> list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> >>> >> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
>>>> >>> > list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> >>> > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> - --
>>>> >>> Abolish the NSA
>>>> >>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>> >>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> >>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> >> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Andrew Miller
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>
>>>
>>
>