Someone suggested, "go schedule a meeting with the lady," this sort of
assumes that kind of thing hasn't been already tried. Sure, go try...
but keep in mind that 1) you are unlikely to get that kind of access, 2)
if and when you do, the ideas that are considered acceptable
conversation are highly limited. That puts a damper on things believe
me. I know.

But for a moment let's notice that "go schedule a meeting with the lady"
bit...
I was one of the people who submitted statements for the record for the
Nov. 18 and 19, 2013 hearing before the US Senate. Jen Shasky-Calvery
(the director of FinCen who is mentioned throughout this thread) was
there folks. I'm guessing there are others associated with this list
either near or distant who were either: present at those US Senate
hearings on decentralized virtual currency, or who submitted written
statements for the record.

I know I am not alone here in having attempted to present my point of
view in 'government' proceedings (and having my point of view not be
well received). The thing of it is, there are some in gov /
corporation-state who are going to understand points of view that accept
or include a departure from status quo, typically centralized systems,
and others in gov / corporation state who reject these ideas outright,
even when ideas are presented to them that show that they could easily
outsource some of their traditional "gov functions" to the population
vis a vis decentralization. Here I'm not just talking about
decentralization of money or broad-based public participation and
spending prioritization or deliberative democracy consortiums that
include participatory democracy advocates, I'm talking about the fact
that most people who benefit directly from government aren't exactly
willing to talk openly about (incremental or other) losses of control
that are implied by exponentially increasing levels of change in terms
of the confluence of society and technology. In short, they're in
denial.

Not all gov people are in denial, but if you want an example of how hard
it is to get these ideas across, look at the Bitcoin Foundation, which
is supposedly concerned with (according to its bylaws) decentralization
and privacy, but leans towards (what I think is too much) collaboration
with gov folks. And I'm a Foundation member (at least until January of
2015 when my membership expires ~ I don't plan to renew), I have a pull
request in (titled "Anonymity and Funding") to change the Bylaws of the
Foundation which is up for a final vote on Oct. 13 (less than two weeks
from now) to help add an emphasis on anonymity development and for other
purposes. I urge you to check it out before the 13th at
https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/pull/23 and
weigh in if you like.

So if it's rather hard (very actually) to emphasize the importance of
decentralization (instead of seeking "collaboration" and "permission"
from a slew of governments all over the world) when we're talking about
the Bitcoin Foundation, then it's so much harder to present the
importance of decentralization to those in 'government' who make their
living off centralized control. Doesn't mean we can't try though.

I foresee a transitional phase beginning in 2015 (lasting at least
several years) where some persons working as employees of the
corporation-states, which are in popular culture referred to as
'governments,' make fundamental realizations about their connections to
others in a much more decentralized societal framework. At the same
time this happens, there will be (beginning in 2015 also) a huge
blossoming of many technologies relating to not only "privacy" but as
well, anonymity (such technologies may be developed based on Bitcoin,
Cryptonote, Zerocash, or similar developments) which while they are in
their infancy, will not have broad applicability initially, but will
quickly be able to be incorporated into many systems: webcrypto (I have
a feeling this will really be the case, having recently had the
opportunity to present at a W3C webcrypto workshop), all kinds of
financial cryptography, decentralized identity and authentication
systems, and more. Some of this initial progress will be limited by the
fact that much of the world does not have regular internet connection,
many people have minimal or zero access to hardware or at most have a
cell phone, and many others do not have even their own cell phone or
access to any sort of signal normally (water and food are the primary
daily concerns, I lived in El Salvador for several years in the campo so
I understand the limitations of the extension of technology depending on
who has, or does not have, access to infrastructure, signal, hardware,
etc.) As time goes on and these technological solutions become lighter
(e.g. able to be run from a not-so-smart cell phone), it is likely that
the rate of adoption of decentralized solutions (be they for
participatory democracy, virtual currency or anything else) will
increase even faster than we are seeing today.

Of course, I could be totally wrong and just be blowing hot air, too.
That's up to you to decide.

Side note: I have presented at the following environments (don't judge
me, I tried to convince them!)
(I departed 'government' years ago, and I don't regret it, I see what's
left of governments now as a transitional challenge more than anything,
just being realistic ~ observe the below names associated with the gov
environments closely and you'll see they are already suffering death by
committee, too much bureacracy, etc. ~ ok enough rambling, here is where
I've presented / attempted to have my point of view heard)

(USA/EEUU) Nov. 19, 2013 Hearing, 'The Present and Future Impact of
Virtual Currency' of the Subcommittee on National Security and
International Trade and Finance,
US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, Subcommittee
on National Security
And International Trade and Finance, and Subcommittee on Economic Policy
US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
US Senate Committee on Finance
(Note: FinCen Director Jen Shasky-Calvery was at this hearing)

(USA/EEUU) Feb. 5, 2013 Hearing, 'Fighting for Internet Freedom: Dubai
and Beyond'
US House Energy and Commerce Committee, Committee on Foreign Affairs
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade and the
Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and
International Organizations

(ITU) Where opportunities presented themselves, in the runup to the
Fifth World Telecommunication / ICT Policy Forum

(The above environments are samplers and are not a complete list...)

I've grown a bit tired of trying to convince gov folk of the need to
look at things a bit differently. I'm more inclined to simply learn how
to do that change myself or support those who I am confident are also
capable of doing what is necessary. I see Unsystem devs as doing
incredible social (not just technological) groundwork that is really
laying the foundation for a tremendous future. That's a big part of why
I stick around. Thanks for reading this long thing.


On 2014-10-01 13:58, Josh Walker wrote:
>>
>> Go fricking schedule a damned meeting with the lady
>
>
> *You* go schedule it. There are no bosses here, just leaders.
>
> And don't ever call a woman a bitch if you want me to take you
>> seriously.
>
>
> Only men, then? Stop being a whiny bitch.
>
> Yes, you've irritated me, quite a bit.
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Josh Walker <josh@???>
> wrote:
>
>> What is the mission that unSys has crept away from, exactly? This is
>> little more than 4chan's old /raid/ board but in mailing list form,
>> tailored to the demographic of cryptoanarchists. Not your personal
>> army.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@???>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't mean to be too dramatic or anything, but the unsystem may
>>> be entirely unable to perform it's stated mission if the members
>>> do not un-do some bullshit arrogance and mission creep.
>>>
>>> You'll wake up to find the feminine has killed the black dog of
>>> cyberwhatever while you were thumping your chests and dancing
>>> around about how you won the latest battle with the terrible and
>>> evil state.
>>>
>>> see
>>> http://books.google.com/books?id=Gmn8AgAAQBAJ&pg=PT129&lpg=PT129&dq=changing+planes+the+black+dog&source=bl&ots=xNCjfZocad&sig=DiJInPeUhnZgYpZVbjkpYO_od3Q&hl=en&sa=X&ei=n2UsVPreJ42XyAT1poCYCQ&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=changing%20planes%20the%20black%20dog&f=false
>>>
>>>
>>> Go fricking schedule a damned meeting with the lady and explain
>>> how high-frequency trading is funding ISIS, and the unsystem would
>>> like to offer it's collective knowledge, experience, and energy to
>>> track down who's making anonymous trades on the commodities and
>>> stock exchanges, and buying military weapons with it.
>>>
>>> Is this not a shared goal of both the unsystem and FINCEN?
>>>
>>> And don't ever call a woman a bitch if you want me to take you
>>> seriously.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 09:04:53PM -0700, Odinn Cyberguerrilla wrote:
>>> > Folks, I don't mean to be too dramatic or anything, but it's
>>> > entirely possible that before the end of 2015, FinCen (though it
>>> > will not cease to exist) will be unable to perform its own stated
>>> > mission. Sure it's a part of the US Treasury and all that, but look
>>> > at it's long-term IT modernization efforts...
>>> > http://www.fincen.gov/about_fincen/wwd/ITModernizationEffortsFAQ.html
>>> > (It's a .gov but I'll summarize it here)
>>> > Basically they are still working out the details of e-filing for the
>>> > Bank Secrecy Act and supposedly attempting to "re-engineer the BSA
>>> > data architecture, update antiquated infrastructure required to
>>> > support data capture and dissemination, implement innovative Web
>>> > services and enhanced electronic filing, and provide enhanced
>>> > analytical tools."
>>> >
>>> > If FinCen was really modernizing, they wouldn't be just studying
>>> > ring signature or "looking into it" as the coindesk article seemed
>>> > to imply. FinCen would be USING it. Or bitcoin. Or both!
>>> >
>>> > By the time they figure out how to fix their own shit, the rest of
>>> > the world will be light years ahead of them.
>>> >
>>> > I remember clearly (and even have a little blog and printout) of
>>> > (FinCen Director) Jen Shasky-Calvery's testimony from Nov. 18, 2013
>>> > on the US Senate Hearings on Decentralized virtual currency. She
>>> > said the same thing on Nov. 19, too, basically just repeating word
>>> > for word today what she said back then....
>>> > ""We work to achieve (our) mission by implementing the Bank Secrecy
>>> > Act... Illicit actors might decide to use virtual currency... (it's)
>>> > relatively anonymous.... does not typically have transaction
>>> > limits.... may have been created to facilitate money laundering..."
>>> > "(This) is not nearly theoretical..." (References Liberty Reserve,
>>> > Silk Road)
>>> > "It is also important to put virtual currency in perspective...
>>> > Approximately 8 billion dollars in transactions (in virtual
>>> > currency) over the past year."
>>> > "It is in the best interest of virtual currency users to comply with
>>> > (our) regulations..."
>>> > (From her statements which she repeated on Nov. 18 and 19, 2013
>>> > before the Senate. Same parrot-talk)
>>> >
>>> > It's our responsibility to reach a helping hand out to those who are
>>> > trying to figure out how to live without things like FinCen invading
>>> > every square inch of their lives. Getting back to that now...
>>> >
>>> > Just as an aside though, were it not for that zombie-like image of
>>> > the FinCen Director with The Flag(!!) behind it, one could almost
>>> > see her squatting somewhere with a bunch of hungry DW developers,
>>> > lounging over a screen...
>>> > pipe dream o possible future reality? <le sigh>
>>> > Anyway...
>>> >
>>> > End the state. Autonomy is here. It's not here in the form of some
>>> > future far-off perfect software. It's right here, now, in the form
>>> > of decisions we make.
>>> >
>>> > DW, Forward!
>>> >
>>> > On 2014-09-30 20:33, Amir Taaki wrote:
>>> > >http://www.coindesk.com/fincen-director-villainize-bitcoin/
>>> > >
>>> > >"Of particular concern, Calvery said, are informal bitcoin dealers who
>>> > >may think they can operate outside of the agency’s oversight.
>>> > >
>>> > >“I hear reports that there are folks who say that they’ll wait and see
>>> > >if there’s any enforcement behind our requirements before they take it
>>> > >too seriously, so that’s unfortunate. I have to hear that folks want to
>>> > >see folks do wrong, and take action before they’re willing to comply,
>>> > >but we’re willing to do that if we need to,” she said."
>>> > >
>>> > >so you will need ID to trade bitcoins for fiat basically.
>>> > >
>>> > >pin minded careerist trying to one up lawsky.
>>> > >
>>> > >“We don’t start at a product and villainize a product, we
>>> > >villainize the
>>> > >bad actors and find out what they’re doing with their money.”
>>> > >
>>> > >"We ask that you think about it from an anti-money laundering (AML)
>>> > >perspective, what could you build in [to the technology]?"
>>> > >
>>> > >"Rather, Calvery said that bitcoin’s status as a newcomer to the
>>> > >financial ecosystem has made it the target of bad actors."
>>> > >
>>> > >"“When I looked through it [BitLicense], I saw a lot of concepts that I
>>> > >was already familiar with from New York and other places,” Calvery
>>> > >said."
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >_______________________________________________
>>> > >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
>>>
>>> --
>>>

>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Troy Benjegerdes                 'da hozer'
>>> hozer@???
>>> 7 elements      earth::water::air::fire::mind::spirit::soul
>>> grid.coop

>>>

>>>       Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel,
>>>          nor try buy a hacker who makes money by the megahash

>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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