http://www.themascherade.com/contents/en-us/d5_Page_5.html
Venetian masks are a centuries-old tradition of Venice, Italy. The masks
are typically worn during the Carnival (Carnival of Venice), but have
been used on many other occasions in the past, usually as a device for
hiding the wearer's identity and social status. The mask would permit
the wearer to act more freely in cases where he or she wanted to
interact with other members of the society outside the bounds of
identity and everyday convention. It was useful for a variety of
purposes, some of them illicit or criminal, others just personal, such
as romantic encounters.
In 18th century, the Bauta had become a standardized society mask and
disguise regulated by the Venetian government.[ It was obligatory to
wear it at certain political decision-making events when all citizens
were required to act anonymously as peers. Only citizens had the right
to use the Bauta. Its role was similar to the anonymizing processes
invented to guarantee general, direct, free, equal and secret ballots in
modern democracies.
On 10/07/2014 03:13 AM, Josh Walker wrote:
> What I'd rather have is an open-source hardware google-glass device
> that lets me look at someone's personal public blockchain if I meet
> them on the street and decide if I want to give them food, make a
> sales pitch, or avoid them because they have too many dark deep
> web connections.
>
>
> That, good sir, is what I believe is the true endgame. It is what will
> be necessary to have a species-wide "anarchy". Anonymity is purely legal
> and optional, and you balance your desire for it with the fact that you
> know it makes people uneasy, and uneasy people may not want to deal with
> you. The cute girl you meet on the plane, the guy at the market selling
> the wine you like,
>
> etc. The "marketplace of social behaviors" will incentivize the
> appropriate balance. So anonymity won't go away, but perhaps
> "conspicuous anonymity" will.
>
> And critically, it's all optional. No one can be forced to de-anonymize,
> but they will, because they in turn cannot force someone to trade or
> associate with them. Removal of consent is the only weapon, and do do
> that effectively (it shouldn't be a three-day review process to get a
> baker to sell you bread, after all!) requires automation and a HUD-like
> overlay on daily life to deliver the information feed.
>
> You ever gonna come out with why you're so personally focused (even
> obsessed) with HFT? When I stop and think about it, ignoring my
> preconditioning to /dislike /the notion, I can't find anything wrong
> with HFT anymore than I'd dislike Amazon finding low-cost electricity
> for their datacenters, lower-cost than anyone can get anywhere else.
> That's what the HFT guys have done. They've used their resources to find
> the most efficient way to do their business.
>
> Is it not /what they do with their proceeds/ that is the problem? I'm on
> board with that. Or their anti-competitive behavior, if it violates the
> non-aggression obligation. But rich dudes finding low-latency
> connections does not and should not offend merely because they are rich.
>
> -J
>
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@???
> <mailto:hozer@hozed.org>> wrote:
>
> I think it's great that paranoid people are working on anonymous deep
> web crypto.
>
> But my prediction is the endgame is the same as the existing broken
> (and deeply anonymous) chicago board of trade, and instead of buying
> low-latency connections for high frequency trading, the kings of
> industry will buy industrial coal-and nuclear powered anon-coin-mining
> data centers.
>
> What I'd rather have is an open-source hardware google-glass device
> that lets me look at someone's personal public blockchain if I meet
> them on the street and decide if I want to give them food, make a
> sales pitch, or avoid them because they have too many dark deep
> web connections.
>
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 02:38:11AM +0100, Matthew Holt wrote:
> > Unless you're deeply invested in bitcoin then new anonymous deep web
> > cryptocurrencies offer something a lot better to users demanding privacy
> > and freedom from the legacy systems. There's already a new type of
> > exchange that requires no registration to trade alts for BTC and
> > vice-versa. So there's a quick easy route to fiat cash and also into the
> > networks. While look at FairCoop <https://fair.coop/> on their
> plan to
> > only trade with Faircoin <http://fair-coin.org/>. I've been
> involved with
> > Bitcoin since the early Britcoin days of 2011 but I don't have
> large masses
> > of bitcoin stashed nor do I feel like I owe it anything. If anything
> > Bitcoin with its public blockchain make it ideal for the
> pro-regulation
> > camps. And TBH the bitcoin price could really take off once the
> coin is
> > fully regulated, but the cat is out of the bag now. And anonymous
> plus
> > deep-web cryptocurrencies like Anoncoin and Monero are here now.
> That's
> > where system-D monies will eventually start to head. Not to a
> permanently
> > public bitcoin blockchain. Also I don't feel that anything built
> off or
> > around the CoinJoin protocol could ever really offer real life or
> death
> > anonymity, but it may make users feel better. So could help
> further the
> > cryptocoin cause. Like Darkcoin once it's used enough it's going
> to be be
> > playing whack-a-mole with privacy exploits for ever and a day
> IMHO. While
> > yes these are just my opinions for whatever worth they may add to
> these
> > discussions. Also BTW I've donated to Darkcoin and helped raise
> funds also.
> >
> > On 6 October 2014 01:35, Washington Sanchez
> <washington.sanchez@??? <mailto:washington.sanchez@gmail.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "Whatever dude, that's just like your opinion..."
> > > On 06/10/2014 7:34 AM, "Julia Tourianski"
> <juliatourianski@??? <mailto:juliatourianski@gmail.com>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> First I was censored
> > >> Then it got too awkward for him, so he let me speak. This is
> the worst
> > >> type of thinking we can encounter.
> > >>
> > >> "We live in the real world, you can't change reality"
> > >>
> > >> "When I was 20 sure I thought I could fight the government, but
> you have
> > >> to be pragmatic"
> > >>
> > >> "I'm gonna quote Shakespeare, you can smile and smile but be a
> villain,
> > >> well you can whine and whine but the reality is there needs to be
> > >> regulation"
> > >>
> > >> "Regulation is inevitable, it had value, it's there for a reason.
> > >> Everything is regulated, it's valid"
> > >>
> > >> "Compliance is a necessary evil"
> > >>
> > >> - Juan Llanos
> > >>
> > >> Me response
> > >>
> > >> https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=785756038149327
> > >>
> > >> - Julia Tourianski
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> 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
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Troy Benjegerdes 'da hozer'
> hozer@??? <mailto:hozer@hozed.org>
> 7 elements earth::water::air::fire::mind::spirit::soul
> grid.coop <http://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
>
::
Re: [unSYSTEM] Regulation panel at …
