A Brief History of the Silk Road: Drugs, (Non)Violence ...

___

Welcome to "the Omni-Market!" We strive to bring you the most reliable source of news, updates, and discussion of the Darknet scene.
[link]

Brian from Open Bazaar + Kristov Atlas of the Anonymous bitcoin book livestreamed tonight at Decentral Vancouver 7pm PST to talk about Silk Road 2.0 seizure

@decentralvan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgzkMs8rvr8&feature=youtu.be
submitted by cammyjee to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Ross Ulbricht, Founder Of Bitcoin Bazaar Silk Road, Sentenced To Life In Jail

source link: Ross Ulbricht, Founder Of Bitcoin Bazaar Silk Road, Sentenced To Life In Jail
poster: yyhhggt, original conspiracy link
Discourse level: 0%
Shills: 0%
submitted by conspirobot to conspiro [link] [comments]

Ross Ulbricht, Founder Of Bitcoin Bazaar Silk Road, Sentenced To Life In Jail

Ross Ulbricht, Founder Of Bitcoin Bazaar Silk Road, Sentenced To Life In Jail submitted by yyhhggt to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Faiella is charged with having operated an underground bitcoin exchange from late 2011 to late 2013 via the now infamous Silk Road, described by authorities as "a sprawling and anonymous black-market bazaar where illegal drugs of virtually every variety were bought and sold . . . ."

Faiella is charged with having operated an underground bitcoin exchange from late 2011 to late 2013 via the now infamous Silk Road, described by authorities as submitted by Rednblu777 to law [link] [comments]

Justice Department Links Bitcoin Mogul Charlie Shrem to Silk Road Drug Bazaar

Justice Department Links Bitcoin Mogul Charlie Shrem to Silk Road Drug Bazaar submitted by josicmedia to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A few stories about Brian Krebs: The independent cybercrime journalist who exposes criminals on the internet

First, a bit of introduction before we get into the living drama that is Brian Krebs.
Brian Krebs has been a journalist for decades, starting in the late 90s. He got his start at The Washington Post, but what he's most famous for are his exposes on criminal businesses and individuals who perpetuate cyber crime worldwide. In 2001, he got his interest in cybercrime piqued when a computer worm locked him out of his own computer. In 2005, he shifted from working as a staff writer at The Washington Post's tech newswire to writing for their security blog, "Security Wire". During his tenure there, he started by focusing on the victims of cybercrime, but later also started to focus on the perpetrators of it as well. His reporting helped lead to the shutdown of McColo, a hosting provider who provided service to some of the world's biggest spammers and hackers. Reports analyzing the shutdown of McColo estimated that global spam volume dropped by between 40 and 70 percent. Further analysis revealed it also played host to child pornography sites, and the Russian Business Network, a major Russian cybercrime ring.
In 2009, Krebs left to start his own site, KrebsOnSecurity. Since then, he's been credited with being the first to report on major events such as Stuxnet and when Target was breached, resulting in the leakage of 40 million cards. He also regularly investigates and reveals criminals' identities on his site. The latter has made him the bane of the world of cybercrime, as well as basically a meme, where criminals will include references like Made by Brian Krebs in their code, or name their shops full of stolen credit cards after him.
One of his first posts on his new site was a selection of his best work. While not particularly dramatic, they serve as an excellent example of dogged investigative work, and his series reveal the trail of takedowns his work has documented, or even contributed to.
And now, a selection of drama involving Krebs. Note, all posts are sarcastically-tinged retellings of the source material which I will link throughout. I also didn't use the real names in my retellings, but they are in the source material. This took way too long to write, and it still does massively condense the events described in the series. Krebs has been involved with feuds with other figures, but I'd argue these tales are the "main" bits of drama that are most suited for here.

Fly on the Wall

By 2013, Krebs was no stranger to cybercriminals taking the fight to the real world. He was swatted previously to the point where the police actually know to give him a ring and see if there'd actually been a murder, or if it was just those wacky hackers at it again. In addition, his identity was basically common knowledge to cybercriminals, who would open lines of credit in his name, or find ways to send him money using stolen credit cards.
However, one particular campaign against him caught his eye. A hacker known as "Fly" aka "Flycracker" aka "MUXACC1" posted on a Russian-language fraud forum he administered about a "Krebs fund". His plan was simple. Raise Bitcoin to buy Heroin off of a darknet marketplace, address it to Krebs, and alert his local police via a spoofed phone call. Now, because Krebs is an investigative journalist, he develops undercover presences on cybercrime forums, and it just so happened he'd built up a presence on this one already.
Guys, it became known recently that Brian Krebs is a heroin addict and he desperately needs the smack, so we have started the "Helping Brian Fund", and shortly we will create a bitcoin wallet called "Drugs for Krebs" which we will use to buy him the purest heroin on the Silk Road. My friends, his withdrawal is very bad, let’s join forces to help the guy! We will save Brian from the acute heroin withdrawal and the world will get slightly better!
Fly had first caught Krebs' attention by taunting him on Twitter, sending him Tweets including insults and abuse, and totally-legit looking links. Probably either laced with malware, or designed to get Krebs' IP. He also took to posting personal details such as Krebs' credit report, directions to his house, and pictures of his front door on LiveJournal, of all places.
So, after spotting the scheme, he alerted his local police that he'd probably have someone sending him some China White. Sure enough, the ne'er-do-wells managed to raise 2 BTC, which at the time was a cool $200 or so. They created an account on the premiere darknet site at the time, The Silk Road under the foolproof name "briankrebs7". They found one seller who had consistently high reviews, but the deal fell through for unknown reasons. My personal theory is the seller decided to Google where it was going, and realized sending a gram of dope into the waiting arms of local law enforcement probably wasn't the best use of his time. Still, the forum members persevered, and found another seller who was running a buy 10 get 2 free promotion. $165 of Bitcoin later, the drugs were on their way to a new home. The seller apparently informed Fly that the shipment should arrive by Tuesday, a fact which he gleefully shared with the forum.
While our intrepid hero had no doubt that the forum members were determined to help him grab the tail of the dragon, he's not one to assume without confirmation, and enlisted the help of a graduate student at UCSD who was researching Bitcoin and anonymity on The Silk Road, and confirmed the address shared by Fly was used to deposit 2 BTC into an account known to be used for money management on the site.
By Monday, an envelope from Chicago had arrived, containing a copy of Chicago confidential. Taped inside were tiny baggies filled with the purported heroin. Either dedicated to satisfied customers, or mathematically challenged, the seller had included thirteen baggies instead of the twelve advertised. A police officer arrived to take a report and whisked the baggies away.
Now, Fly was upset that Krebs wasn't in handcuffs for drug possession, and decided to follow up his stunt by sending Krebs a floral arrangement shaped like a cross, and an accompanying threatening message addressed to his wife, the dire tone slightly undercut by the fact that it was signed "Velvet Crabs". Krebs' curiosity was already piqued from the shenanigans with the heroin, but with the arrival of the flowers decided to dive deeper into the сука behind things.
He began digging into databases from carding sites that had been hacked, but got his first major breakthrough to his identity from a Russian computer forensics firm. Fly had maintained an account on a now-defunct hacking forum, whose database was breached under "Flycracker". It turns out, the email Flycracker had used was also hacked at some point, and a source told Krebs that the email was full of reports from a keylogger Fly had installed on his wife's computer. Now, because presumably his wife wasn't part of, or perhaps even privy to her husband's illicit dealings, her email account happened to be her full legal name, which Krebs was able to trace to her husband. Now, around this time, the site Fly maintained disappeared from the web, and administrators on another major fraud forum started purging his account. This is a step they typically take when they suspect a member has been apprehended by authorities. Nobody knew for sure, but they didn't want to take any chances.
More research by Krebs revealed that the criminals' intuition had been correct, and Fly was arrested in Italy, carrying documents under an assumed name. He was sitting in an Italian jail, awaiting potential extradition to the United States, as well as potentially facing charges in Italy. This was relayed to Krebs by a law enforcement official who simply said "The Fly has been swatted". (Presumably while slowly removing a pair of aviator sunglasses)
While Fly may have been put away, the story between Krebs and Fly wasn't quite over. He did end up being extradited to the US for prosecution, but while imprisoned in Italy, Fly actually started sending Krebs letters. Understandably distrustful after the whole "heroin" thing, his contacts in federal law enforcement tested the letter, and found it to be clean. Inside, there was a heartfelt and personal letter, apologizing for fucking with Krebs in so many ways. He also forgave Krebs for posting his identity online, leading him to muse that perhaps Fly was working through a twelve-step program. In December, he received another letter, this time a simple postcard with a cheerful message wishing him a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Krebs concluded his post thusly:
Cybercrooks have done some pretty crazy stuff to me in response to my reporting about them. But I don’t normally get this kind of closure. I look forward to meeting with Fly in person one day soon now that he will be just a short train ride away. And he may be here for some time: If convicted on all charges, Fly faces up to 30 years in U.S. federal prison.
Fly ultimately was extradited. He plead guilty and was sentenced to 41 months in jail

vDOS and Mirai Break The Internet

Criminals are none too happy when they find their businesses and identities on the front page of KrebsOnSecurity. It usually means law enforcement isn't far behind. One such business was known as vDOS. A DDOS-for-hire (also known as a "booter" or a "stresser") site that found itself hacked, with all their customer records still in their databases leaked. Analysis of the records found that in a four-month time span, the service had been responsible for about 8.81 years worth of attack time, meaning on average at any given second, there were 26 simultaneous attacks running. Interestingly, the hack of vDOS came about from another DDOS-for-hire site, who as it turns out was simply reselling services provided by vDOS. They were far from the only one. vDOS appeared to provide firepower to a large number of different resellers.
In addition to the attack logs, support messages were also among the data stolen. This contained some complaints from various clients who complained they were unable to launch attacks against Israeli IPs. This is a common tactic by hackers to try and avoid unwanted attention from authorities in their country of residence. This was confirmed when two men from Israel were arrested for their involvement in owning and running vDOS. However, this was just the beginning for this bit of drama.
The two men arrested went by the handles "applej4ck" and "Raziel". They had recently published a paper on DDOS attack methods in an online Israeli security magazine. Interestingly, on the same day the men were arrested, questioned, and released on bail, vDOS went offline. Not because it had been taken down by Israeli authorities, not because they had shut it down themselves, but because a DDOS protection firm, BackConnect Security, had hijacked the IP addresses belonging to the company. To spare a lot of technical detail, it's called a BGP hijack, and it basically works by a company saying "Yeah, those are our addresses." It's kind of amazing how much of the internet is basically just secured by the digital equivalent of pinky swears. You can read some more technical detail on Wikipedia. Anyway, we'll get back to BackConnect.
Following the publication of the story uncovering the inner workings of vDOS, KrebsOnSecurity was hit with a record breaking DDOS attack, that peaked at 620/Gbps, nearly double the most powerful DDOS attack previously on record. To put that in perspective, that's enough bandwidth to download 5 simultaneous copies of Interstellar in 4K resolution every single second, and still have room to spare. The attack was so devastating, Akamai, one of the largest providers of DDOS protection in the world had to drop Krebs as a pro bono client. Luckily, Google was willing to step in and place his site under the protection of Google's Project Shield, a free service designed to protect the news sites and journalists from being knocked offline by DDOS attacks.
This attack was apparently in retaliation for the vDOS story, since some of the data sent in the attack included the string "freeapplej4ck". The attack was executed by a botnet of Internet of Things (or IoT) devices. These are those "smart" devices like camera systems, routers, DVRs. Basically things that connect to the cloud. An astounding amount of those are secured with default passwords that can be easily looked up from various sites or even the manufacturers' websites. This was the start of a discovery of a massive botnet that had been growing for years.
Now time for a couple quick side stories:
Dyn, a company who provides DNS to many major companies including Twitter, Reddit, and others came under attack, leaving many sites (including Twitter and Reddit) faltering in the wake of it. Potentially due to one of their engineers' collaboration with Krebs on another story. It turned out that the same botnet that attacked Krebs' site was at least part of the attack on Dyn
And back to BackConnect, that DDOS protection firm that hijacked the IP addresses from vDOS. Well it turns out BGP Hijacks are old hat for the company. They had done it at least 17 times before. Including at least once (purportedly with permission) for the address 1.3.3.7. Aka, "leet". It turns out one of the co-founders of BackConnect actually posted screenshots of him visiting sites that tell you your public IP address in a DDOS mitigation industry chat, showing it as 1.3.3.7. They also used a BGP Hijack against a hosting company and tried to frame a rival DDOS mitigation provider.
Finally, another provider, Datawagon was interestingly implicated in hosting DDOS-for-hire sites while offering DDOS protection. In a Skype conversation where the founder of Datawagon wanted to talk about that time he registered dominos.pizza and got sued for it, he brings up scanning the internet for vulnerable routers completely unprompted. Following the publication of the story about BackConnect, in which he was included in, he was incensed about his portrayal, and argued with Krebs over Skype before Krebs ultimately ended up blocking him. He was subsequently flooded with fake contact requests from bogus or hacked Skype accounts. Shortly thereafter, the record-breaking DDOS attack rained down upon his site.
Back to the main tale!
So, it turns out the botnet of IoT devices was puppeteered by a malware called Mirai. How did it get its name? Well, that's the name its creator gave it, after an anime called Mirai Nikki. How did this name come to light? The creator posted the source code online. (The name part, not the origin. The origin didn't come 'til later.) The post purported that they'd picked it up from somewhere in their travels as a DDOS industry professional. It turns out this is a semi-common tactic when miscreants fear that law enforcement might come looking for them, and having the only copy of the source code of a malware in existence is a pretty strong indicator that you have something to do with it. So, releasing the source to the world gives a veneer of plausible deniability should that eventuality come to pass. So who was this mysterious benefactor of malware source? They went by the name "Anna-senpai".
As research on the Mirai botnet grew, and more malware authors incorporated parts of Mirai's source code into their own attacks, attention on the botnet increased, and on the people behind it. The attention was presumably the reason why Hackforums, the forum where the source code was posted, later disallowed ostensible "Server Stress Tester" services from being sold on it. By December, "Operation Tarpit" had wrought 34 arrests and over a hundred "knock and talk" interviews questioning people about their involvement.
By January, things started to come crashing down. Krebs published an extensive exposé on Anna-senpai detailing all the evidence linking them to the creation of Mirai. The post was so big, he included a damn glossary. What sparked the largest botnet the internet had ever seen? Minecraft. Minecraft servers are big business. A popular one can earn tens of thousands of dollars per month from people buying powers, building space, or other things. It's also a fiercely competitive business, with hundreds of servers vying for players. It turns out that things may have started, as with another set of companies, two rival DDOS mitigation providers competing for customers. ProTraf was a provider of such mitigation technology, and a company whose owner later worked for ProTraf had on at least one occasion hijacked addresses belonging to another company, ProxyPipe. ProxyPipe had also been hit with DDOS attacks they suspected to be launched by ProTraf.
While looking into the President of ProTraf, Krebs realized he'd seen the relatively uncommon combination of programming languages and skills posted by the President somewhere else. They were shared by Anna-senpai on Hackforums. As Krebs dug deeper and deeper into Anna-senpai's online presence, he uncovered other usernames, including one he traced to some Minecraft forums where a photoshopped picture of a still from Pulp Fiction contained the faces of BackConnect, which was a rival to ProTraf's DDOS mitigation business, and another face. A hacker by the name of Vyp0r, who another employee of ProTraf claimed betrayed his trust and blackmailed him into posting the source of another piece of malware called Bashlite. There was also a third character photoshopped into the image. An anime character named "Yamada" from a movie called B Gata H Hei.
Interestingly, under the same username, Krebs found a "MyAnimeList" profile which, out of 9 titles it had marked as watched, were B Gata H Hei, as well as Mirai Nikki, the show from which Mirai derived its name. It continues on with other evidence, including DDOS attacks against Rutgers University, but in short, there was little doubt in the identity of "Anna-senpai", but the person behind the identity did contact Krebs to comment. He denied any involvement in Mirai or DDOS attacks.
"I don’t think there are enough facts to definitively point the finger at me," [Anna-senpai] said. "Besides this article, I was pretty much a nobody. No history of doing this kind of stuff, nothing that points to any kind of sociopathic behavior. Which is what the author is, a sociopath."
He did, however, correct Krebs on the name of B Gata H Kei.
Epilogue
Needless to say, the Mirai botnet crew was caught, but managed to avoid jailtime thanks to their cooperation with the government. That's not to say they went unpunished. Anna-senpai was sentenced to 6 months confinement, 2500 hours of community service, and they may have to pay up to $8.6 million in restitution for their attacks on Rutgers university.

Other Stories

I don't have the time or energy to write another effortpost, and as is I'm over 20,000 characters, so here's a few other tidbits of Krebs' clashes with miscreants.
submitted by HereComesMyDingDong to internetdrama [link] [comments]

IamA journalist and author who spent 5 years delving into every murky corner of the dark web for my latest book “The Darkest Web”. AMA!

Hi Reddit!
I'm a former corporate lawyer, journalist and author who has spent five years exploring the dark web. My first book, Silk Road was the world's first in-depth look at the black markets that operate on the dark web. My latest book The Darkest Web, goes beyond the darknet markets and explores the world of murder-for-hire, red rooms, child exploitation and hurtcore.
I’ve also been to trials and traveled the world to meet some of the dark web identities in real life, whether in prison, or over a beer.
The blurb:
Darkest Web : Drugs, death and destroyed lives ... the inside story of the internet's evil twin
Dark...
A kingpin willing to murder to protect his dark web drug empire. A corrupt government official determined to avoid exposure. The death of a dark web drugs czar in mysterious circumstances in a Bangkok jail cell, just as the author arrives there.
Who is Variety Jones and why have darknet markets ballooned tenfold since authorities shut down the original dark web drugs bazaar, Silk Road? Who are the kingpins willing to sell poisons and weapons, identities and bank accounts, malware and life-ruining services online to anyone with a wallet full of Bitcoin?
Darker...
A death in Minnesota leads detectives into the world of dark web murder-for-hire where hundreds of thousands of dollars in Bitcoin is paid to arrange killings, beatings and rapes. Meanwhile, the owner of the most successful hitman website in history is threatening the journalists who investigate his business with a visit from his operatives - and the author is at the top of his list.
Darkest...
People with the most depraved perversions gather to share their obscene materials in an almost inaccessible corner of the dark web. A video circulates and the pursuit of the monsters responsible for 'Daisy's Destruction' lead detectives into the unimaginable horror of the world of hurtcore.
There's the world wide web - the internet we all know that connects us via news, email, forums, shopping and social media. Then there's the dark web - the parallel internet accessed by only a select few. Usually, those it connects wish to remain anonymous and for good reason.
Eileen Ormsby has spent the past five years exploring every corner of the Dark Web. She has shopped on darknet markets, contributed to forums, waited in red rooms and been threatened by hitmen on murder-for-hire sites. On occasions, her dark web activities have poured out into the real world and she has attended trials, met with criminals and the law enforcement who tracked them down, interviewed dark web identities and visited them in prison.
This book will take you into the murkiest depths of the web's dark underbelly: a place of hitmen for hire, red rooms, hurtcore sites and markets that will sell anything a person is willing to pay for - including another person. The Darkest Web.
My Proof: https://twitter.com/EileenOrmsby/status/982145968916185088
AMA!
EDIT Well, this is rather... slow. But I'm around Reddit quite a bit, so if you happen to come across this post, please feel free to ask a question and I'll definitely answer it !
submitted by OzFreelancer to IAmA [link] [comments]

[Everyone] We now have several forms of unbannable private property. Is the far left ideologically dead?

TL;DR: Any ideology based on banning private property is dead thanks to cryptographically-enforced private property.
Cryptocurrencies, Smart Contracts(sometimes called dApps), and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations(DAOs) each represents three different forms of unbannable private property. What is private property? The capitalist definition of private property is straightforward; it's any piece of property that the government doesn't own. But even if we go by the left's definition, we will see that each of these 3 technologies meets their definition of private property. And since each of these technologies are inherently unbannable, one can only conclude that the far left is ideologically dead.
So how does the far left define private property? Here are a few excerpts from a few different leftists:
”We are opposed to the kind of [private] property “which can be used only to exploit people — land and buildings, instruments of production and distribution, raw materials and manufactured articles, money and capital.” [Nicholas Walter, About Anarchism, p. 40]
"If your mom made a living off fixing neighbors clothes, and accepted money for it, then [the sewing machine] would be considered private property. If she employs people and takes part of the revenue for the work done by employees, that shit's getting seized." Here we see how communists define private property. If you use property to make money, it's private property. And if you make money using your private property while hiring others, that's doubly offensive.
Here are some others on money in particular:
"Yes, communism seeks to abolish money, but nobody knows how a moneyless post-capitalist system would run."
"[Money] needs to be abolished there is no way to have money and not have material individualism."
"Abolish Money!" This one is particularly interesting becuase leftist-anarchists like to claim that anarcho-capitalists aren't real anarchists because 100 years ago the 'original' anarchists were anti-capitalists. At the same time, some modern anarchists say that money is fine, and doesn't need to be abolished(likely because they realized Bitcoin killed their entire ideology overnight). Be be sure to check the date this was published(1900).
So now let's go one by one and use technology to see if private property is bannable

Money

Money is the obvious one. Cryptocurrencies are unbannable forms of money. Their inherent decentralized structure means that not even china, who has complete control of their nations internet, could ban it. The weakest link in crypto space are the centralized exchanges. However, thanks to mining and stores that accept CCs like SilkRoad and OpenBazaar, it's possible to acquire CCs and spend them without going through a centralized exchange. Not to mention, decentralized exchanges will be a thing one day.

Property that you use to earn money

This one is solved by boths Smart Contracts and DAOs, but I'm going to focus on Smart Contracts. Smart Contracts are awesome. If you haven't read my article on them, check out what I wrote here. They can compute anything that a normal program can, but are also unbannable thanks to being decentralized. For our purposes, we can think of Smart Contracts as unbannable programs. Programs are property. Even open source programs are property. When a programer creates a program, they have the freedom to open source the code or not because they own their code(assuming they haven't agreed to give up ownership of the code in exchange for something else). If they do decide to open source their code, they also have the freedom to attach a license(any license) onto their code or not- because they own their code. It's their property. In fact, software in general can be thought of as just digital factories- it takes in inputs, and spits out some outputs. And like physical factories, someone owns them. So we've established programs and code are property. But is it private property? Going by the leftist definitions, yes, it can be.
Take CryptoKitties for instance. CryptoKitties is a SmartContract that lives on the Ethereum blockchain. The idea is you can trade and breed these digital cats with other users, while the company earns a fixed percentage of each trade. CryptoKitties was in fact created by an entrepreneur who hired people to help him make the product. His employees probably get paid a salary, while his company gets paid directly through the SmartContract. In fact, we can see the exact addresses that CryptoKities sends its revenue to, along with who has control over which parts of the Smart Contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x06012c8cf97bead5deae237070f9587f8e7a266d#code The "contract KittyAccessControl" is particularly interesting. CryptoKitties was made by a team, but you could imagine if it was made by a single person. There's nothing really stopping a single person from making CKs. Either way, CKs is property that is owned by an individual or a few individuals, and is used to make a profit. And it's unbannable. The revenue from CKs will always go to the owner of the contract. That makes CKs an unbannable form of private property by their own definition.

Instruments/Tools/Means of production

But what about the physical computers and keyboards that the programmers use to create the unbannable programs? Couldn't those at least be seized? Nope. That's where DAOs come in. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations mother fucker. DAOs are a beast. Imagine a company with no headquarters, and no one knows who the owners or employees are, or where they're located. DAOs are built on top of Smart Contracts, but instead of a cute game like CryptoKitties, they allow an entrepreneur to codify a business structure in such a way that anyone can perform a task and get paid for it in a completely decentralized fashion. In such a business, it would be impossible to "seize the means of production". Even if the government tracked down one employee and stole their computer, the DAO would still automatically find a new employee to do work, potentially in a completely separate country. And even if the government tracked down the owner of the DAO, the DAO itself still might not be seizeable, assuming the owner stores their private keys in their head. Think of the Uber business model, but on steroids. Or think 'working from home' taken to the extreme. Here's a good article on DAOs. Uber by itself actually is very interesting. Uber doesn't own any cars, the drivers own their own car. However, the Uber App isn't on the blockchain, so technically it could be banned or seized. However, if Uber were a DAO, it would become an unbannable form of private property.
Far leftists would point out that DAOs also enable "woker owned businesses", which is true. A DAO could be programmed to fit any sort of business structure. Unfortunately for them, capitalism doesn't care at all what individuals do, as long as they don't steal or damage other people's private property, or break a contract that they agreed to. Worker co-ops like Mondragon Corporation are as capitalist as Chicken McNuggets. Far leftists on the other hand don't extend this same level of freedom to us, which is why their ideologies are predicated on violence. In order for them to succeed, private property must be completely banned, and their very specific business model must be enforced at gunpoint. Luckily for us, we have cryptography and economics on our side. They may be able to ban certain forms of physical private property like apartments(although even that could be solved by an AirBnB Smart Contract), but they will never be able to ban all of it, or even a fraction of it. Other far leftists such as left-anarchists believe that if we get rid of the government, private property won't be enforceable, and will just automatically disappear. They believe a government is required for private property enforcement. They're completely wrong. Cryptographically-enforced private property is here to stay. They can scream and shout exploitation all they want, but their ideology is completely and utterly unenforceable, and is thus effectively dead.

In conclusion

submitted by CommunismDoesntWork to CapitalismVSocialism [link] [comments]

Who is the richest Bitcoin owner?

Technically, Bitcoin was worth less than 10 cents per bitcoin upon its inception in 2009. The cryptocurrency has risen steadily since then and is now worth around $6000 per Bitcoin. This is the most remarkable appreciation of the value and has created many millionaires over the last eight years.
Here are the top ten people/institutions that held a large amount of Bitcoins over time:
1. Satoshi Nakamoto
The creator of Bitcoin, who hides behind the moniker Satoshi Nakamoto, remains the major holder of bitcoins. The number of bitcoins that Nakamoto owns today is estimated at around 1.1 million, based on the early mining that he did. This is the equivalent of about $6 billion at today’s exchange rate of 1BTC to 6,098 USD. At least Nakamoto has never touched most of his bitcoins, and neither converted them into real-world currencies nor used them for any other purpose. If he were to sell his entire stash, the value of Bitcoin could plummet in an instant.
2. Bulgaria
Bulgaria is currently sitting on one of the biggest stashes of Bitcoin in the world. How did the European nation come into the possession of this enormous sum of money? A crackdown on organized crime by the Bulgarian law enforcement in May 2017 resulted in the seizure of a stash of 213,519 Bitcoins, enough to pay off a quarter of the country’s national debt.
According to Bulgarian authorities, the criminals used their technical prowess to circumvent taxes. As of June 2018, the virtual coins would be worth more than $1.2 billion. The Bulgarian government has declined to comment on the status of the coins.
3. BitFinex
BitFinex, a crypto exchange, has one of the largest bitcoin wallets with 163,133.38 BTC that are worth approximately $1 billion at the current price of $6,098.24 per bitcoin. The coins are believed to be kept in a cold wallet to protect them from cyber hacks, unauthorized access and other vulnerabilities that a system connected to the internet is prone to.
4. The FBI
The FBI is one of the largest renowned holders of Bitcoin. In September 2013, they brought down Silk Road, the infamous dark web drug bazaar, and seized 144,000 Bitcoin owned by the site’s operator Ross Ulbricht, better known as, “Dread Pirate Roberts”. Ulbricht made critical blunders that allowed investigators to locate the site and link him to it. Users of Silk Road are said to have traded around 9.5 million bitcoins since Ulbricht launched the site in 2011. Even thought the FBI sold a large amount of their Bitcoin holdings or even all, the FBI worth mentioned as they had a fortune in Bitcoin at some point. A large portion of the Bitcoins seized and sold went to Barry Silbert.
5. The Winklevoss Twins
Tyler Winklevoss and Cameron Winklevoss were among the first Bitcoin billionaires. The duo had first gained popularity when they sued the Facebook C.E.O. Mark Zuckerberg for allegedly stealing the idea of creating Facebook from them. They were contacted by Zuckerberg to develop the ConnectU site, which was to become Facebook later on.
They used $11 million of the $65 million cash compensation they received from the legal dispute with Zuckerberg to purchase 1.5 million Bitcoins in 2013. Back then, one Bitcoin traded at $120. That investment has increased more than 20000% since then.
The twins allegedly own around 1 percent of all Bitcoin in circulation. Their combined net worth is approximately 400 million. They created the Windex, funded several bitcoin-related ventures and invested $1.5 million in BitInstant.
6. Garvin Andresen
Although bitcoin is the brainchild of Satoshi Nakamoto, Garvin Andresen is credited as the person who made it what it is today. Garvin is one of the people who has been suspected to be Satoshi, a claim he denies. Rather, he says that he had a close relationship with the anonymous cryptographer for many years. The real Satoshi Nakamoto picked him as his successor in late 2010. Garvin became the chief developer of the open source code that determines how Bitcoin operates – and whether it can survive. He was once paid over $200,000 in Bitcoin by the Bitcoin Foundation for his contributions. He had already cashed out multiple times.
7. Roger Ver
Roger Ver, otherwise known as Bitcoin Jesus, is one of the first Bitcoin billionaires and believed to hold or held at least 100,000 bitcoins. The renowned libertarian allegedly dropped out of college to focus on his bitcoin-related projects. Unlike other crypto billionaires out there who are throwing their cash in the typical private Islands or luxury jets, Ver’s dream is to establish his own libertarian nation where every individual is the absolute owner of their own life and are free to do whatever they wish with their person or property. The controversial bitcoin evangelist renounced his U.S. citizenship in 2014 and relocated permanently to a small Caribbean Island.
8. Barry Silbert
Silbert is a venture capitalist and founder of Digital Currency Group. He was an early adopter of Bitcoin. He purportedly walked away with an eye-watering 48,000 Bitcoins in an auction held by the U.S. Marshals Service in 2014. The US government had confiscated much of the crypto coins from Ross Ulbricht, the alleged operator of the dark web marketplace for drugs and other illegal products. Bitcoin was then worth $350, which means Silbert’s coins have skyrocketed in value from $16.8 million to $288 million.
9. Charlie Shrem
Charlie Shrem is no doubt one of the most controversial Bitcoin millionaires. He invested in a large quantity of Bitcoin in the early days of the cryptocurrency. Shrem was also an active member of the Bitcoin Foundation and founded BitInstant when he was just 22 years old. By the end of December 2014, Shrem had been found guilty of money laundering and received a two-year prison sentence. After his release from federal custody, he unveiled a startup called Intellisys Capital, a company that sells investment portfolios in blockchain companies.
10. Tony Gallippi
A famous business magnate Tony Gallippi is also believed to be one of the big holders of bitcoins. He is the brain behind BitPay, one of the most popular Bitcoin payment service providers in the world. The company was launched in May 2011 and processes over one million dollars per day. Bitpay is also one of the companies to sign contracts with major companies including Microsoft, Dell, TigerDirect, and Newegg. By 2014, the company had employed approximately 100 people.
Conclusion
It is estimated that the top 1000 bitcoin addresses own approximately 35% of the total bitcoin in circulation. There are also thousands of individuals who hold large stashes of bitcoin but have chosen to remain anonymous.
submitted by alifkhalil469 to BtcNewz [link] [comments]

[Effort Post] The far left is dead, and cryptography killed it

TL;DR: Any ideology based on banning private property is dead thanks to cryptographically-enforced private property.
Cryptocurrencies, Smart Contracts(sometimes called dApps), and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations(DAOs) each represents three different forms of unbannable private property. What is private property? Our definition of private property is straightforward; it's any piece of property that the government doesn't own. But even if we go by the left's irrelevant definition, we will see that each of these 3 technologies meets their definition of private property. And since each of these technologies are inherently unbannable, one can only conclude that the far left is ideologically dead.
So how does the far left define private property? Here are a few excerpts from a few different leftists:
”We are opposed to the kind of [private] property “which can be used only to exploit people — land and buildings, instruments of production and distribution, raw materials and manufactured articles, money and capital.” [Nicholas Walter, About Anarchism, p. 40]
"If your mom made a living off fixing neighbors clothes, and accepted money for it, then [the sewing machine] would be considered private property. If she employs people and takes part of the revenue for the work done by employees, that shit's getting seized." Here we see how communists define private property. If you use property to make money, it's private property. And if you make money using your private property while hiring others, that's doubly offensive.
Here are some others on money in particular:
"Yes, communism seeks to abolish money, but nobody knows how a moneyless post-capitalist system would run."
"[Money] needs to be abolished there is no way to have money and not have material individualism."
"Abolish Money!" This one is particularly interesting becuase leftist-anarchists like to claim that anarcho-capitalists aren't real anarchists because 100 years ago the 'original' anarchists were anti-capitalists. At the same time, some modern anarchists say that money is fine, and doesn't need to be abolished(likely because they realized Bitcoin killed their entire ideology overnight). When debating these fools, send them to this article, and be sure to tell them to check the date it was published(1900).
So now let's go one by one and use technology to destroy the far left's horrific hopes and dreams.

Money

Money is the obvious one. Cryptocurrencies are unbannable forms of money. Their inherent decentralized structure means that not even china, who has complete control of their nations internet, could ban it. The weakest link in crypto space are the centralized exchanges. However, thanks to mining and stores that accept CCs like SilkRoad and OpenBazaar, it's possible to acquire CCs and spend them without going through a centralized exchange. Not to mention, decentralized exchanges will be a thing one day.

Property that you use to earn money

This one is solved by boths Smart Contracts and DAOs, but I'm going to focus on Smart Contracts. Smart Contracts are awesome. If you haven't read my article on them, check out what I wrote here. They can compute anything that a normal program can, but are also unbannable thanks to being decentralized. For our purposes, we can think of Smart Contracts as unbannable programs. Programs are property. Even open source programs are property. When a programer creates a program, they have the freedom to open source the code or not because they own their code(assuming they haven't agreed to give up ownership of the code in exchange for something else). If they do decide to open source their code, they also have the freedom to attach a license(any license) onto their code or not- because they own their code. It's their property. In fact, software in general can be thought of as just digital factories- it takes in inputs, and spits out some outputs. And like physical factories, someone owns them. So we've established programs and code are property. But is it private property? Going by the leftist definitions, yes, it can be.
Take CryptoKitties for instance. CryptoKitties is a SmartContract that lives on the Ethereum blockchain. The idea is you can trade and breed these digital cats with other users, while the company earns a fixed percentage of each trade. CryptoKitties was in fact created by an entrepreneur who hired people to help him make the product. His employees probably get paid a salary, while his company gets paid directly through the SmartContract. In fact, we can see the exact addresses that CryptoKities sends its revenue to, along with who has control over which parts of the Smart Contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x06012c8cf97bead5deae237070f9587f8e7a266d#code The "contract KittyAccessControl" is particularly interesting. CryptoKitties was made by a team, but you could imagine if it was made by a single person. There's nothing really stopping a single person from making CKs. Either way, CKs is property that is owned by an individual or a few individuals, and is used to make a profit. And it's unbannable. The revenue from CKs will always go to the owner of the contract. That makes CKs an unbannable form of private property by their own definition.

Instruments/Tools/Means of production

But what about the physical computers and keyboards that the programmers use to create the unbannable programs? Couldn't those at least be seized? Nope. That's where DAOs come in. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations mother fucker. DAOs are a beast. Imagine a company with no headquarters, and no one knows who the owners or employees are, or where they're located. DAOs are built on top of Smart Contracts, but instead of a cute game like CryptoKitties, they allow an entrepreneur to codify a business structure in such a way that anyone can perform a task and get paid for it in a completely decentralized fashion. In such a business, it would be impossible to "seize the means of production". Even if the government tracked down one employee and stole their computer, the DAO would still automatically find a new employee to do work, potentially in a completely separate country. And even if the government tracked down the owner of the DAO, the DAO itself still might not be seizeable, assuming the owner stores their private keys in their head. Think of the Uber business model, but on steroids. Or think 'working from home' taken to the extreme. Here's a good article on DAOs. Uber by itself actually is very interesting. Uber doesn't own any cars, the drivers own their own car. However, the Uber App isn't on the blockchain, so technically it could be banned or seized. However, if Uber were a DAO, it would become an unbannable form of private property.
Far leftists would point out that DAOs also enable "woker owned businesses", which is true. A DAO could be programmed to fit any sort of business structure. Unfortunately for them, capitalism doesn't care at all what individuals do, as long as they don't steal or damage other people's private property, or break a contract that they agreed to. Worker co-ops like Mondragon Corporation are as capitalist as Chicken McNuggets. Far leftists on the other hand don't extend this same level of freedom to us, which is why their ideologies are predicated on violence. In order for them to succeed, private property must be completely banned, and their very specific business model must be enforced at gunpoint. Luckily for us, we have cryptography and economics on our side. They may be able to ban certain forms of physical private property like apartments(although even that could be solved by an AirBnB Smart Contract), but they will never be able to ban all of it, or even a fraction of it. Other far leftists such as left-anarchists believe that if we get rid of the government, private property won't be enforceable, and will just automatically disappear. They believe a government is required for private property enforcement. They're completely wrong. Cryptographically-enforced private property is here to stay. They can scream and shout exploitation all they want, but their ideology is completely and utterly unenforceable, and is thus effectively dead. Good riddens.

In conclusion

If you like this post and want to explore this topic further, feel free to sub and post to /AnarchoCryptography. It's a crypto-anarchist sub specifically for ancaps.
submitted by CommunismDoesntWork to GoldandBlack [link] [comments]

State of the Libertarian Movement

I think it is time we provided an update on where we are as a movement.
I will break this down into pieces. Additionally, I will include my own observations and suggestions:
Seasteading
Seasteading is progressing faster than any other direct action undertaken by this movement. Anenome5 has established a company called Ventive Floathouse. This company endeavors to establish the first seastead in Richardson Bay, off the coast of California. It will be a visa haven, appealing to those attempting to bypass America's ornery visa requirements. In the following years after this island has been established, Ventive Floathouse will attempt to build the first seastead in international waters, which will be explicitly anarcho-capitalist. They are currently $450k away from funding the first seastead in Richardson Bay. They are currently testing the design of the island and will not begin accepting funding until testing has been completed. If you or anyone you know would be interested in investing in this project, contact Anenome5 through the website link provided above.
The Seasteading Institute has achieved a Memorandum of Understanding with the French Polynesian government. This Memorandum has been criticized by some within the FP government and the FP public, as seen in this article. Regardless, it appears that the project is moving forward. The plan is to create 12 artificial islands within 1 mile of the FP coastline, funded by investors and an ICO. The project is projected to be completed by 2020, however only time will tell if the Institute will meet that deadline.
In other news, a corporation has officially began marketing artificial islands for the price of 300 million dollars, see here. Their target consumers are the ultra-rich. This suggests that, in the coming decades, seasteading will become an increasingly viable alternative to buying an island.
Suggestions: Support Ventive Floathouse in any way you can. Be the change you want to see. This may be our best shot at establishing an anarcho-capitalist society within the next two decades.
Libertarian Party of the United States of America
In the Presidential Election of 2016, the LPUSA achieved 3.2 percent of the popular vote, a total of 4,042,291 voters. This is a significant improvement over the 2012 election, in which roughly 1 million people voted for the LPUSA. The real challenge will be repeating this success in the next election. Gary Johnson has announced that he will not be running for president in 2020.
The LPUSA has announced its intention to get 2,000 candidates on the ballot for the 2018 elections. Whether or not this will occur remains to be seen.
Despite achieving 3.2 percent of the popular vote, the LPUSA is still struggling to acquire permanent ballot access in all 50 states. The LPUSA currently has ballot access in a majority of states.
In the aftermath of the 2016 National Convention, the LPUSA has been experiencing somewhat of an identity crisis. A fat individual in a speedo danced on stage while the event was broadcast live on CSPAN, significantly tarnishing the reputation of the party. Anarcho-capitalists were widely blamed by moderate libertarians for this incident, despite our outright condemnation of said incident. Libertarians are in the process of deciding whether the party should be radical or moderate in its message and platform. The majority of libertarians wish to see the LPUSA become more moderate, and to abandon such phrases as "Taxation is Theft". There is even a socialist caucus within the Libertarian Party.
In an attempt to preserve the radical libertarian and anarcho-capitalist elements within the LPUSA, the Mises Caucus has been established. Together with the Radical Caucus, these organizations seek to promote radical libertarianism and to elect party officials and political candidates who will represent them.
The Libertarian National Committee is comprised of 8 representatives from 8 regions. Region 1, based in Colorado, is represented by an anarcho-capitalist named Caryn Ann Harlos. I do not know if any of the other committee members are anarcho-capitalists.
in 2014, the former chairman of the Libertarian Party Geoff Neale made history when he was appointed to establish the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties. This is the first attempt by the libertarian parties of the world to coordinate internationally.
Suggestions: Libertarians should seek a moderate platform while maintaining a radical message. Efforts should be made to appeal to a majority of voters while raising the libertarian consciousness of the population to the highest degree possible. Libertarians should focus primarily on running in state and local elections in an attempt to maximize our influence on the American population.
The Free State Project
Thousands of libertarians have moved to New Hampshire in an attempt to influence the politics of the state towards a more libertarian direction. Libertarians have run as republicans and democrats and been successfully elected to office. Statist laws have been repealed and more libertarian laws have been enacted, such as protections for Bitcoin sellers.
Suggestions: Libertarians should move to New Hampshire in greater numbers and run for positions in the local and state governments. Organizations should be established to carry out activism, namely:
And more. Which brings me to my next topic:
Activism
Libertarians, especially outside of NH, have engaged in very little activism. This is due to both a lack of organization and a lack of ideas. Meanwhile, non-libertarians have been engaging in activism that might interest radical libertarians. An example of this are the intermittent property tax protests that have swept across parts of rural America.
Suggestions: Libertarians should seek to emulate the Chicago Tax Strike of 1977. Libertarian organizations should hold town hall meetings about issues that concern the public, such as high property taxes, and attempt to radicalize the public toward direct action, such as a protest or tax strike. Once direct action is underway, libertarians should seek to raise the libertarian consciousness of the disgruntled masses. For example, if people are protesting high property taxes, you can attempt to turn their attention (and anger) to the recipients of those taxes, such as the education system. Instead of being angry about just property taxes, you can make them angry at the public schools who receive it (and waste the money). In this manner, you will raise the libertarian consciousness of the protesters. We must always seek to radicalize and raise the libertarian consciousness of the American people.
Which brings me to a classic example of what we are trying to achieve:
Free Brazil Movement
A few years ago, the Atlas Network and a coalition of charitable organizations provided millions of dollars in funding and a number of activist leaders to think tanks in Brazil. The provision of funding and leaders culminated in the establishment of the Free Brazil Movement, led by Kim Kataguiri. With the support of the Atlas Network and affiliated think tanks, they were able to mobilize many tens of thousands of Brazilian citizens to take to the streets and protest against the socialist government.
The Free Brazil Movement organized the demonstrations of 15 March and 12 April in 2015 against the social governmental establishment of Dilma Rousseff and the Workers' Party, and was instrumental in the impeachment of Dilma Rousseff. See article and video here.
In the aftermath of the uprising, thousands of Brazilians have converted to libertarianism. Some of them are English speakers who frequent this subreddit's Discord Server.
Suggestions: Do everything within your power to support the blossoming libertarian movement in Brazil. Learn Portuguese, translate literature to Portuguese, print flyers and posters in their language, and donate to libertarian institutions in Brazil. Libertarianism is now an international movement, and it is time we acted like one. Emulate their success in raising the libertarian consciousness of the masses, to such a degree that thousands of libertarians were born. And above all, let us work together. Americans and Brazilians, hand in hand!
Students for Liberty
SFL has evolved into a decentralized international organization, with chapters ranging from America to Brazil to Europe and Asia. Gone are the days when SFL was a small organization; it is now a massive organization with thousands of members across the world. SFL represents the spearhead of the libertarian student movement, providing a presence on college campuses and aiding in the recruitment of new libertarians.
Suggestions: We must do everything in our power to build the libertarian student movement. If you are on college campus, it is in your best interest to organize with other libertarians and engage in whatever activism and propaganda dissemination you can. We must build a Student Libertarian Action Movement (SLAM) on every college campus that we can.
Free Society Foundation
Roger Ver and a group of wealthy individuals have raised 100 million dollars in an attempt to purchase sovereignty from a host nation. While the odds of this succeeding are slim, this amounts to the largest holding of capital ever accumulated by a group of anarcho-capitalists. This money could easily be spent on seasteading, activism, advertising, and more.
Suggestions: Let this serve as an example for others to follow. When we pool our money together and raise capital, we can accomplish great things.
Crypto-Anarchism and Crypto-currencies
Bitcoin has come a long way in the last few years. The price has soared and it is beginning to see widespread adoption. It has also given birth to a multitude of new crypto-currencies, such as BCH, Litecoin, Monero, Ethereum, Ripple, etc. Gone are the days when bitcoin was a secret treasure of libertarians. It has now been co-opted by the average joe, for better or worse. Some libertarians argue that this transition, combined with increasing state regulations on crypto-currency, has challenged Bitcoin’s revolutionary nature. But with new currencies like Monero offering the promise of anonymity, many libertarians believe the full revolutionary potential of crypto-currencies has yet to be realized.
The NSA revelations of recent years have resulted in the popularization of crypto-graphic tools, such as Signal, TOR, I2P, etc. Mass surveillance has provoked a widespread counter-surveillance movement.
The Silk Road is long gone, but on the horizon is a new innovation- the Open Bazaar. Decentralized, reputation-based, and incorporating the use of 3rd party arbitration, the combination of software like Open Bazaar with anonymizing tools will facilitate the establishment of an anarcho-capitalist marketplace on the internet.
In the last few years, we have seen the innovation of new ways of engaging in market activities and contractual arrangements, from smart contracts to multi-sig. With these developments destined to advance, the future of crypto-anarchism looks promising.
Suggestions: Spread the word about Open Bazaar and cryptographic tools. Warn others about the NSA in the hopes that it will entice others to begin using such tools. Help to develop the latest in cryptographic tools and protocols so that we may ore effectively establish radical libertarianism on the internet.
Agorism and Crypto-Agorism
Despite a large number of libertarians claiming to be Agorists, very few libertarians abide by the founding document of Agorism, the New Libertarian Manifesto. Most libertarians do not engage in Agorist praxis beyond holding cryptocurrency and retreating to rural homesteads to live in isolation. The strategy of Agorism traditionally requires organization on the part of New Libertarians. Instead, libertarians seem to have adopted a new strategy, referred to as Crypto-Agorism. Crypto-Agorism is a merger of the strategy of Agorism with Crypto-Anarchism. In other words, it is the attempt to realize Agorism on the internet, through the use of tools such as Monero and the Open Bazaar. While Crypto-Agorism blossoms, traditional Agorism appears to be stagnating.
Suggestions: Crypto-Agorism should continue to be pursued. However, libertarians must organize into chapters of the New Libertarian Alliance, participate in counter-economics (beyond the use of cryptographic tools and currencies) and build alternative institutions if we are to truly develop the counter-economy beyond the confines of the internet.
Conclusion
There is more than I could write about, but I will stop there. The next decade will be a turning point for the libertarian movement. Are we prepared to organize, raise capital, build alternative institutions, and ultimately construct a free society? Only time will tell.
submitted by Anarchy321 to GoldandBlack [link] [comments]

I just watched the Deep Web film premiere at SXSW. Huge audience, mainstream production (Alex Winters directed and Keanu Reeves narrated) and the film was pro-Silk Road, anti-war on drugs, and pro-Ross Ulbricht.

I was blown away. They interview Andy Greenberg, Amir Taaki, Cody Wilson, and extensively featured the Ulbricht family. They covered the cypherpunks, mentioned austrian economics, Mises, and anarcho-capitalism multiple times. They interviewed the head of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. They gave a very accurate and largely favorable explanation of Bitcoin.
The focus of the film was basically the history of the Silk Road, the bust, and how unfair the government's trial of Ross was.
They even mentioned OpenBazaar (I almost dropped out of my seat).
Afterwards, they brought the director Alex Winters on stage, along with Lyn Ulbricht, Cody Wilson, Andy Greenberg and a few others. They talked and had a Q&A for ~20 minutes. Obviously, it was extremely positive towards Ulbricht's position and strongly attacked the trial.
This wasn't a Bitcoin conference or a libertarian gathering, this was a major film premiere at SXSW. It was a massive theater (easily more than 500 people) and standing room only, I had to wait in line for a half hour for a ticket.
I still can't believe what I saw. Amazing. Everyone needs to see this film.
submitted by CC_EF_JTF to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[Effort Post] The far left is dead, and cryptography killed it

TL;DR: Any ideology based on banning private property is dead thanks to cryptographically-enforced private property.
Cryptocurrencies, Smart Contracts(sometimes called dApps), and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations(DAOs) each represents three different forms of unbannable private property. What is private property? Our definition of private property is straightforward; it's any piece of property that the government doesn't own. But even if we go by the left's irrelevant definition, we will see that each of these 3 technologies meets their definition of private property. And since each of these technologies are inherently unbannable, one can only conclude that the far left is ideologically dead.
So how does the far left define private property? Here are a few excerpts from a few different leftists:
”We are opposed to the kind of [private] property “which can be used only to exploit people — land and buildings, instruments of production and distribution, raw materials and manufactured articles, money and capital.” [Nicholas Walter, About Anarchism, p. 40]
"If your mom made a living off fixing neighbors clothes, and accepted money for it, then [the sewing machine] would be considered private property. If she employs people and takes part of the revenue for the work done by employees, that shit's getting seized." Here we see how communists define private property. If you use property to make money, it's private property. And if you make money using your private property while hiring others, that's doubly offensive.
Here are some others on money in particular:
"Yes, communism seeks to abolish money, but nobody knows how a moneyless post-capitalist system would run."
"[Money] needs to be abolished there is no way to have money and not have material individualism."
"Abolish Money!" This one is particularly interesting becuase leftist-anarchists like to claim that anarcho-capitalists aren't real anarchists because 100 years ago the 'original' anarchists were anti-capitalists. At the same time, some modern anarchists say that money is fine, and doesn't need to be abolished(likely because they realized Bitcoin killed their entire ideology overnight). When debating these fools, send them to this article, and be sure to tell them to check the date it was published(1900).
So now let's go one by one and use technology to destroy the far left's horrific hopes and dreams.

Money

Money is the obvious one. Cryptocurrencies are unbannable forms of money. Their inherent decentralized structure means that not even china, who has complete control of their nations internet, could ban it. The weakest link in crypto space are the centralized exchanges. However, thanks to mining and stores that accept CCs like SilkRoad and OpenBazaar, it's possible to acquire CCs and spend them without going through a centralized exchange. Not to mention, decentralized exchanges will be a thing one day.

Property that you use to earn money

This one is solved by boths Smart Contracts and DAOs, but I'm going to focus on Smart Contracts. Smart Contracts are awesome. If you haven't read my article on them, check out what I wrote here. They can compute anything that a normal program can, but are also unbannable thanks to being decentralized. For our purposes, we can think of Smart Contracts as unbannable programs. Programs are property. Even open source programs are property. When a programer creates a program, they have the freedom to open source the code or not because they own their code(assuming they haven't agreed to give up ownership of the code in exchange for something else). If they do decide to open source their code, they also have the freedom to attach a license(any license) onto their code or not- because they own their code. It's their property. In fact, software in general can be thought of as just digital factories- it takes in inputs, and spits out some outputs. And like physical factories, someone owns them. So we've established programs and code are property. But is it private property? Going by the leftist definitions, yes, it can be.
Take CryptoKitties for instance. CryptoKitties is a SmartContract that lives on the Ethereum blockchain. The idea is you can trade and breed these digital cats with other users, while the company earns a fixed percentage of each trade. CryptoKitties was in fact created by an entrepreneur who hired people to help him make the product. His employees probably get paid a salary, while his company gets paid directly through the SmartContract. In fact, we can see the exact addresses that CryptoKities sends its revenue to, along with who has control over which parts of the Smart Contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x06012c8cf97bead5deae237070f9587f8e7a266d#code The "contract KittyAccessControl" is particularly interesting. CryptoKitties was made by a team, but you could imagine if it was made by a single person. There's nothing really stopping a single person from making CKs. Either way, CKs is property that is owned by an individual or a few individuals, and is used to make a profit. And it's unbannable. The revenue from CKs will always go to the owner of the contract. That makes CKs an unbannable form of private property by their own definition.

Instruments/Tools/Means of production

But what about the physical computers and keyboards that the programmers use to create the unbannable programs? Couldn't those at least be seized? Nope. That's where DAOs come in. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations mother fucker. DAOs are a beast. Imagine a company with no headquarters, and no one knows who the owners or employees are, or where they're located. DAOs are built on top of Smart Contracts, but instead of a cute game like CryptoKitties, they allow an entrepreneur to codify a business structure in such a way that anyone can perform a task and get paid for it in a completely decentralized fashion. In such a business, it would be impossible to "seize the means of production". Even if the government tracked down one employee and stole their computer, the DAO would still automatically find a new employee to do work, potentially in a completely separate country. And even if the government tracked down the owner of the DAO, the DAO itself still might not be seizeable, assuming the owner stores their private keys in their head. Think of the Uber business model, but on steroids. Or think 'working from home' taken to the extreme. Here's a good article on DAOs. Uber by itself actually is very interesting. Uber doesn't own any cars, the drivers own their own car. However, the Uber App isn't on the blockchain, so technically it could be banned or seized. However, if Uber were a DAO, it would become an unbannable form of private property.
Far leftists would point out that DAOs also enable "woker owned businesses", which is true. A DAO could be programmed to fit any sort of business structure. Unfortunately for them, capitalism doesn't care at all what individuals do, as long as they don't steal or damage other people's private property, or break a contract that they agreed to. Worker co-ops like Mondragon Corporation are as capitalist as Chicken McNuggets. Far leftists on the other hand don't extend this same level of freedom to us, which is why their ideologies are predicated on violence. In order for them to succeed, private property must be completely banned, and their very specific business model must be enforced at gunpoint. Luckily for us, we have cryptography and economics on our side. They may be able to ban certain forms of physical private property like apartments(although even that could be solved by an AirBnB Smart Contract), but they will never be able to ban all of it, or even a fraction of it. Other far leftists such as left-anarchists believe that if we get rid of the government, private property won't be enforceable, and will just automatically disappear. They believe a government is required for private property enforcement. They're completely wrong. Cryptographically-enforced private property is here to stay. They can scream and shout exploitation all they want, but their ideology is completely and utterly unenforceable, and is thus effectively dead. Good riddens.

In conclusion

If you like this post and want to explore this topic further, feel free to sub and post to /AnarchoCryptography. It's a crypto-anarchist sub specifically for ancaps.
submitted by CommunismDoesntWork to Anarcho_Capitalism [link] [comments]

Buy drug online with bitcoin? That's what this new company is blatantly advertising on YouTube, thoughts?

Buy drug online with bitcoin? That's what this new company is blatantly advertising on YouTube, thoughts? submitted by IamWalterSobchak to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Thanks to cryptographically enforced private property, anarcho-capitalism is already here

TL;DR: Any ideology based on banning private property is dead thanks to cryptographically-enforced private property. And any ideology predicated on the idea that private property will disappear if the government does as well is dead.
Cryptocurrencies, Smart Contracts(sometimes called dApps), and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations(DAOs) each represents three different forms of unbannable private property that doesn't need a government to enforce. What is private property? Our definition of private property is straightforward; it's any piece of property that the government doesn't own. But even if we go by the left's irrelevant definition, we will see that each of these 3 technologies meets their definition of private property. And since each of these technologies are inherently unbannable, one can only conclude that the far left is ideologically dead.
So how does the far left define private property? Here are a few excerpts from a few different leftists:
”We are opposed to the kind of [private] property “which can be used only to exploit people — land and buildings, instruments of production and distribution, raw materials and manufactured articles, money and capital.” [Nicholas Walter, About Anarchism, p. 40]
"If your mom made a living off fixing neighbors clothes, and accepted money for it, then [the sewing machine] would be considered private property. If she employs people and takes part of the revenue for the work done by employees, that shit's getting seized." Here we see how communists define private property. If you use property to make money, it's private property. And if you make money using your private property while hiring others, that's doubly offensive.
Here are some others on money in particular:
"Yes, communism seeks to abolish money, but nobody knows how a moneyless post-capitalist system would run."
"[Money] needs to be abolished there is no way to have money and not have material individualism."
"Abolish Money!" This one is particularly interesting becuase leftist-anarchists like to claim that anarcho-capitalists aren't real anarchists because 100 years ago the 'original' anarchists were anti-capitalists. At the same time, some modern anarchists say that money is fine, and doesn't need to be abolished(likely because they realized Bitcoin killed their entire ideology overnight). Be sure to tell them to check the date it was published(1900).
So now let's go one by one and use technology to destroy the far left's horrific hopes and dreams.

Money

Money is the obvious one. Cryptocurrencies are unbannable forms of money. Their inherent decentralized structure means that not even china, who has complete control of their nations internet, could ban it. The weakest link in crypto space are the centralized exchanges. However, thanks to mining and stores that accept CCs like SilkRoad and OpenBazaar, it's possible to acquire CCs and spend them without going through a centralized exchange. Not to mention, decentralized exchanges will be a thing one day.

Property that you use to earn money

This one is solved by boths Smart Contracts and DAOs, but I'm going to focus on Smart Contracts. Smart Contracts are awesome. If you haven't read my article on them, check out what I wrote here. They can compute anything that a normal program can, but are also unbannable thanks to being decentralized. For our purposes, we can think of Smart Contracts as unbannable programs. Programs are property. Even open source programs are property. When a programer creates a program, they have the freedom to open source the code or not because they own their code(assuming they haven't agreed to give up ownership of the code in exchange for something else). If they do decide to open source their code, they also have the freedom to attach a license(any license) onto their code or not- because they own their code. It's their property. In fact, software in general can be thought of as just digital factories- it takes in inputs, and spits out some outputs. And like physical factories, someone owns them. So we've established programs and code are property. But is it private property? Going by the leftist definitions, yes, it can be.
Take CryptoKitties for instance. CryptoKitties is a SmartContract that lives on the Ethereum blockchain. The idea is you can trade and breed these digital cats with other users, while the company earns a fixed percentage of each trade. CryptoKitties was in fact created by an entrepreneur who hired people to help him make the product. His employees probably get paid a salary, while his company gets paid directly through the SmartContract. In fact, we can see the exact addresses that CryptoKities sends its revenue to, along with who has control over which parts of the Smart Contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x06012c8cf97bead5deae237070f9587f8e7a266d#code The "contract KittyAccessControl" is particularly interesting. CryptoKitties was made by a team, but you could imagine if it was made by a single person. There's nothing really stopping a single person from making CKs. Either way, CKs is property that is owned by an individual or a few individuals, and is used to make a profit. And it's unbannable. The revenue from CKs will always go to the owner of the contract. That makes CKs an unbannable form of private property by their own definition.

Instruments/Tools/Means of production

But what about the physical computers and keyboards that the programmers use to create the unbannable programs? Couldn't those at least be seized? Nope. That's where DAOs come in. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations mother fucker. DAOs are a beast. Imagine a company with no headquarters, and no one knows who the owners or employees are, or where they're located. DAOs are built on top of Smart Contracts, but instead of a cute game like CryptoKitties, they allow an entrepreneur to codify a business structure in such a way that anyone can perform a task and get paid for it in a completely decentralized fashion. In such a business, it would be impossible to "seize the means of production". Even if the government tracked down one employee and stole their computer, the DAO would still automatically find a new employee to do work, potentially in a completely separate country. And even if the government tracked down the owner of the DAO, the DAO itself still might not be seizeable, assuming the owner stores their private keys in their head. Think of the Uber business model, but on steroids. Or think 'working from home' taken to the extreme. Here's a good article on DAOs. Uber by itself actually is very interesting. Uber doesn't own any cars, the drivers own their own car. However, the Uber App isn't on the blockchain, so technically it could be banned or seized. However, if Uber were a DAO, it would become an unbannable form of private property.
Far leftists would point out that DAOs also enable "woker owned businesses", which is true. A DAO could be programmed to fit any sort of business structure. Unfortunately for them, capitalism doesn't care at all what individuals do, as long as they don't steal or damage other people's private property, or break a contract that they agreed to. Worker co-ops like Mondragon Corporation are as capitalist as Chicken McNuggets. Far leftists on the other hand don't extend this same level of freedom to us, which is why their ideologies are predicated on violence. In order for them to succeed, private property must be completely banned, and their very specific business model must be enforced at gunpoint. Luckily for us, we have cryptography and economics on our side. They may be able to ban certain forms of physical private property like apartments(although even that could be solved by an AirBnB Smart Contract), but they will never be able to ban all of it, or even a fraction of it. Other far leftists such as left-anarchists believe that if we get rid of the government, private property won't be enforceable, and will just automatically disappear. They believe a government is required for private property enforcement. They're completely wrong. Cryptographically-enforced private property is here to stay. They can scream and shout exploitation all they want, but their ideology is completely and utterly unenforceable, and is thus effectively dead. Good riddens.

In conclusion

submitted by CommunismDoesntWork to CapitalismVSocialism [link] [comments]

State of the Libertarian Movement

I think it is time we provided an update on where we are as a movement.
I will break this down into pieces. Additionally, I will include my own observations and suggestions:
Seasteading
Seasteading is progressing faster than any other direct action undertaken by this movement. Anenome5 has established a company called Ventive Floathouse. This company endeavors to establish the first seastead in Richardson Bay, off the coast of California. It will be a visa haven, appealing to those attempting to bypass America's ornery visa requirements. In the following years after this island has been established, Ventive Floathouse will attempt to build the first seastead in international waters, which will be explicitly anarcho-capitalist. They are currently $450k away from funding the first seastead in Richardson Bay. They are currently testing the design of the island and will not begin accepting funding until testing has been completed. If you or anyone you know would be interested in investing in this project, contact Anenome5 through the website link provided above.
The Seasteading Institute has achieved a Memorandum of Understanding with the French Polynesian government. This Memorandum has been criticized by some within the FP government and the FP public, as seen in this article. Regardless, it appears that the project is moving forward. The plan is to create 12 artificial islands within 1 mile of the FP coastline, funded by investors and an ICO. The project is projected to be completed by 2020, however only time will tell if the Institute will meet that deadline.
In other news, a corporation has officially began marketing artificial islands for the price of 300 million dollars, see here. Their target consumers are the ultra-rich. This suggests that, in the coming decades, seasteading will become an increasingly viable alternative to buying an island.
Suggestions: Support Ventive Floathouse in any way you can. Be the change you want to see. This may be our best shot at establishing an anarcho-capitalist society within the next two decades.
Libertarian Party of the United States of America
In the Presidential Election of 2016, the LPUSA achieved 3.2 percent of the popular vote, a total of 4,042,291 voters. This is a significant improvement over the 2012 election, in which roughly 1 million people voted for the LPUSA. The real challenge will be repeating this success in the next election. Gary Johnson has announced that he will not be running for president in 2020.
The LPUSA has announced its intention to get 2,000 candidates on the ballot for the 2018 elections. Whether or not this will occur remains to be seen.
Despite achieving 3.2 percent of the popular vote, the LPUSA is still struggling to acquire permanent ballot access in all 50 states. The LPUSA currently has ballot access in a majority of states.
In the aftermath of the 2016 National Convention, the LPUSA has been experiencing somewhat of an identity crisis. A fat individual in a speedo danced on stage while the event was broadcast live on CSPAN, significantly tarnishing the reputation of the party. Anarcho-capitalists were widely blamed by moderate libertarians for this incident, despite our outright condemnation of said incident. Libertarians are in the process of deciding whether the party should be radical or moderate in its message and platform. The majority of libertarians wish to see the LPUSA become more moderate, and to abandon such phrases as "Taxation is Theft". There is even a socialist caucus within the Libertarian Party.
In an attempt to preserve the radical libertarian and anarcho-capitalist elements within the LPUSA, the Mises Caucus has been established. Together with the Radical Caucus, these organizations seek to promote radical libertarianism and to elect party officials and political candidates who will represent them.
The Libertarian National Committee is comprised of 8 representatives from 8 regions. Region 1, based in Colorado, is represented by an anarcho-capitalist named Caryn Ann Harlos. I do not know if any of the other committee members are anarcho-capitalists.
in 2014, the former chairman of the Libertarian Party Geoff Neale made history when he was appointed to establish the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties. This is the first attempt by the libertarian parties of the world to coordinate internationally.
Suggestions: Libertarians should seek a moderate platform while maintaining a radical message. Efforts should be made to appeal to a majority of voters while raising the libertarian consciousness of the population to the highest degree possible. Libertarians should focus primarily on running in state and local elections in an attempt to maximize our influence on the American population.
The Free State Project
Thousands of libertarians have moved to New Hampshire in an attempt to influence the politics of the state towards a more libertarian direction. Libertarians have run as republicans and democrats and been successfully elected to office. Statist laws have been repealed and more libertarian laws have been enacted, such as protections for Bitcoin sellers.
Suggestions: Libertarians should move to New Hampshire in greater numbers and run for positions in the local and state governments. Organizations should be established to carry out activism, namely:
And more. Which brings me to my next topic:
Activism
Libertarians, especially outside of NH, have engaged in very little activism. This is due to both a lack of organization and a lack of ideas. Meanwhile, non-libertarians have been engaging in activism that might interest radical libertarians. An example of this are the intermittent property tax protests that have swept across parts of rural America.
Suggestions: Libertarians should seek to emulate the Chicago Tax Strike of 1977. Libertarian organizations should hold town hall meetings about issues that concern the public, such as high property taxes, and attempt to radicalize the public toward direct action, such as a protest or tax strike. Once direct action is underway, libertarians should seek to raise the libertarian consciousness of the disgruntled masses. For example, if people are protesting high property taxes, you can attempt to turn their attention (and anger) to the recipients of those taxes, such as the education system. Instead of being angry about just property taxes, you can make them angry at the public schools who receive it (and waste the money). In this manner, you will raise the libertarian consciousness of the protesters. We must always seek to radicalize and raise the libertarian consciousness of the American people.
Which brings me to a classic example of what we are trying to achieve:
Free Brazil Movement
A few years ago, the Atlas Network and a coalition of charitable organizations provided millions of dollars in funding and a number of activist leaders to think tanks in Brazil. The provision of funding and leaders culminated in the establishment of the Free Brazil Movement, led by Kim Kataguiri. With the support of the Atlas Network and affiliated think tanks, they were able to mobilize many tens of thousands of Brazilian citizens to take to the streets and protest against the socialist government.
The Free Brazil Movement organized the demonstrations of 15 March and 12 April in 2015 against the social governmental establishment of Dilma Rousseff and the Workers' Party, and was instrumental in the impeachment of Dilma Rousseff. See article and video here.
In the aftermath of the uprising, thousands of Brazilians have converted to libertarianism. Some of them are English speakers who frequent this subreddit's Discord Server.
Suggestions: Do everything within your power to support the blossoming libertarian movement in Brazil. Learn Portuguese, translate literature to Portuguese, print flyers and posters in their language, and donate to libertarian institutions in Brazil. Libertarianism is now an international movement, and it is time we acted like one. Emulate their success in raising the libertarian consciousness of the masses, to such a degree that thousands of libertarians were born. And above all, let us work together. Americans and Brazilians, hand in hand!
Students for Liberty
SFL has evolved into a decentralized international organization, with chapters ranging from America to Brazil to Europe and Asia. Gone are the days when SFL was a small organization; it is now a massive organization with thousands of members across the world. SFL represents the spearhead of the libertarian student movement, providing a presence on college campuses and aiding in the recruitment of new libertarians.
Suggestions: We must do everything in our power to build the libertarian student movement. If you are on college campus, it is in your best interest to organize with other libertarians and engage in whatever activism and propaganda dissemination you can. We must build a Student Libertarian Action Movement (SLAM) on every college campus that we can.
Free Society Foundation
Roger Ver and a group of wealthy individuals have raised 100 million dollars in an attempt to purchase sovereignty from a host nation. While the odds of this succeeding are slim, this amounts to the largest holding of capital ever accumulated by a group of anarcho-capitalists. This money could easily be spent on seasteading, activism, advertising, and more.
Suggestions: Let this serve as an example for others to follow. When we pool our money together and raise capital, we can accomplish great things.
Crypto-Anarchism and Crypto-currencies
Bitcoin has come a long way in the last few years. The price has soared and it is beginning to see widespread adoption. It has also given birth to a multitude of new crypto-currencies, such as BCH, Litecoin, Monero, Ethereum, Ripple, etc. Gone are the days when bitcoin was a secret treasure of libertarians. It has now been co-opted by the average joe, for better or worse. Some libertarians argue that this transition, combined with increasing state regulations on crypto-currency, has challenged Bitcoin’s revolutionary nature. But with new currencies like Monero offering the promise of anonymity, many libertarians believe the full revolutionary potential of crypto-currencies has yet to be realized.
The NSA revelations of recent years have resulted in the popularization of crypto-graphic tools, such as Signal, TOR, I2P, etc. Mass surveillance has provoked a widespread counter-surveillance movement.
The Silk Road is long gone, but on the horizon is a new innovation- the Open Bazaar. Decentralized, reputation-based, and incorporating the use of 3rd party arbitration, the combination of software like Open Bazaar with anonymizing tools will facilitate the establishment of an anarcho-capitalist marketplace on the internet.
In the last few years, we have seen the innovation of new ways of engaging in market activities and contractual arrangements, from smart contracts to multi-sig. With these developments destined to advance, the future of crypto-anarchism looks promising.
Suggestions: Spread the word about Open Bazaar and cryptographic tools. Warn others about the NSA in the hopes that it will entice others to begin using such tools. Help to develop the latest in cryptographic tools and protocols so that we may ore effectively establish radical libertarianism on the internet.
Agorism and Crypto-Agorism
Despite a large number of libertarians claiming to be Agorists, very few libertarians abide by the founding document of Agorism, the New Libertarian Manifesto. Most libertarians do not engage in Agorist praxis beyond holding cryptocurrency and retreating to rural homesteads to live in isolation. The strategy of Agorism traditionally requires organization on the part of New Libertarians. Instead, libertarians seem to have adopted a new strategy, referred to as Crypto-Agorism. Crypto-Agorism is a merger of the strategy of Agorism with Crypto-Anarchism. In other words, it is the attempt to realize Agorism on the internet, through the use of tools such as Monero and the Open Bazaar. While Crypto-Agorism blossoms, traditional Agorism appears to be stagnating.
Suggestions: Crypto-Agorism should continue to be pursued. However, libertarians must organize into chapters of the New Libertarian Alliance, participate in counter-economics (beyond the use of cryptographic tools and currencies) and build alternative institutions if we are to truly develop the counter-economy beyond the confines of the internet.
Conclusion
There is more than I could write about, but I will stop there. The next decade will be a turning point for the libertarian movement. Are we prepared to organize, raise capital, build alternative institutions, and ultimately construct a free society? Only time will tell.
submitted by Anarchy321 to Anarcho_Capitalism [link] [comments]

[Effort Post] The far left is dead, and cryptography killed it

TL;DR: Any ideology based on banning private property is dead thanks to cryptographically-enforced private property.
Cryptocurrencies, Smart Contracts(sometimes called dApps), and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations(DAOs) each represents three different forms of unbannable private property. What is private property? Our definition of private property is straightforward; it's any piece of property that the government doesn't own. But even if we go by the left's irrelevant definition, we will see that each of these 3 technologies meets their definition of private property. And since each of these technologies are inherently unbannable, one can only conclude that the far left is ideologically dead.
So how does the far left define private property? Here are a few excerpts from a few different leftists:
”We are opposed to the kind of [private] property “which can be used only to exploit people — land and buildings, instruments of production and distribution, raw materials and manufactured articles, money and capital.” [Nicholas Walter, About Anarchism, p. 40]
"If your mom made a living off fixing neighbors clothes, and accepted money for it, then [the sewing machine] would be considered private property. If she employs people and takes part of the revenue for the work done by employees, that shit's getting seized." Here we see how communists define private property. If you use property to make money, it's private property. And if you make money using your private property while hiring others, that's doubly offensive.
Here are some others on money in particular:
"Yes, communism seeks to abolish money, but nobody knows how a moneyless post-capitalist system would run."
"[Money] needs to be abolished there is no way to have money and not have material individualism."
"Abolish Money!" This one is particularly interesting becuase leftist-anarchists like to claim that anarcho-capitalists aren't real anarchists because 100 years ago the 'original' anarchists were anti-capitalists. At the same time, some modern anarchists say that money is fine, and doesn't need to be abolished(likely because they realized Bitcoin killed their entire ideology overnight). When debating these fools, send them to this article, and be sure to tell them to check the date it was published(1900).
So now let's go one by one and use technology to destroy the far left's horrific hopes and dreams.

Money

Money is the obvious one. Cryptocurrencies are unbannable forms of money. Their inherent decentralized structure means that not even china, who has complete control of their nations internet, could ban it. The weakest link in crypto space are the centralized exchanges. However, thanks to mining and stores that accept CCs like SilkRoad and OpenBazaar, it's possible to acquire CCs and spend them without going through a centralized exchange. Not to mention, decentralized exchanges will be a thing one day.

Property that you use to earn money

This one is solved by boths Smart Contracts and DAOs, but I'm going to focus on Smart Contracts. Smart Contracts are awesome. If you haven't read my article on them, check out what I wrote here. They can compute anything that a normal program can, but are also unbannable thanks to being decentralized. For our purposes, we can think of Smart Contracts as unbannable programs. Programs are property. Even open source programs are property. When a programer creates a program, they have the freedom to open source the code or not because they own their code(assuming they haven't agreed to give up ownership of the code in exchange for something else). If they do decide to open source their code, they also have the freedom to attach a license(any license) onto their code or not- because they own their code. It's their property. In fact, software in general can be thought of as just digital factories- it takes in inputs, and spits out some outputs. And like physical factories, someone owns them. So we've established programs and code are property. But is it private property? Going by the leftist definitions, yes, it can be.
Take CryptoKitties for instance. CryptoKitties is a SmartContract that lives on the Ethereum blockchain. The idea is you can trade and breed these digital cats with other users, while the company earns a fixed percentage of each trade. CryptoKitties was in fact created by an entrepreneur who hired people to help him make the product. His employees probably get paid a salary, while his company gets paid directly through the SmartContract. In fact, we can see the exact addresses that CryptoKities sends its revenue to, along with who has control over which parts of the Smart Contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x06012c8cf97bead5deae237070f9587f8e7a266d#code The "contract KittyAccessControl" is particularly interesting. CryptoKitties was made by a team, but you could imagine if it was made by a single person. There's nothing really stopping a single person from making CKs. Either way, CKs is property that is owned by an individual or a few individuals, and is used to make a profit. And it's unbannable. The revenue from CKs will always go to the owner of the contract. That makes CKs an unbannable form of private property by their own definition.

Instruments/Tools/Means of production

But what about the physical computers and keyboards that the programmers use to create the unbannable programs? Couldn't those at least be seized? Nope. That's where DAOs come in. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations mother fucker. DAOs are a beast. Imagine a company with no headquarters, and no one knows who the owners or employees are, or where they're located. DAOs are built on top of Smart Contracts, but instead of a cute game like CryptoKitties, they allow an entrepreneur to codify a business structure in such a way that anyone can perform a task and get paid for it in a completely decentralized fashion. In such a business, it would be impossible to "seize the means of production". Even if the government tracked down one employee and stole their computer, the DAO would still automatically find a new employee to do work, potentially in a completely separate country. And even if the government tracked down the owner of the DAO, the DAO itself still might not be seizeable, assuming the owner stores their private keys in their head. Think of the Uber business model, but on steroids. Or think 'working from home' taken to the extreme. Here's a good article on DAOs. Uber by itself actually is very interesting. Uber doesn't own any cars, the drivers own their own car. However, the Uber App isn't on the blockchain, so technically it could be banned or seized. However, if Uber were a DAO, it would become an unbannable form of private property.
Far leftists would point out that DAOs also enable "woker owned businesses", which is true. A DAO could be programmed to fit any sort of business structure. Unfortunately for them, capitalism doesn't care at all what individuals do, as long as they don't steal or damage other people's private property, or break a contract that they agreed to. Worker co-ops like Mondragon Corporation are as capitalist as Chicken McNuggets. Far leftists on the other hand don't extend this same level of freedom to us, which is why their ideologies are predicated on violence. In order for them to succeed, private property must be completely banned, and their very specific business model must be enforced at gunpoint. Luckily for us, we have cryptography and economics on our side. They may be able to ban certain forms of physical private property like apartments(although even that could be solved by an AirBnB Smart Contract), but they will never be able to ban all of it, or even a fraction of it. Other far leftists such as left-anarchists believe that if we get rid of the government, private property won't be enforceable, and will just automatically disappear. They believe a government is required for private property enforcement. They're completely wrong. Cryptographically-enforced private property is here to stay. They can scream and shout exploitation all they want, but their ideology is completely and utterly unenforceable, and is thus effectively dead. Good riddens.

In conclusion

If you like this post and want to explore this topic further, feel free to sub and post to /AnarchoCryptography. It's a crypto-anarchist sub specifically for ancaps.
submitted by CommunismDoesntWork to Agorism [link] [comments]

[Effort Post] The far left is dead, and cryptography killed it

TL;DR: Any ideology based on banning private property is dead thanks to cryptographically-enforced private property.
Cryptocurrencies, Smart Contracts(sometimes called dApps), and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations(DAOs) each represents three different forms of unbannable private property. What is private property? Our definition of private property is straightforward; it's any piece of property that the government doesn't own. But even if we go by the left's irrelevant definition, we will see that each of these 3 technologies meets their definition of private property. And since each of these technologies are inherently unbannable, one can only conclude that the far left is ideologically dead.
So how does the far left define private property? Here are a few excerpts from a few different leftists:
”We are opposed to the kind of [private] property “which can be used only to exploit people — land and buildings, instruments of production and distribution, raw materials and manufactured articles, money and capital.” [Nicholas Walter, About Anarchism, p. 40]
"If your mom made a living off fixing neighbors clothes, and accepted money for it, then [the sewing machine] would be considered private property. If she employs people and takes part of the revenue for the work done by employees, that shit's getting seized." Here we see how communists define private property. If you use property to make money, it's private property. And if you make money using your private property while hiring others, that's doubly offensive.
Here are some others on money in particular:
"Yes, communism seeks to abolish money, but nobody knows how a moneyless post-capitalist system would run."
"[Money] needs to be abolished there is no way to have money and not have material individualism."
"Abolish Money!" This one is particularly interesting becuase leftist-anarchists like to claim that anarcho-capitalists aren't real anarchists because 100 years ago the 'original' anarchists were anti-capitalists. At the same time, some modern anarchists say that money is fine, and doesn't need to be abolished(likely because they realized Bitcoin killed their entire ideology overnight). When debating these fools, send them to this article, and be sure to tell them to check the date it was published(1900).
So now let's go one by one and use technology to destroy the far left's horrific hopes and dreams.

Money

Money is the obvious one. Cryptocurrencies are unbannable forms of money. Their inherent decentralized structure means that not even china, who has complete control of their nations internet, could ban it. The weakest link in crypto space are the centralized exchanges. However, thanks to mining and stores that accept CCs like SilkRoad and OpenBazaar, it's possible to acquire CCs and spend them without going through a centralized exchange. Not to mention, decentralized exchanges will be a thing one day.

Property that you use to earn money

This one is solved by boths Smart Contracts and DAOs, but I'm going to focus on Smart Contracts. Smart Contracts are awesome. If you haven't read my article on them, check out what I wrote here. They can compute anything that a normal program can, but are also unbannable thanks to being decentralized. For our purposes, we can think of Smart Contracts as unbannable programs. Programs are property. Even open source programs are property. When a programer creates a program, they have the freedom to open source the code or not because they own their code(assuming they haven't agreed to give up ownership of the code in exchange for something else). If they do decide to open source their code, they also have the freedom to attach a license(any license) onto their code or not- because they own their code. It's their property. In fact, software in general can be thought of as just digital factories- it takes in inputs, and spits out some outputs. And like physical factories, someone owns them. So we've established programs and code are property. But is it private property? Going by the leftist definitions, yes, it can be.
Take CryptoKitties for instance. CryptoKitties is a SmartContract that lives on the Ethereum blockchain. The idea is you can trade and breed these digital cats with other users, while the company earns a fixed percentage of each trade. CryptoKitties was in fact created by an entrepreneur who hired people to help him make the product. His employees probably get paid a salary, while his company gets paid directly through the SmartContract. In fact, we can see the exact addresses that CryptoKities sends its revenue to, along with who has control over which parts of the Smart Contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x06012c8cf97bead5deae237070f9587f8e7a266d#code The "contract KittyAccessControl" is particularly interesting. CryptoKitties was made by a team, but you could imagine if it was made by a single person. There's nothing really stopping a single person from making CKs. Either way, CKs is property that is owned by an individual or a few individuals, and is used to make a profit. And it's unbannable. The revenue from CKs will always go to the owner of the contract. That makes CKs an unbannable form of private property by their own definition.

Instruments/Tools/Means of production

But what about the physical computers and keyboards that the programmers use to create the unbannable programs? Couldn't those at least be seized? Nope. That's where DAOs come in. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations mother fucker. DAOs are a beast. Imagine a company with no headquarters, and no one knows who the owners or employees are, or where they're located. DAOs are built on top of Smart Contracts, but instead of a cute game like CryptoKitties, they allow an entrepreneur to codify a business structure in such a way that anyone can perform a task and get paid for it in a completely decentralized fashion. In such a business, it would be impossible to "seize the means of production". Even if the government tracked down one employee and stole their computer, the DAO would still automatically find a new employee to do work, potentially in a completely separate country. And even if the government tracked down the owner of the DAO, the DAO itself still might not be seizeable, assuming the owner stores their private keys in their head. Think of the Uber business model, but on steroids. Or think 'working from home' taken to the extreme. Here's a good article on DAOs. Uber by itself actually is very interesting. Uber doesn't own any cars, the drivers own their own car. However, the Uber App isn't on the blockchain, so technically it could be banned or seized. However, if Uber were a DAO, it would become an unbannable form of private property.
Far leftists would point out that DAOs also enable "woker owned businesses", which is true. A DAO could be programmed to fit any sort of business structure. Unfortunately for them, capitalism doesn't care at all what individuals do, as long as they don't steal or damage other people's private property, or break a contract that they agreed to. Worker co-ops like Mondragon Corporation are as capitalist as Chicken McNuggets. Far leftists on the other hand don't extend this same level of freedom to us, which is why their ideologies are predicated on violence. In order for them to succeed, private property must be completely banned, and their very specific business model must be enforced at gunpoint. Luckily for us, we have cryptography and economics on our side. They may be able to ban certain forms of physical private property like apartments(although even that could be solved by an AirBnB Smart Contract), but they will never be able to ban all of it, or even a fraction of it. Other far leftists such as left-anarchists believe that if we get rid of the government, private property won't be enforceable, and will just automatically disappear. They believe a government is required for private property enforcement. They're completely wrong. Cryptographically-enforced private property is here to stay. They can scream and shout exploitation all they want, but their ideology is completely and utterly unenforceable, and is thus effectively dead. Good riddens.

In conclusion

If you like this post and want to explore this topic further, feel free to sub and post to /AnarchoCryptography. It's a crypto-anarchist sub specifically for ancaps.
submitted by CommunismDoesntWork to AnarchoCryptography [link] [comments]

[Effort Post] The far left is dead, and cryptography killed it

TL;DR: Any ideology based on banning private property is dead thanks to cryptographically-enforced private property.
Cryptocurrencies, Smart Contracts(sometimes called dApps), and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations(DAOs) each represents three different forms of unbannable private property. What is private property? Our definition of private property is straightforward; it's any piece of property that the government doesn't own. But even if we go by the left's irrelevant definition, we will see that each of these 3 technologies meets their definition of private property. And since each of these technologies are inherently unbannable, one can only conclude that the far left is ideologically dead.
So how does the far left define private property? Here are a few excerpts from a few different leftists:
”We are opposed to the kind of [private] property “which can be used only to exploit people — land and buildings, instruments of production and distribution, raw materials and manufactured articles, money and capital.” [Nicholas Walter, About Anarchism, p. 40]
"If your mom made a living off fixing neighbors clothes, and accepted money for it, then [the sewing machine] would be considered private property. If she employs people and takes part of the revenue for the work done by employees, that shit's getting seized." Here we see how communists define private property. If you use property to make money, it's private property. And if you make money using your private property while hiring others, that's doubly offensive.
Here are some others on money in particular:
"Yes, communism seeks to abolish money, but nobody knows how a moneyless post-capitalist system would run."
"[Money] needs to be abolished there is no way to have money and not have material individualism."
"Abolish Money!" This one is particularly interesting becuase leftist-anarchists like to claim that anarcho-capitalists aren't real anarchists because 100 years ago the 'original' anarchists were anti-capitalists. At the same time, some modern anarchists say that money is fine, and doesn't need to be abolished(likely because they realized Bitcoin killed their entire ideology overnight). When debating these fools, send them to this article, and be sure to tell them to check the date it was published(1900).
So now let's go one by one and use technology to destroy the far left's horrific hopes and dreams.

Money

Money is the obvious one. Cryptocurrencies are unbannable forms of money. Their inherent decentralized structure means that not even china, who has complete control of their nations internet, could ban it. The weakest link in crypto space are the centralized exchanges. However, thanks to mining and stores that accept CCs like SilkRoad and OpenBazaar, it's possible to acquire CCs and spend them without going through a centralized exchange. Not to mention, decentralized exchanges will be a thing one day.

Property that you use to earn money

This one is solved by boths Smart Contracts and DAOs, but I'm going to focus on Smart Contracts. Smart Contracts are awesome. If you haven't read my article on them, check out what I wrote here. They can compute anything that a normal program can, but are also unbannable thanks to being decentralized. For our purposes, we can think of Smart Contracts as unbannable programs. Programs are property. Even open source programs are property. When a programer creates a program, they have the freedom to open source the code or not because they own their code(assuming they haven't agreed to give up ownership of the code in exchange for something else). If they do decide to open source their code, they also have the freedom to attach a license(any license) onto their code or not- because they own their code. It's their property. In fact, software in general can be thought of as just digital factories- it takes in inputs, and spits out some outputs. And like physical factories, someone owns them. So we've established programs and code are property. But is it private property? Going by the leftist definitions, yes, it can be.
Take CryptoKitties for instance. CryptoKitties is a SmartContract that lives on the Ethereum blockchain. The idea is you can trade and breed these digital cats with other users, while the company earns a fixed percentage of each trade. CryptoKitties was in fact created by an entrepreneur who hired people to help him make the product. His employees probably get paid a salary, while his company gets paid directly through the SmartContract. In fact, we can see the exact addresses that CryptoKities sends its revenue to, along with who has control over which parts of the Smart Contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x06012c8cf97bead5deae237070f9587f8e7a266d#code The "contract KittyAccessControl" is particularly interesting. CryptoKitties was made by a team, but you could imagine if it was made by a single person. There's nothing really stopping a single person from making CKs. Either way, CKs is property that is owned by an individual or a few individuals, and is used to make a profit. And it's unbannable. The revenue from CKs will always go to the owner of the contract. That makes CKs an unbannable form of private property by their own definition.

Instruments/Tools/Means of production

But what about the physical computers and keyboards that the programmers use to create the unbannable programs? Couldn't those at least be seized? Nope. That's where DAOs come in. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations mother fucker. DAOs are a beast. Imagine a company with no headquarters, and no one knows who the owners or employees are, or where they're located. DAOs are built on top of Smart Contracts, but instead of a cute game like CryptoKitties, they allow an entrepreneur to codify a business structure in such a way that anyone can perform a task and get paid for it in a completely decentralized fashion. In such a business, it would be impossible to "seize the means of production". Even if the government tracked down one employee and stole their computer, the DAO would still automatically find a new employee to do work, potentially in a completely separate country. And even if the government tracked down the owner of the DAO, the DAO itself still might not be seizeable, assuming the owner stores their private keys in their head. Think of the Uber business model, but on steroids. Or think 'working from home' taken to the extreme. Here's a good article on DAOs. Uber by itself actually is very interesting. Uber doesn't own any cars, the drivers own their own car. However, the Uber App isn't on the blockchain, so technically it could be banned or seized. However, if Uber were a DAO, it would become an unbannable form of private property.
Far leftists would point out that DAOs also enable "woker owned businesses", which is true. A DAO could be programmed to fit any sort of business structure. Unfortunately for them, capitalism doesn't care at all what individuals do, as long as they don't steal or damage other people's private property, or break a contract that they agreed to. Worker co-ops like Mondragon Corporation are as capitalist as Chicken McNuggets. Far leftists on the other hand don't extend this same level of freedom to us, which is why their ideologies are predicated on violence. In order for them to succeed, private property must be completely banned, and their very specific business model must be enforced at gunpoint. Luckily for us, we have cryptography and economics on our side. They may be able to ban certain forms of physical private property like apartments(although even that could be solved by an AirBnB Smart Contract), but they will never be able to ban all of it, or even a fraction of it. Other far leftists such as left-anarchists believe that if we get rid of the government, private property won't be enforceable, and will just automatically disappear. They believe a government is required for private property enforcement. They're completely wrong. Cryptographically-enforced private property is here to stay. They can scream and shout exploitation all they want, but their ideology is completely and utterly unenforceable, and is thus effectively dead. Good riddens.

In conclusion

If you like this post and want to explore this topic further, feel free to sub and post to /AnarchoCryptography. It's a crypto-anarchist sub specifically for libertarians and ancaps.
submitted by CommunismDoesntWork to Libertarian [link] [comments]

[Effort post] Will private property disappear if the state does as well?

Cryptocurrencies, Smart Contracts(sometimes called dApps), and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations(DAOs) each represents three different forms of unbannable private property. What is private property? The capitalist definition of private property is straightforward; it's any piece of property that the government doesn't own. But even if we go by the left's definition, we will see that each of these 3 technologies meets their definition of private property.
So how does the far left define private property? Here are a few excerpts from a few different leftists:
”We are opposed to the kind of [private] property “which can be used only to exploit people — land and buildings, instruments of production and distribution, raw materials and manufactured articles, money and capital.” [Nicholas Walter, About Anarchism, p. 40]
"If your mom made a living off fixing neighbors clothes, and accepted money for it, then [the sewing machine] would be considered private property. If she employs people and takes part of the revenue for the work done by employees, that shit's getting seized." Here we see how communists define private property. If you use property to make money, it's private property. And if you make money using your private property while hiring others, that's doubly offensive.
Here are some others on money in particular:
"Yes, communism seeks to abolish money, but nobody knows how a moneyless post-capitalist system would run."
"[Money] needs to be abolished there is no way to have money and not have material individualism."
"Abolish Money!" This one is particularly interesting becuase an anarchist wrote this over 100 years ago
So now let's go one by one and see if private property is bannable

Money

Money is the obvious one. Cryptocurrencies are unbannable forms of money. Their inherent decentralized structure means that not even china, who has complete control of their nations internet, could ban it. The weakest link in crypto space are the centralized exchanges. However, thanks to mining and stores that accept CCs like SilkRoad and OpenBazaar, it's possible to acquire CCs and spend them without going through a centralized exchange. Not to mention, decentralized exchanges will be a thing one day.

Property that you use to earn money

This one is solved by boths Smart Contracts and DAOs, but I'm going to focus on Smart Contracts. Smart Contracts are awesome. If you haven't read my article on them, check out what I wrote here. They can compute anything that a normal program can, but are also unbannable thanks to being decentralized. For our purposes, we can think of Smart Contracts as unbannable programs. Programs are property. Even open source programs are property. When a programer creates a program, they have the freedom to open source the code or not because they own their code(assuming they haven't agreed to give up ownership of the code in exchange for something else). If they do decide to open source their code, they also have the freedom to attach a license(any license) onto their code or not- because they own their code. It's their property. In fact, software in general can be thought of as just digital factories- it takes in inputs, and spits out some outputs. And like physical factories, someone owns them. So we've established programs and code are property. But is it private property? Going by the leftist definitions, yes, it can be.
Take CryptoKitties for instance. CryptoKitties is a SmartContract that lives on the Ethereum blockchain. The idea is you can trade and breed these digital cats with other users, while the company earns a fixed percentage of each trade. CryptoKitties was in fact created by an entrepreneur who hired people to help him make the product. His employees probably get paid a salary, while his company gets paid directly through the SmartContract. In fact, we can see the exact addresses that CryptoKities sends its revenue to, along with who has control over which parts of the Smart Contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x06012c8cf97bead5deae237070f9587f8e7a266d#code The "contract KittyAccessControl" is particularly interesting. CryptoKitties was made by a team, but you could imagine if it was made by a single person. There's nothing really stopping a single person from making CKs. Either way, CKs is property that is owned by an individual or a few individuals, and is used to make a profit. And it's unbannable. The revenue from CKs will always go to the owner of the contract. That makes CKs an unbannable form of private property by their own definition.

Instruments/Tools/Means of production

But what about the physical computers and keyboards that the programmers use to create the unbannable programs? Couldn't those at least be seized? Nope. That's where DAOs come in. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations mother fucker. DAOs are a beast. Imagine a company with no headquarters, and no one knows who the owners or employees are, or where they're located. DAOs are built on top of Smart Contracts, but instead of a cute game like CryptoKitties, they allow an entrepreneur to codify a business structure in such a way that anyone can perform a task and get paid for it in a completely decentralized fashion. In such a business, it would be impossible to "seize the means of production". Even if the government tracked down one employee and stole their computer, the DAO would still automatically find a new employee to do work, potentially in a completely separate country. And even if the government tracked down the owner of the DAO, the DAO itself still might not be seizeable, assuming the owner stores their private keys in their head. Think of the Uber business model, but on steroids. Or think 'working from home' taken to the extreme. Here's a good article on DAOs. Uber by itself actually is very interesting. Uber doesn't own any cars, the drivers own their own car. However, the Uber App isn't on the blockchain, so technically it could be banned or seized. However, if Uber were a DAO, it would become an unbannable form of private property.
Far leftists would point out that DAOs also enable "woker owned businesses", which is true. A DAO could be programmed to fit any sort of business structure. Unfortunately for them, capitalism doesn't care at all what individuals do, as long as they don't steal or damage other people's private property, or break a contract that they agreed to. Worker co-ops like Mondragon Corporation are as capitalist as Chicken McNuggets. Far leftists on the other hand don't extend this same level of freedom to us, which is why their ideologies are predicated on violence. In order for them to succeed, private property must be completely banned, and their very specific business model must be enforced at gunpoint. Luckily for us, we have cryptography and economics on our side. They may be able to ban certain forms of physical private property like apartments(although even that could be solved by an AirBnB Smart Contract), but they will never be able to ban all of it, or even a fraction of it. Other far leftists such as left-anarchists believe that if we get rid of the government, private property won't be enforceable, and will just automatically disappear. They believe a government is required for private property enforcement. They're completely wrong. Cryptographically-enforced private property is here to stay. They can scream and shout exploitation all they want, but their ideology is completely and utterly unenforceable, and is thus effectively dead.

In conclusion

submitted by CommunismDoesntWork to Anarchism [link] [comments]

r/bitcoin recap - February 2017

Hi again everyone!
You gave me fantastic feedback on the first monthly recap last month, so of course I made another one for February.
For those unfamiliair, each day (usually around the same time), I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in bitcoin and save them, after which I release them in one batch after the month ends. This gives you a quick (but not necessarily the best) overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
This month I’m making 2 changes:
  1. I’m removing links in the Reddit post, to prevent it from getting auto-moderated like last month. I will link to all the respective reddit posts (so you can see discussion too) on the web version instead. version with links
  2. As #1 gave away, I launched a website to permanently store these things. Unfortunately it is not live yet, as my hosting provider is taking forever to deal with the DNS nameservers. As you can imagine, I’m currently best friends with their customer support, as I really wanted to have the site up before posting today. To deal with this for now, I made a post on my personal site instead until I get the new site up and running. I hope people aren’t too fussed about that.
Anyways let’s get to the recap. Let me know if you think I missed something!
A recap of February 2017 in bitcoin
Thank you to everyone who is contributing to this exciting space!
Personal note:
I’ve seen more constructive discussions over the past month than in January, let’s keep that up. We should avoid sinking to the level of insults and focus on continuously correcting misinformation. You will never convince people that your approach is favourable by insulting them, but you might if you show them that not everyone on the “other side” is malicious, as they’re made out to be. Our perception of how Bitcoin should develop is simply different. Let’s create understanding, not a rift.
Now let's March!
submitted by SamWouters to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Particl is a decentralized privacy platform built for global P2P eCommerce #PART

Where we've been: Amazon is 22 years old, eBay is 21. The online services we use are increasingly demanding more of our personal data, a disturbing trend. Corporate entities such as Google and Facebook have grown to extraordinary sizes solely by monetizing on user data. These entities are charged with keeping said data secure and, in the case of social and economic interactions, safeguarding the privacy. This approach of centralized security models is not applicable to the new generation of technologies such as Bitcoin.
Where we're going: Satoshi Nakamoto had initially created a marketplace which was included in the official Bitcoin codebase but was stripped out later on. The concept of a decentralized marketplace in itself is not novel, there have been a small set of academic constructions and even serious attempts at creating them. (OpenBazaar, BitMarkets, Beaver, DropZone) They either propose solutions that scale extremely well and neglect the privacy implications, or they propose very privacy conscious solutions that do not scale well. Privacy and efficiency are often at odds with each other.
"to hide the signal you must generate noise". -Ido Kaiser
Tor exemplifies this well, the traffic is pushed through various nodes with several layers of encryption before arriving at its destination, it is deliberately inefficient but the privacy provided by the trade off is well worth it. And then there's governance and how do you attach a self-governance mechanism on a decentralized network? The issue of governance on decentralized models is already starting to become a hot button for blockchain platforms.
How we get there: Particl is an open source, decentralized privacy platform built for global person to person eCommerce. The native marketplace, currency tokens and suite of encrypted communication tools offer unfettered access between buyers and sellers worldwide or just down the street.
You can buy or sell anything, similar to eBay, Etsy or Amazon, except that all the transaction data, payments and conversations happen over a self-governed, distributed network instead of a central server. Think of it as going to a local market to buy something you need, from the person who is actually selling it, without a third person's permission, "service" or fee required for the sale to happen.
PART is the native 2-token currency in Particl. Users have a choice when sending money on the distributed ledger. Pseudo-anonymous transactions use a public token and truly-anonymous transactions use a private token.
Particl will be currency agnostic, meaning it will support the use of many cryptocurrencies with the intent of being an inclusive platform. A decentralized privacy platform focused on free markets cannot be limited by its own built-in token system. Our goal is to lower barriers of entry and reduce friction in online shopping, allowing for easier adoption by buyers and vendors anywhere in the world.
The very nature of a free-market built on a distributed network immediately brings up the question of governance. To get right to the point, Particl is being built with protection to ensure the market does not become an ultimate version of silk road. Our main focus is researching self-governance models that can be adapted to a decentralized network. The self-governance model for Particl will have two components to it:
  • Platform Governance. Protection against illegal goods. "How do we protect the platform?"
  • Privacy Governance. Providing user privacy. "How do we protect the users?" ___ Who's on the team? Particl core developers ___
  • Ryno Mathee - Lead & Core Developer ([email protected]) (rynomster)
  • Gerlof van Ek - Developer, Branding & Graphics, UI/UX ([email protected]) (crz)
  • Ido Kaiser - Developer & Software Architect (kewde)
  • Tecnovert - Core Developer, Cryptographic Researcher
  • Shazzy - Research & Development ([email protected]) (dasource) ___ Particl non-developer core ___
  • Paul Schmitzer - Communications ([email protected]) (litebit)
  • Henk Swardt - Project Manager, PMP ([email protected])
  • Nick Sy - Treasurer ([email protected]) ___ Extended Team: ___
  • Arcanum - PR / Writing
  • FFmad - General Relations
  • Edu - Community Manager
  • Allien - Front-end Developer
  • Ludx - Developer ___ Advisors: ___
  • Micah Spruill - Business & Finance - Managing Partner, Aurora Investment Advisors ([email protected])
  • Yann Alleman - Business & PR, - Engineer, Ferrari A.G. ([email protected])
  • Joe Fisher - E-Commerce Strategy - Private label online seller, Product Developer ([email protected]) ___ What technology is Particl built with? Particl is based on the latest and market-leading Bitcoin codebase. We are currently adding the privacy functionality from ShadowCash onto the Bitcoin Core 13.2 codebase but with .14 released in March it is highly likely that by the time we create the Particl genesis block we will be on Bitcoin Core .14 codebase. ___ Will there be a token exchange for PART? A seed round is scheduled to start March 18th, 2017 and last 4 weeks. During this time existing ShadowCash token holders can exchange SDC for PART. ___ To participate in the Particl token exchange, you must have ShadowCash (SDC) tokens. Please visit https://particl.io for investment inquiries and information. ___ Useful links: Website: https://particl.io Reddit: https://reddit.com/particl Blog: https://particl.news Twitter: https://twitter.com/particlproject Slack: https://particl.slack.com | Slack invite: http://slack.particl.io Riot: https://riot.im/app/#/room/#particl:matrix.org IRC: #particl Github: https://github.com/particl ___ Contact us: General queries: [email protected]
submitted by Vindyne8 to Particl [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Breaks $300!!! -- Dread Pirate Not Guilty? -- Silk Road 2.0 Launches OpenBazaar, a decentralized marketplace to buy/sell anything w/bitcoin, is a Big Idea w/Big Backers SilkRoad 2.0 - Bitcoin TOR Darknet Politik - sk2.eu Info Fakten ✔✔✔ How to Install and Use OpenBazaar Bitcoin Market Hunt for BitCoin & Silk Road Users

Silk Road programmer Michael R. Weigand pleaded guilty Monday to concealing his involvement in the once-sprawling darknet market’s backend operations. Since bitcoin’s inception, several high-profile instances of criminal misconduct have shone a light on the potential dangers of cryptocurrency. Among them was the creation of the world’s first online drug bazaar, and a massive hack at the Mt. Gox bitcoin exchange, which sparked a vicious bear market in the price of bitcoin. Bitcoin erpresst, gestohlen, unterschlagen und gewaschen zu haben. Der bemerkenswerte Ermittlungsbericht zeichnet eine Gaunerstory von zwei korrupten Agenten, die wie Raubritter durch den Cyberspace gezogen sind. Die Geschichte zeigt auch, wie wenig anonym die Blockchain ist und was einen Beweis in der digitalen Welt ausmacht. Auktion der Silk Road Coins: Bitcoins nicht deutlich unter ... I'm not talking about what will be sold on OpenBazaar but rather if it will spur more interest in Bitcoin. I know the SilkRoad brought the concept of Bitcoins to the public. Will OpenBazaar do the same thing ? I feel that once it is fully operational it will defiantly help and make it more mainstream. 19 comments. share . save hide report. 61% Upvoted. This thread is archived. New comments ... Bitcoin is all about electronic wallets that send digital cash directly to one another. All you need is a Bitcoin wallet address. You never need to know someone's real name. And at the center of ...

[index] [4558] [49487] [24727] [43558] [8259] [18971] [40432] [38640] [37051] [29121]

Bitcoin Breaks $300!!! -- Dread Pirate Not Guilty? -- Silk Road 2.0 Launches

On today's show is Brian Hoffman, lead developer of OpenBazaar.org, a decentralized P2P open marketplace to buy and sell anything using bitcoin. Parallels to Silk Road abound, and Jason and Brian ... Please Subscribe to My YouTube Channel Hunt for BitCoin & Silk Road Users http://rt.com/news/silk-road-bitcoins-us-britain-934/ http://www.peacefreedomprospe... SpaceX Nails Starlink Launch but Narrowly Missed Falcon 9 Landing After Fastest Booster Reuse Yet - Duration: 14:18. ENGINEERING TODAY Recommended for you. New Here are Today's MadBits: Bitcoin prices are in outer ... Skip navigation Sign in. Search. Loading... Close. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue. Remove all; Disconnect ... In this video we will be showing how easy it is to download and start using OpenBazaar, a decentralized bitcoin marketplace. It's like the silk road and ebay mashed into one, but with no fees! My ...

#