I also believe it is preferable that we "antagonize" as much as possible
(in messaging and action, like the strategy around the Wiki Weapon), and
force the Many Silk Roads / Money Laundering etc etc discussion into the
forefront. If we do not get an RIAA/MPAA-type response, we're in uncharted
waters. If they'd taken this tack with filesharing, we might not have
full-DHT & magnet bittorrent (read: entirely unstoppable as long as there
is internet) at all, or yet.

Necessity is the mother of all invention, but that requires a sense of
urgency or complacency sets in. Like boiling a frog slowly. If they'd
gradually clamped down onto it after years of "fair" reviews and whatnot,
even if we *had* exactly the same degree of filesharing sophistication,
there'd be likely little content. The public perception would have been
slowly moulded to stand against the pirates, instead of overwhelming "lol,
RIAA thinks they own 1s and 0s" attitudes. This is the suppression of the
network effect's effects.

There are many very key things that could be built, but check out guru and
taskrabbit and the like. These are highly fettered by tax laws and so on.
Everyone needs 1099s and SSNs and whatever if they're in the US.
Outsourcing is subject to all the remittance losses. The USCIS "lost" the
package for my Japanese wife's green card. For two years, she's been
prevented working legally, despite experience and a degree in medicine.
Opportunities for under-the-table labor don't pay well and are typically
physical. Years and money are being "stolen" by the threat of violence. It
is technically illegal to not report paying a babysitter, over a small sum
of money, yet people do it and don't care. We need to make the freelance
marketplace work the same way.


On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Diego Saa <cuco.saa@???> wrote:

> Let them ban bitcoin altogether. We'll get a crack out of them when they
> try to enforce their stupid laws. Also, if Bitcoin activity becomes
> illegal, it'll start benefiting individuals that can disregard stupid laws
> more than large corporations that mostly have to abide by them. If anything
> let's advocate a ban! We all know what happened when they tried to ban
> alcohol in the 1920. The state will just prove how it's becoming
> increasingly irrelevant.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Amir Taaki <genjix@???> wrote:
>
>>
>> http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2aycxs/hi_this_is_ben_lawsky_at_nydfs_here_are_the/
>>
>> people are like "oh dear, we need better legislation" without realising
>> the foot in the door danger. it's like the used car salesman who rips
>> you off with an overpriced crappy car which you jump on after "he speaks
>> to the boss" (i.e smokes a ciggy), knocking down his initial high offer.
>> wow! what a bargain!
>>
>> G8 magazine, June 2013 "Protecting digital economies": "If the leaders
>> of the European Union and United States could be convinced to take a
>> lead on these initiatives [banning Bitcoin], that would be a huge
>> contribution to making the internet a safe place for financial
>> transactions. At the same time, it would also strike a blow against
>> those who would try to destroy the fabric of our world’s well-being."
>>
>> JP Morgan, Feb 2014 "The audacity of Bitcoin": "But followers of
>> financial history know the limitation of a system based on a fixed or
>> slow-growing money supply: it imposes uncomfortable financial discipline
>> on governments, households and corporates. [i.e governments, consumers,
>> the corporations" (goes on to talk about how printing dollars was used
>> to fund WW1 and the Vietnam war as a good thing)
>>
>> ECB, Oct 2012 "Virtual currency schemes": "Authorities need to consider
>> whether they intend to formalise or acknowledge and regulate these
>> schemes. In this regard, a likely suggestion could sooner or later
>> involve virtual currency scheme owners registering as financial
>> institutions with their local regulating authorities. This is a similar
>> trajectory to the one PayPal has undergone, as it was granted a banking
>> licence in Luxembourg in 2007 after its service became popular. This is
>> not an easy step, but it looks like the only possible way to strike a
>> proper balance between money and payment innovations on the one hand,
>> and consumer protection and financial stability, on the other."
>>
>> Mark my words. The problem is not with this regulation needing to be
>> fixed. They will probably tone down the proposal and it will be hailed
>> as a victory within the community, yet be another step toward
>> normalisation of their activities.
>>
>> http://www.coindesk.com/ben-lawsky-friend-foe/
>>
>> "The choice for the regulators is: permit money laundering on the one
>> hand, or permit innovation on the other, and we’re always going to choose
>> squelching the money laundering first. It’s not worth it to society to
>> allow money laundering and all of the things it facilitates to persist in
>> order to permit 1000 flowers to bloom on the innovation side.”
>>
>> funny he's affiliated with chuck schumer too who is a populist and someone
>> who in the early days was very anti-bitcoin (silk road).
>>
>> i love the whole tone of this propaganda piece which is like "he's such a
>> nice guy". I bet he has good manners too.
>>
>> maybe you all appreciate this article,
>>
>>
>> http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-dark-wallet-developers-plan-for-startup-governments-run-on-bitcoin
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>