re all,

interesting debate. Luke-Jr you are also a person we all give much
respect as someone who has contributed *a lot* to Bitcoin and all around

On Sat, 26 Apr 2014, Luke-Jr wrote:

> Amir, I think you contribute much to bitcoin, and I value that. But
> Bitcoin is *not* libertarianism. Bitcoin is *not* anarchism. Bitcoin
> is *not* "volunteerism".

I agree with the above when s/*not*/*not anymore*/

the propulsion for Bitcoin were certain ideals and the money incentive

> Bitcoin is *not* a movement for financial freedom - or any political
> movement at all.

I disagree with that. On a philosophical note I believe that we must
stop taking technology as neutral. Weaving a logos for tech progress
(choosing the direction for it) is a social and political space.
We should get rid of Heidegger's linear vision on progress. Technology
is not Providence, it is entirely the product of the self-determination
of living beings (not just including humans here, but also animals and
soon enough A.I.). Such a path must be walked with a map in mind, it is
not a tunnel. Social movements (a broader definition since the term
politics tends to insert discrepancies esp. in trans-Atlantic debates)
do provide consciousness for more or less comprehensive and liberating
logoi.

> Bitcoin is a technology, which can and should be embraced by people of
> any political affiliation. Adoption by people with views contrary to
> your own is not an attack on Bitcoin, it is growth.

Said all that, I also firmly agree with the above. Getting out is a sign
of success. Different contexts will appropriate the technology because
they are (and should be) free to do so. Yet the technology (please note,
different from a more neutral view of scientific discovery) carries one
logos or another and as such embeds socio/political values that cannot
be transcended by the process of appropriation by different contexts.

IMHO

ciao!

--
http://jaromil.dyne.org
GPG: 6113 D89C A825 C5CE DD02 C872 73B3 5DA5 4ACB 7D10