[Most Recent Entries]
Below are 20 journal entries, after skipping by the 20 most recent ones recorded in
[ << Previous 20 -- Next 20 >> ]
[ << Previous 20 -- Next 20 >> ]
|Monday, October 13th, 2014|
Ruperts rag and bone men discover anarchy
A mega-trend is brewing that could make bureaucratic hierarchies, middlemen and gatekeepers everywhere obsolete including social networks, banks, stock exchanges, electronic voting systems and even governments. It’s called decentralized computing, and it could fundamentally transform the way we connect to and exchange value on the Internet.
Most services today are centralized — sharing photos via social networks, uploading files to the cloud, sending and receiving money. In fact it’s how the world has been organized for hundreds of years. But history has proven that the centralized model is flawed and inefficient. Power concentrated in the hands of a few has always been at risk of corruption, greed and chaos.
Decentralization transfers that power from individuals and corporations to technology and immutable math, leading to reduced overheads, improved security, more resiliency and higher efficiency.
There are three technologies that will form the foundation of the decentralized computing stack — mesh networks (decentralized networking), block chain (decentralized transactions) and autonomous agents (decentralized decision making).
Mesh networks. The traditional network architecture of the Internet is vulnerable. There is risk of accidental damage or deliberate disruption (e.g. 70 million J.P. Morgan Chase accounts got hacked last week). We’re at the mercy and whims of telecom providers (e.g. the net neutrality debate). And there is a risk of corporations wielding too much power and governments tracking and spying on users (e.g. the NSA).
Over the last few days, hundreds of thousands of pro-democracy protesters have been thronging the streets of Hong Kong. Many of them have been turning to a new kind of app to message each other through a network that doesn’t require Wi-Fi nodes or cell towers. The app, FireChat by OpenGarden, got over 100,000 signups in 24 hours and is underpinned by something called mesh networks.
Mesh networks are peer-to-peer networks created by daisy-chaining your phone (which becomes a router) to nearby phones using Bluetooth and Wi-Fi. Everyone joining the mesh network creates an extension of the Internet. The more devices or nodes, the stronger it becomes. They cannot be controlled by any central organization. There is no single IP to block. And governments can’t shut them down. They are decentralized, self-healing and remarkably resilient.
Mesh networks started taking off with the proliferation of smartphones (no additional hardware is required) and the introduction of Multipeer Connectivity (iOS 7.0 and onwards) and Wi-Fi Peer-to-Peer (Android 4.0 onwards). They’ve since been used in protests in Taiwan, Iran and Iraq, the annual Burning Man Festival in Black Rock Desert and even in Red Hook, a remote neighborhood in Brooklyn that had no mobile phone or Internet access when Hurricane Sandy struck.
Block chain. You’ve probably heard of Bitcoin, the global, decentralized crypto-currency, which incidentally has also become the largest supercomputing network in the world. But Bitcoin is really an app built on top of a revolutionary bit of technology called the block chain, the first practical solution to an age-old problem in computing, the Byzantine Generals Problem (establishing trust between unrelated parties over an untrusted network like the Internet).
The block chain is essentially a giant distributed cryptographic ledger shared amongst all nodes participating in the network, and keeps a record of every single successful transaction. This allows for trustless transactional activity. It facilitates ownership, storage, transfer and processing of information without the need for a middleman or identity information clearinghouse.
What this really means is that transactions, identity verification, trust, reputation and payments become quantifiable and programmable.
And it opens up a whole range of possibilities:
Decentralized voting (e.g. Agora), where voters pay using a crypto-currency into an account representing their choice, with the winning candidate being one with highest balance.
Decentralized Domain Name Registration (DNS) (e.g. Namecoin) would be based on a crypto-currency model, and operate independently of ICANN (so technically immune from Internet censorship). Namecoin uses the .bit top-level domain.
Decentralized storage (e.g. Maidsafe and Storj), where trustless nodes would work together (using crypto-currencies as means of payment) to exchange storage space and bandwidth.
Smart self-validating contracts for real-time revenue sharing (e.g. Secure Asset Exchange); helping artists secure and verify their digital artwork by logging it in the block chain (e.g. Monegraph); and even decentralized Twitter-like P2P asynchronous messaging platforms (e.g. BitMessage and Twister).
Document certification (e.g. Proof of Existence) is a clever use of the block chain as a publicly visible and authenticated timestamp.
In fact, asset registries/keys that could theoretically be implemented in a block chain model are endless — land titles, private equities, mortgages, vehicle registries, passports, birth certificates, voter ids, gun permits, wills, escrows, degrees, car keys, house keys, patents, trademarks, coupons, genome data and even nuclear launch codes!
Companies like Ethereum and BitShares are now building their own, new block chains, platform and programming language to help developers build next-gen decentralized apps.
And just last week, a couple at Disney World had the first block chain marriage, recorded forever within the block chain!
Autonomous agents. These are entities that make their own choices regarding how to act in their environment without influence of a central authority.
With decentralization, autonomous agents will play an increasingly important role in how things get done. They will be the brains and logic residing inside everything from driverless cars to delivery drones, from your bank accounts to your thermostats. They will operate individually or in a swarm. They will buy and sell services using crypto-currencies, pay their own costs to maintain and upgrade themselves and even replicate as they become profitable. They will be self-sustaining economic units — almost like mini-corporations, but without the bureaucracy.
Of course, as the decentralized computing revolution spreads, there will be legal, technical and social challenges. Anonymity, a key component of the system, could encourage illegal activities. With rise of autonomous agents, questions regarding liability and accountability will be raised. And we have to be careful we don’t exchange the tyranny of gatekeepers for the tyranny of code.
But the transition to a global system that is decentralized, distributed, anonymous, efficient, secure, permission-less, trustless, resilient, frictionless, almost free, with no single point of control and no single point of failure… seems inevitable.
As the Internet of Things slowly takes shape, an estimated 50 billion devices are expected to come online by 2020. They will be powered by autonomous agents, transact on top of the block chain and connect to each other via mesh networks. As more of the decision-making moves from the application layer down to the agent layer, the global system will start becoming more intelligent.
And that is when things should get really interesting.
Mr. Sharma (aka “The Guy with the Red Tie”) is the founder of GarysGuide.
|Friday, October 10th, 2014|
Croc of a case against me
That piddly APster bet isn't a death threat judge - THIS is a death threat
Let’s Take a Walk
By Jay Nordlinger
October 10, 2014
The opening paragraphs of a recent New York Times article have become almost infamous:
President Obama must be touched by all the concern Republicans are showing him these days. As Congress examines security breaches at the White House, even opposition lawmakers who have spent the last six years fighting his every initiative have expressed deep worry for his security.
“The American people want to know: Is the president safe?” Representative Darrell Issa of California, the Republican committee chairman who has made it his mission to investigate all sorts of Obama administration missteps, solemnly intoned as he opened a hearing into the lapses on Tuesday.
Yet it would not be all that surprising if Mr. Obama were a little wary of all the professed sympathy.
In September 2009, I wrote a piece called “All Wee-Weed Up: Protests on the right, hypocrisy on the left.” (President Obama had used the expression “all wee-weed up,” and it was in the air.) People on the left were saying that they had never seen or heard anything like the hatred being expressed toward Obama — and this, mind you, was less than a year after George W. Bush had departed the White House. I can’t find that article on the Internet to link to. But I have it elsewhere. And I thought I would cull a few items from it, just to take you back down Memory Lane …
(Nixon used to say, “Let’s flick the scab off that wound.”)
Even before Bush was elected president, the kill-Bush talk and imagery started. When Governor Bush was delivering his 2000 convention speech, Craig Kilborn, a CBS talk-show host, showed him on the screen with the words “SNIPERS WANTED.”
Six years later, Bill Maher, the comedian-pundit, was having a conversation with John Kerry. He asked the senator what he had gotten his wife for her birthday. Kerry answered that he had taken her to Vermont. Maher said, “You could have went to New Hampshire and killed two birds with one stone.” (New Hampshire is an early primary state, of course.) Kerry said, “Or I could have gone to 1600 Pennsylvania and killed the real bird with one stone.”
This is the same Kerry who joked in 1988, “Somebody told me the other day that the Secret Service has orders that if George Bush is shot, they’re to shoot Quayle.” Ha ha ha! Kill Quayle!
In 2006, the New York comptroller, Alan Hevesi, spoke to graduating students at Queens College. He said that his fellow Democrat, Senator Charles Schumer, would “put a bullet between the president’s eyes if he could get away with it.”
A columnist in Britain’s Guardian, Charlie Brooker, wrote, “John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. — where are you now that we need you?”
Betty Williams, the Northern Irishwoman who won the Nobel Peace Prize, said, “I have a very hard time with this word ‘non-violence,’ because I don’t believe that I am non-violent. … Right now, I would love to kill George Bush.”
A novelist, Nicholson Baker, was so filled with rage at Bush, he wrote a novel mulling the question of assassinating him.
In Britain, there was a TV movie — a “fictional documentary” — that was a kind of fantasy: on the assassination of Bush. (It was called “Death of a President.”)
In my 2009 piece, I wrote, “The anonymous photographer-blogger who maintains zombietime.com has done something remarkable: assembled a large collection of photos from anti-Bush and anti-Republican rallies — including Obama rallies. This makes for sickening viewing: all the signs calling for Bush’s death, all the severed Bush heads, the burning effigies, and so on. There is a delightful bumper sticker saying ‘SUPPORT BUSH’ and showing a noose.”
Etc., etc. Anyway, I thought some people might find this little walk down Memory Lane useful, in light of the sneering and insulting paragraphs in the New York Times.
Why, when I first carved the internet out of an old bar of soap, I took the left over soap scraps and molded them into the prototype of the first iPod, but Steve Jobs and I got drunk and I forgot all about it until years later. I told Al Gore he could keep the whole internet thing as long as we made sure to put plenty of porn in it.
And then my wife, Morgan Fairchild (who I've slept with) and I decided to go on an around the world cruise in our giant yacht, and by the time I was done rescuing all the baby seals, Apple was already marketing it. I swear, between the sea-sickness and the size of my giant penis, poor Morgan could barely walk for weeks.
Why only the other week, Warren Buffet was calling me to ask why I never filed a patent, and BTW, what do I think of HP splitting into two companies. I told him I don't have a lot of time to explain market fundamentals to him, and suggested he reads Investing for Dummies" first. And, besides, I'm still on retainer with HP as their shadow CEO, so it would be unethical.
I'd tell you why Kim Jong Il has been out of the public eye for a while, but I'm sworn to secrecy for the next twenty years. Fortunately, me am Obama were chilling over steaks the other night, and he had a good laugh about it. At least I can talk to someone about this. The Secret Service guys are really cool, and sometimes let me shoot the guns, and the airforce pilots let me show them how to do a hammerhead in airforce one. Good times. You wouldn't believe what they've got in the secret fortress under Camp David, though. All I can say is Area 51 isn't where the really cool stuff is. FROMhttp://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/14/10/09/1823246/a-critical-look-at-walter-scorpion-obrien
|Monday, October 6th, 2014|
nicklambert — 2014-10-05T02:16:18-04:00 — #1
This past week, @BenMS and myself were in Paris presenting a paper at the ADAM symposium, which was focussed on decentralised technologies.
We will make the paper available via GitHub next week and I will attach the link to this thread for those who are interested. Our talk went as planned and was well received, barring overly some aggressive questioning from a guy from the W3 Consortium (we gave as good as we got). Academic conferences are new to me, but I liked the contrast between this and the other conferences that we have been attending and I think this will be the start of MaidSafe moving to different types of events to maximise our exposure to as many different groups as possible. Being a former academic, Ben was in his element!
We met lots of interesting people, unsurprisingly lots of Computer Scientists and Academics, but most had not heard of MaidSafe so great to expose our technology to new people. The University of Westminster are going to be inviting us down to talk to their students and faculty fairly soon and I would anticipate being invited to other conferences on the back of this. One of the most interesting guys that we met was a Platform Integration Engineer at the Mozilla Foundation, he has been following us for a few months.
Mozilla receive the vast majority of their funding from Google and many see this model as unsustainable. The person we spoke with intends to champion the SAFE Project inside Mozilla with
the engineering team prior to approaching the org’s key decision makers. We spoke at quite a high level and obviously much more technical discussion needs to take place, but his initial thoughts
would be to incorporate the SAFE network with their existing Firefox extensions in the short term, but moving to try and build the SAFE network into a decentralised standard, in conjunction with the W3 and others in the longer term. Obviously this discussion is at an extremely early stage but promising that like minded organisations are keen to work with us.
After the conference finished on Friday our work wasn’t done and by popular demand Ben and I went to a local office of one of the symposium speakers where Ben gave an excellent technical overview of the network to a small group, including computer scientists, academics and the guy from the W3 I mentioned earlier. So, a tiring and very busy few days but lots of exciting stuff to follow up. FROMhttp://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:eJwtFEE9xi0J:https://www.maidsafe.org/t/continuing-to-spread-the-word/1800+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au
|Saturday, October 4th, 2014|
Marxism as absolute contradiction
THE PROPHETIC WORDS OF (ANARCHIST) MIKHAIL BAKUNIN
Written in 1872
The reasoning of Marx ends in absolute contradiction. Taking into account only the economic question, he insists that only the most advanced countries, those in which capitalist production has attained greatest development, are the most capable of making social revolution. These civilized countries, to the exclusion of all others, are the only ones destined to initiate and carry through this revolution. This revolution will expropriate either by peaceful, gradual, or by violent means, the present property owners and capitalists. To appropriate all the landed property and capital, and to carry out its extensive economic and political programs, the revolutionary State will have to be very powerful and highly centralized. The State will administer and direct the cultivation of the land, by means of its salaried officials commanding armies of rural workers organized and disciplined for this purpose. At the same time, on the ruins of the existing banks, it will establish a single state bank which will finance all labor and national commerce.
It is readily apparent how such a seemingly simple plan of organization can excite the imagination of the workers, who are as eager for justice as they are for freedom; and who foolishly imagine that the one can exist without the other; as if, in order to conquer and consolidate justice and equality, one could depend on the efforts of others, particularly on governments, regardless of how they may be elected or controlled, to speak and act for the people! For the proletariat this will, in reality, be nothing but a barracks: a regime, where regimented workingmen and women will sleep, wake, work, and live to the beat of a drum; where the shrewd and educated will be granted government privileges; and where the mercenary-minded, attracted by the immensity of the international speculations of the state bank, will find a vast field for lucrative, underhanded dealings.
There will be slavery within this state, and abroad there will be war without truce, at least until the “inferior” races, Latin and Slav, tired of bourgeois civilization, no longer resign themselves to the subjection of a State, which will be even more despotic than the former State, although it calls itself a People’s State.
|Friday, October 3rd, 2014|
|A recurring nightmare
Robin Hanson gets all the credit for Jim's idea
A recurring theme in our conversation is the excellent solution (invariably proposed by Dr Hanson) that falls on deaf ears. A semi-exception are prediction markets, probably the idea he’s best-known for – the idea of solving debates through betting markets, getting people (quite literally) to put their money where their mouth is. Say there’s a “questionable claim, about global warming or something”. People don’t know who to believe, so you create a betting market. Partisans on both sides bet money, their bet reflecting how strongly they believe what they’re saying. Neutrals get a sense of the consensus – then, when the answer is discovered, those who were wrong lose their money. Over time, a “selection effect” takes hold, weeding out the loudmouths, leaving those who are consistently right.
It’s a good idea – and also works for companies, letting them see how likely a project is to succeed or fail. The snag, however, is that companies don’t want an accurate source of information, because it’s “politically awkward”. If a project fails, “what you usually want to say is ‘The reason it failed could not have been anticipated’”. People need the safety of lies; too much truth isn’t welcome, like the food being forced down a bird’s throat. It’s a case of humans being humans again, our minds not being wired for honesty. “Our minds lead us to think that whatever we were born with seems natural,” sighs Robin. People have no evidence for what they believe to be right, “they just like the comfort of believing what they were told, and being part of a community that believes the same thing. And, to most people, that matters more than trying to carefully figure out what’s right”.
|Sunday, September 28th, 2014|
|Securenet considered harmful
ID encryption and Police states.Geoff Ross needs killing.
Matthew X Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:02:32 -0800
Asia Pacific Office
18 F One International Finance Center
1 Harbour View Street
Central, Hong Kong
+ 852 2166 8309 Fax: + 852 2166 8488 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Canuck outfit diversinet,(NORTEL lest we forget.) want to get into bed with SecureNet who are already linked with the 'smart' new ID cards for Mr Hu's greater Hong Kong.
Families are being split up and some sent back to the Mainland's Lao Gai's.
Companies Like IBM,Ford and guys like Prescott Bush and Robert Menzies are forever tainted by association with totalitarian and murderous regimes.
Can firms like the above,SUN,RSA,CISCO and others be far behind?
To my mind they are already there along with their lick spittle apologists like Declan.http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/10/1039379827281.html
Online security provider SecureNet Ltd has joined forces with Canadian security infrastructure company Diversinet to deliver wired and wireless security solutions to the Australian, New Zealand and Chinese markets.
This follows SecureNet's licensing of Diversinet's Passport security product suite in October.
Under these agreements Diversinet receives a total of $US1 million ($A1.78 million) from SecureNet.
The extended agreement between the two companies includes the combining of research and development expertise to integrate Diversinet's wireless solutions into SecureNet's range of TrustedNet products.
SecureNet managing director Geoffrey Ross said the deal strengthened the company's range of security solutions.
Mr Ross predicted that the burgeoning worldwide demand for secure internet-based systems would offer the greatest opportunity yet for the application of smart card technology. He said multi-application smart cards as recently developed by SecureNet for the Hong Kong market - which carry digital authentication and signature certificates as well as traditional credit, debit and calling card functions � will introduce smart card technology into everyday use, worldwide
The Asia Pacific Smart Card Forum was established in 1995 to promote the development of a technologically advanced and viable smart card industry in Australia, and to position Australia as a leading supplier of smart card technology and applications. Membership includes major vendors, government agencies, financial institutions and consulting firms.
The inaugural Smart Card Industry Award was presented at a ceremony at Cards Australia in Melbourne on 5 July.
The Award sponsor, LM Gemplus, is the newly-formed smart card joint venture between Leigh Mardon Australia and Gemplus France.
SecureNet's Revenues Balloon
February 25, 2000
SecureNet (SNX) has continued on its high growth path, reported a 99% increase in Sales revenue from $3.15 million to $6.27 million for the six months to 31 December, 1999. Gross profit rose 126% to $3.58 million and the company reported an operating loss before equity accounting of $0.23 million ($0.08 million pcp). After equity accounting, the net loss increased to $0.698 million � this takes into account SNX�s share of all start up and business establishment costs on the Cable & Wireless HKT joint venture.
The company said the significant revenue growth was driven by success with e-commerce projects. SNX currently has an outstanding order book exceeding $11 million.
Australia's SecureNet Puts Trust In Beijing
By David Frith, Computer Daily News
31 Jan 2001, 2:32 AM CST
Australian-based Internet security services provider SecureNet [ASX:SNX] has opened a "trust centre" in Beijing.
Modelled on other SecureNet centers in Hong Kong and Australia, it is a joint venture with HKT SecureNet and Top Hawk, the company says.
Securenet says it plans to inject A$5 million (US$2.72 million) into the Beijing venture.
The center will offer a range of Internet-based banking products that require authentication, single sign on, payments processing, secure transactions, smart cards and other related services, SecureNet says.
Managing Director Geoffrey Ross said the company envisages a string of trust centers that can be replicated globally, interconnected via a global IP (Internet protocol) backbone and providing services for customers across Asia.http://www.infowar.com/p_and_s/01/p_n_s_013101a_j.shtml
Snet was called in to plug the e-mail.'leak' from navy sailors that was blowing stories like the 'children overboard,' affair.
FEARS of further terrorist attacks have proved a bonanza for the IT industry, as increasing numbers of companies and organisations focus on security.
According to researcher Gartner, the Asia Pacific IT security market will be worth $US1.2 billion by 2005. Researcher IDC estimates the Australian market alone will be worth $1.75 billion by 2006.
Starved of revenue in the poor economic climate, technology companies are clamouring to sell their wares in what's been described as the fastest growing sector in years.http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,5482378%5e15348%5e%5enbv%5e15306-15317,00.html
The company recently announced a multi-million-dollar pilot program for the Australian Defence Force for a secure message authentication system to protect operational communications.
"We are seeing demand increase in these types of e-security solutions as organisations begin to go online seriously," Mr Ross said.
Remember Richard Li?
The Ronald mcDonald kid?
Pacific Century CyberWorks Buys $32m Stake In SecureNet
... Geoffrey Ross, managing director of SecureNet, and CEO of the joint venture said
CWHKT SecureNet would accelerate its expansion into the Pan Asian region ...
Transaction Systems Architects, Inc. (TSA) - News Detail
... is Part of PCCW-Led Consortium Awarded Hong Kong ID Contract. ... use in the recently
announced Hong Kong smart identity ... will provide 1.2 million smart cards to the ...
www.tsainc.com/news/newsdetail.asp?news_id=324 - 23k - Cached - Similar pages
... but a charge is levied to replace lost or stolen cards. The loss of theft of your
ID card must be ... Hong Kong residents should carry their ID cards with them at ...
www.hongkongcalling.com/id_cards.htm - 5k - Cached - Similar pages FROM
|Thursday, September 25th, 2014|
A dangerous fanatic
Putin’s continuing effort to reconcile very discordant aspects of Russia’s history into one unified, supposedly patriotic ‘symphony’ marches on. On some days he rummages through the imperial past, on others, well, the Moscow Times reports:
President Vladimir Putin signed a decree restoring the title “Dzerzhinsky Division” to an elite police unit that was previously named after the founder of the Bolshevik secret police, the Interior Ministry’s internal troops press service said Monday.
Felix Dzerzhinsky founded the Cheka, a security apparatus notorious for orchestrating mass summary executions during the Russian Civil War and the Red Terror. Established in 1924, the unit bore his name from 1926 until 1994, when its name was changed to the Independent Operational Purpose Division, the press service said. The Dzerzhinsky Division ensured security at the Potsdam Conference of 1945 and the 1980 Moscow Summer Olympics. It was also dispatched to the restive regions of Nagorno-Karabakh, North Ossetia and Chechnya upon the demise of the Soviet Union.
‘Iron Felix’, a Pole of (vaguely) noble descent, was one of the worst of the monsters given his chance by the October Putscht. He was ascetic, highly intelligent, and a true believer (interestingly, in his youth he had contemplated becoming a Jesuit priest) with the soul of an inquisitor. And, of course, he was the architect of “organized terror…the terrorization, arrests and extermination of enemies of the revolution on the basis of their class affiliation or of their pre-revolutionary roles,” a “ devout knight of the proletariat” (to borrow Stalin’s admiring description) who recruited “solid, hard men without pity” to do his butcher’s work. And so they did.
Now, imagine for a moment the reaction if Angela Merkel chose to name an elite German police division after, say, Himmler or Heydrich…
|Tuesday, September 23rd, 2014|
Giving Crimson Jihad a run for their money
An audio statement released by the Islamic State on Monday ruthlessly mocked President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry for their claim that the terror group is not Islamic, asking when the two became such experts in Islamic law.
The recording by Islamic State spokesman Abu Mohammed al-Adnani, released online in Arabic, comes to eleven pages of bluster, threats and exhortations to violence once translated into English. It urges attacks on Western civilians – especially those from countries involved in a growing military coalition against the Islamic State — and promises the Western intervention in Iraq will be “the last crusader campaign” in the region. “Thereafter, we will raid them by Allah’s permission and they will not raid us,” it promises.
The Islamic State spokesman singled out American leadership for savage criticism, repeatedly calling President Obama ”the mule of the Jews.”
“Have you not realized, O mule of the Jews, that the battle cannot be decided from the air at all?” he asks. “Or do you think that you are smarter than Bush, you obeyed fool, when he brought the armies of the cross and placed them under the fire of the mujahideen on the ground? No, you are more foolish than him.”
Nor is Kerry spared from the Islamic State’s tongue-lashing, with al-Adnani twice referring to the secretary of state as an “uncircumcized old geezer.”
The spokesman also mocked Obama and Kerry’s claims about the group’s relationship to the Islamic faith.
“To the extent that Kerry, that uncircumsized old geezer, suddenly became an Islamic jurist, issuing a verdict to the people that the Islamic State was distorting Islam, that what it was doing was against Islamic teachings, and that the Islamic State was an enemy of Islam,” al-Adnani sneered, ”and to the extent that Obama, the mule of the Jews, suddenly became a sheikh, mufti, and an Islamic preacher, warning the people and preaching in defense of Islam, claiming that the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam.”
|Monday, September 22nd, 2014|
|Roberta the Bruce
Roberta Armand Tanzarian • 2 days ago
I'm talking in terms of the state vs private justice...
Could bounty services like Ver's (whether they work with traditional law enforcement or something private)be more efficient than the state in terms of cost, casualties, and deterrence?
If Crowdsourced/Individual bounties were used to catch criminals, you have competition, you have a network of people with diverse skills doing the investigating who want the reward or shared reward as well as those who want the criminal to be caught posting bounty, these people are risking thier time and money for the reward at no cost to anyone but themselves...evidence is kept securely and then presented to the enforcers who don't pay for the time and resources used on investigating and building the case, all they do is weigh the evidence and deliver a verdict. Even this process could be made more efficient...after that some other private (or state) service can deliver the consequences to felon. These state or private services would be subject to a reputation system. The same could be done with a defendant who might want to crowdsource or fund a defence.
If people were to adopt this type of justice system how could it be more vulnerable to corruption or the miscarriage of justice than the state? Costs would be paid through crowdfunding bounties rather than through taxes. People would be free to participate in what type of 'justice' was most important to them. Do you think that this system could be more easily exploited than a state imposed justice system?
Could you see murder for hire or vigilantism becoming significantly more popular because of this? How many of us really want someone dead? My guess is not too many ...my guess is if there were any increase in this type of action it would be insignificant.
Democide is the murder of any person or people by their government, including genocide, politicide and mass murder. Democide passed war as the leading cause of non-natural death in the 20th century (262 Million), not sure what the total figure for war is here's a reference http://www.scaruffi.com/politi....
The reason I bring this into it is because it illustrates that murder of innocents to these proportions (262 Million)...
Any innocent lives lost due to funding violence against possible innocents through vigilantism and murder for hire through these types of bounties or through other private means pales in comparison with what the state already does with your tax dollars without your permission or knowledge. Could the cost in dollars or casualties possibly compare or exceed those that happen at the hands of the state?
IMO, this p2p justice system would not be perfect but it would be vastly superior to what we have. FROMhttp://cointelegraph.com/news/112559/op-ed-roger-vers-bitcoin-bounty-hunter-is-misguided-and-dangerous?utm_content=bufferdbe0c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
|Saturday, September 20th, 2014|
over the last few weeks, the world didn’t know what to expect. Would Scotland leave the United Kingdom, or stay?
I hate to sound obnoxious, but I was pretty confident that Scotland wouldn’t leave. Why? I put a lot more weight on what the prediction markets were saying than on the results from polls, due in large part to a great paper by the economists David Rothschild and Justin Wolfers. And while the polls on Scottish independence were volatile, really only in the last month showed a close race, and even disagreed with each other once or twice towards the end, betting markets consistently predicted the probability of independence to be relatively low.
Indeed, if pollsters adjusted their strategies based on prediction markets, they would likely do a better job. Here’s Dr. Wolfers in today’s New York Times:
Instead of focusing on whom people say they plan to vote for, ask them instead to focus on who they think will win. Typically, asking people who they think will win yields better forecasts, possibly because it leads them to also reflect on the opinions of those around them, and perhaps also because it may yield more honest answers.
It’s an idea with particular relevance to the case of the Scottish referendum. As Stephen Fisher, an associate professor of political sociology at the University of Oxford, has noted, there is a historical tendency for polling to overstate the likelihood of success of referendums, possibly because we’re more willing to tell pollsters we will vote for change than to actually do so. Such biases are less likely to distort polls that ask people who they think will win. Indeed, in giving their expectations, some respondents may even reflect on whether or not they believe recent polling.
And in this election, too, voters’ expectations yielded a much clearer signal. A recent IPSOS/More poll showed that voters’ intentions were so evenly balanced as to be within the margin of error, even as the share of the population who expected the No vote to win held a robust 11-point lead over those expecting a successful Yes vote. Lesson: The electorate knew who would win, even as most pollsters failed to ask them.
The lessons here, of course, apply to American politics as well. Something to keep in mind as we gear up for 2016.
Dr. Wolfers continues:
But my real beef with the polls concerns how badly they’ve failed at making useful long-run forecasts. Predicting what will happen tomorrow is never that hard, while predicting what will happen in several months or years is not only difficult but also much more useful.
|Friday, September 19th, 2014|
|Stalin as new statesman
Dispute with George Orwell
Martin's editorship resulted in what D. J. Taylor called a "titantic feud" with NS contributor George Orwell. Returning to the UK after fighting in the Spanish Civil War, Orwell contacted Martin and offered to give him an account of the conflict; Martin accepted the offer. But Martin rejected Orwell's first article, "Eyewitness in Spain", on the grounds it could undermine the Spanish Republicans. As compensation, Martin then offered Orwell a chance to review Franz Borkenau's book The Spanish Cockpit. However, Martin and the literary editor Raymond Mortimer turned down Orwell's review on the grounds "it is very uncompromisingly said and implies that our Spanish correspondents are all wrong", and that it was more a restatement of Orwell's opinions than a review. Mortimer later wrote to Orwell to apologise for the rejection of his articles on Spain, stating "There is no premium here on Stalinist orthodoxy". Orwell never forgave Martin for this rejection; although he continued to write for the New Statesman, he often made "wounding remarks" in his journalism about the magazine being "under direct communist influence" and its readers being "worshippers of Stalin". Orwell also included Martin's name in a list of "fellow travellers" he passed on to the Information Research Department, a branch of UK intelligence. FROMhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsley_Martin
|Wednesday, September 17th, 2014|
Fred and Kim Kagan were key intellectual architects of the surge that saved the Iraq war and defeated the forerunner of the Islamic State the first time around–and were ringing the alarm bells long ago about the descent of Iraq after the U.S. withdrawal, when few were inclined to listen.
Now, they have published a proposed strategy for defeating the Islamic State. I recommend reading the whole thing. You will be struck by its modest tone. What they propose is much more robust than President Obama’s strategy, yet, even then, the risks are high and the prospects of success uncertain. A few key points.
People speak loosely of how we must rely on the pesh merga and the Iraq army on the ground in Iraq. The Kagans argue this is entirely wrong-headed. The key potential ally, and the only one that will be accepted in the Sunni communities where this battle will be fought, are the Sunni tribes:
Al-Qaeda and like-minded groups such as ISIS can only flourish in distressed Sunni communities. They attack every other religion and sect, but their bases must be in Sunni lands because their ideology is an extreme, exclusionary interpretation of Sunni Islam. Doing anything to al-Qaeda — defeating, disrupting, degrading, destroying, anything else — requires working with the overwhelming majority of the Sunni communities within which it lives and operates. Those communities have shown their distaste for the ideology and the groups that espouse it, rising up against them in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Egypt, and almost everywhere else they have appeared, except Pakistan.
But al-Qaeda brings more than ideology to the table. Its affiliates are extremely lethal and use brutality to maintain their positions among populations who reject their ideas. The Islamic State has been assassinating Sunni tribal leaders who allied with the U.S. and the Iraqi government during the Awakening in 2007 and pre-emptively killing those it fears might ally with us again. It has also been cleansing the areas of Syria it controls of potential Sunni opponents in an attempt to nip any reprise of the Awakening in the bud. Sunni populations cannot expel al-Qaeda groups simply because they reject their ideas. They need outside help to defeat these well-organized, well-armed, skilled, and determined zealots. They have already shown that they can and will fight against
al-Qaeda groups with that help, and that they either cannot or will not fight effectively without it.
The core challenge facing the U.S. in Iraq and Syria, therefore, is the problem of enabling the Sunni Arab community stretching from Baghdad to Damascus and Turkey to Jordan to defeat al-Qaeda affiliates and splinter groups and persuading that community to rejoin reformed states in Iraq and Syria whose security forces can thereafter provide the help it needs to keep al-Qaeda from returning.
Meeting this challenge requires centering operations within the Sunni Arab community rather than strengthening Shi’a and Kurdish forces that are alien and threatening to that community. A strategy of basing in Kurdistan and Shi’a Iraq and providing air support to Kurdish troops and ISF forces intermingled with Shi’a militias and Iranian advisers may achieve some initial successes, but will ultimately fail. The prospect of Kurdish domination over Ninewa Province, including Mosul, and of the permanent Kurdish seizure of Kirkuk, could well spark an ethnic Arab-Kurdish war. ISIS has been working actively to stoke those ethnic tensions inorder to provoke precisely such a conflict, which would allow it to embed itself more deeply among an embattled Arab populace. Merely strengthening Iraqi Security Forces that are rightly seen as Shi’a dominated and militia-infiltrated may also achieve short-term gains, but at the cost of setting conditions for an even larger Sunni Arab mobilization against perceived Shi’a domination that would create new opportunities for ISIS or a successor group to establish itself.
The Sunni Arabs in Iraq and Syria are the only local partners who can be decisive in the fight against ISIS and JN. Our strategy must focus on making direct contact with them, coordinating our efforts with them, building their strength against ISIS, and finding out the terms on which they would be willing to reintegrate into reformed states in Iraq and Syria. They are the pivot of the entire effort and must be at the heart of every phase of our strategy.
The Kagans are clear-eyed about the opposition in Syria:
The moderate elements of the opposition have been especially degraded because they are fighting against both the regime and ISIS. They have also received far less international support than either of their opponents. JN [the al Qaeda affiliate in Syria] has penetrated the opposition thoroughly and interwoven itself with opposition forces across the theater. JN has close operational ties with other Salafist-jihadist groups such as Ahrar al-Sham (HASI), although many other opposition groups also cooperate with Jabhat al-Nusra in battle without necessarily being aligned with JN. This includes an array of groups ranging from members of the Islamic Front to groups falling under the umbrella of the moderate Free Syrian Army (FSA).
Jabhat al-Nusra’s fighting prowess keeps it central to opposition efforts in the southern Deraa and Quneitra fronts as well as the Hama and Idlib fronts. It is also influential in the fight for Damascus. Jabhat al-Nusra is quietly cultivating influence within rebel governance and shaping the opposition where it can, although it appears that most opposition groups are cooperating with JN opportunistically rather than ideologically.
Their strategy requires the commitment of substantial ground forces:
It is impossible to identify precisely the forces that will be required for all of Phase I, let alone for subsequent phases, before operations have commenced. The activities recommended in this paper will likely require the deployment of not more than 25,000 ground forces supported by numerous air and naval assets. The bulk of those forces will likely be comprised of various kinds of units supporting a much more limited number of Special Forces and other assets deployed in small groups with tribes, opposition forces, and Iraqi Security Forces. This plan does not envisage U.S. combat units conducting unilateral operations (apart from targeted attacks against individual enemy leaders and small groups) or leading clearing operations. It requires some combat units in the support and quick reaction force (QRF) roles described above.
And there will be substantial risks:
. . . the dispersed footprint of U.S. troops required by this plan and the immaturity of the theater support infrastructure exposes US soldiers to a high risk of capture and kidnapping. Individual U.S. teams are likely to find themselves threatened by overwhelming enemy force at times. Casualties, hostages, and beheading videos are extremely likely. These risks must be mitigated through the deployment of robust helicopter support and quick response forces. Such forces will greatly increase the total “boots-on-the-ground” requirement, which many will find distasteful. It is essential to keep in mind, however, that withholding those forces and capabilities in order to keep the U.S. troop presence inside Iraq and Syria below some arbitrary number enormously increases the risk to the small number of Americans who would be actually operating with indigenous forces.
|Monday, September 15th, 2014|
|Everyone a mint
Subject: Re: Tim May;Anarcho-phony,cheap fraud and despicable ,
Date: 2001-12-25 4:07:17
>>| Anarchism is a variant of socialism > > an7ar7chism (nr-kzm) > n. >
The theory or doctrine that all forms of government are oppressive > and
undesirable and should be abolished.
Which is self-referential (it basically says that even anarchism will
Indeed.Especially where delegates are not rotated and revocable.See jamesd
for the dangers anarchism in practise.
The Friedman/May "anarcho-capitalist" crock of shit would opress like
HELL.BE AWARE! Dont let him get away with all thet CALCer crap here.Its
>>so7cial7ism (ssh-lzm) > n. > Any of various theories or systems of
social organization in which > the means of producing and distributing
goods is owned collectively > or by a centralized government that often
plans and controls the > economy. > > Pick one, stick to it.
Which raises an interesting question. How do you get everyone to behave the
same way with the same levels of consideration under anarchism without some
sort of universal standard (a central organization)? Who gets to decide it?
What happens if somebody decides they don't want to play nice? How do you
pay for it? <<
APster.Central organization,summits,world federations are all scalable and
not to be feared as long as all democratically elected delegates are
revocable and rotated.Its not rocket science.Everyone a remailer,(they will
be essential,as will crypto)Everyone a mint,presumably when all the drug
war prisoners are released there will be room for fraudsters.
Everyone an APster,.Justice by consensus complements then overtakes common
law.Everyone a jury.
Warlords in the SW Quadrant? Put together a 'sandline' army and knock them
out.Commo's opressing bears?
Lets all vote on nuking commie HQ.Operation soft drill International,only
there will be no more 'nations'.
Can you dig it? CAN YOU DIG IT? Anarchy is not just a job; Its an Adventure.
|Thursday, September 11th, 2014|
Mr. President, ISIS Is 100 Percent Islamic
By Daniel Pipes
September 10, 2014
In a televised address on how to address the Islamic State this evening, President Barack Obama declared the organization variously known as ISIS or ISIL to be “not Islamic.”
In making this preposterous claim, Obama joins his two immediate predecessors in pronouncing on what is not Islamic. Bill Clinton called the Taliban treatment of women and children “a terrible perversion of Islam.” George W. Bush deemed that 9/11 and other acts of violence against innocents “violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith.”
None of the three has any basis for such assertions. To state the obvious: As non-Muslims and politicians, rather than Muslims and scholars, they are in no position to declare what is Islamic and what is not. As Bernard Lewis, a leading American authority of Islam, notes: “It is surely presumptuous for those who are not Muslims to say what is orthodox and what is heretical in Islam.”
Indeed, Obama compounds his predecessors’ errors and goes further: Clinton and Bush merely described certain actions (treatment of women and children, acts of violence against innocents) as un-Islamic, but Obama has dared to declare an entire organization (and quasi-state) to be “not Islamic.”
The only good thing about this idiocy? At least it’s better than the formulation by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (known as CAIR) which has the nerve to call the Islamic State “anti-Islamic.”
In the end, though, neither U.S. presidents nor Islamist apologists fool people. Anyone with eyes and ears realizes that the Islamic State, like the Taliban and al-Qaeda before it, is 100 percent Islamic. And most Westerners, as indicated by detailed polling in Europe, do have eyes and ears. Over time, they are increasingly relying on common sense to conclude that the group is indeed profoundly Islamic.
|Wednesday, September 10th, 2014|
Five people in a situation where three have been caught stealing 20K from two. To fix this its decided the three guilty parties contribute 6,666 each to make a pool of 19, 998. That is then divided between the two victims.
This may be too neat for some who could decide to pay some 'Danegeld" - a kickback of 2 or three K here or there. Crime's not supposed to pay but of course it does.
|Thursday, September 4th, 2014|
Julian Assange’s war on women Published: September 4, 2014
In his fight against sex-crime allegations, Julian Assange showed no concern for the well-being of women around the world.
Let’s call his four-year misinformation campaign “Collateral Rape.”
His human-rights lawyer — before he hired George Clooney’s fiancée — argued that it isn’t illegal to trick a woman into unprotected sex. If a woman objects to sex without a condom, if the man uses force to pin her down, it can’t be considered a crime if she gives up and gives in, according to the lawyer, who now handles human-rights issues for the United Nations.
Assange has much support in developing countries, and his supporters laughed at the idea that a man could be required to use a condom. But women’s right to say no to sex without a condom is crucial to the AIDS epidemic, population control and women’s health.
Assange founded WikiLeaks, a website for whistleblowers. In April 2010, it released “Collateral Murder,” a documentary on U.S. Army gunmen killing two Reuters journalists, whom they mistook for Iraqi combatants.
That August in Sweden, two volunteers for WikiLeaks went to police. One said she agreed to sex with Assange, but only if he used a condom. She said he had difficulty having sex with a condom on. The next morning, she said, she awoke to find him having sex with her without a condom. The other woman said she wanted to have sex with him initially, but he was rude and rough. She struggled as he lay on top of her, pinning her arms and forcing her legs open. He finally asked what was wrong, and she said she wanted to use a condom. He let her retrieve one, but she believes he broke it intentionally.
In July, a Swedish court upheld his international arrest warrant, saying there was probable cause of rape and molestation. The Australian has avoided extradition by holing up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. He recently suggested he would leave “soon,” but apparently not for Sweden.
His misinformation campaign began early. When the accusations first became public, Assange lied, saying he didn’t know who the women were. Next, he suggested the Pentagon had set him up. A supporter published an article blaming the CIA. His British attorney at the time called the case a honey trap (but later said he was misquoted). He argued Assange’s only crime was “sex by surprise,” which was illegal in Sweden. Actually, no such law exists. A British court ruled that the accusations against Assange would constitute rape and molestation in both Britain and Sweden.
The most important misdirect has been the suggestion that Sweden had no interest in prosecuting him until he released government secrets. His Swedish lawyer claimed no one tried to interview Assange before he left for London at the end of September 2010. In court, however, he said he realized later that the prosecutor had contacted him in an attempt to interview Assange, but the lawyer wasn’t able to notify Assange. A British judge called this “a deliberate attempt to mislead the court,” and the Swedish Bar Association issued a warning to the lawyer.
There was discussion about Assange returning in October 2010. Meanwhile, he was feuding with associates, who wanted more time to go through documents on the Iraq war, in hopes of protecting people. Assange went ahead and released the documents that month. After he failed to return to Sweden, an arrest warrant was issued in November, and Assange then released the U.S. diplomatic cables. His celebrity was cemented.
His lawyers have never presented evidence of conspiracy. In a British court, the human-rights lawyer said he wasn’t accusing the women of any wrongdoing, and he didn’t challenge the idea that the women found the sex “disturbing.” By then, however, Assange supporters had harassed the women, publishing their private information, and driving them into hiding.
Governments aren’t the only source of human-rights abuses. Supporters of WikiLeaks need to acknowledge that women’s rights are human rights, too.
Suzie Siegel was a reporter and editor at The Tampa Tribune from 1988-1999. FROMhttp://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-commentary/julian-assanges-war-on-women-20140904/
|Nxt then maidsafe then Ethereum
State of the horse-race
"...Just when people were getting used to the idea that bitcoin might not be a boom-and-bust fad destined for failure, entirely new applications of the technology have joined digital currency on stage.
Crypto 2.0 – also know as cryptography 2.0, decentralized applications, or, popularly, as bitcoin 2.0 – is the application of block chain or distributed ledger technology to things other than digital currency. The block chain offers the ability to facilitate decentralized ownership and store, transfer and process information in a decentralized, programmable way. Many consider that innovation to be the true value of this technology.
In May, New York-based investment firm Ledra Capital took to Twitter to crowdsource a list of what kinds of information the block chain could be used for. Currency transactions, of course, topped the list. But, it was followed by things like stocks, bonds, mortgages, land titles, gun permits, contracts, votes, bets, trademarks, data storage, domain names, proof of authorship and much, much more.
As Robby Dermody, co-founder of Counterparty, told CoinDesk:
“Bitcoin can be used to pay for things like a cup of coffee, but that’s not bitcoin’s ‘killer app’. To the average customer it’s just as easy to pay with their credit card. A killer app would need to offer massive advantages in another area.”
A community of developers and entrepreneurs recognize this notion and have been busy building out many crypto 2.0 concepts. Dominik Zynis, the former head of business development at Mastercoin, commented on the significance of this movement to CoinDesk, saying:
“We ought to be paying very close attention to crypto 2.0 because bitcoin has redefined how we launch web services.”
Zynis believes crypto 2.0 companies are laying the foundation for a new generation of “secure and scalable Internet applications” that will be more resilient to hacking, fraud, scalability and privacy problems.
Bitcoin’s role as a digital currency is still a work in progress, both at the code and implementation level, as well as on the consumer and institutional adoption side. Still, the wider impact of distributed ledger technology is beginning to rapidly take shape. Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, illustrated the movement’s broader vision to CoinDesk, adding:
“I think now might be the time when we have just enough cryptographic, crypto-economic building blocks to finally make a proper shot at advancing a radically different vision for Internet architecture and society.”
Rise of the decentralized exchange
A year ago it might have been hard to believe that in just 12 month’s time, a publicly traded company would be openly exploring the possibility of launching a cryptosecurity on a decentralized asset exchange.
Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne has been outspoken in his support of digital currency, and he recently told CoinDesk that Overstock intends to figure out how to launch a cryptosecurity so other companies can use their system to raise funds. Overstock published a wiki on 29th July that currently details 12 organizations that have either launched decentralized exchanges or are building them.
Among them, Counterparty, NXT and BitShares have exchanges that are operational right now. Counterparty has been live since January and NXT’s Asset Exchange since May, while BitShare’s platform is only a few weeks old. Each exchange’s implementation differs in various ways, but they all share common features, namely the ability to create and trade user-defined assets without the need for a centralized third party.
Company shares are an obvious application of these platforms. On NXT’s Asset Exchange, for instance, where more than 220 user-defined assets have already been created, digital currency exchange service Coinomat has issued a cryptoasset that offers shareholders a 1.5% dividend of the company’s weekly profits. This is really an example of a smart contract that is automatically confirmed and processed over a block chain.
Other current examples of block chain implementations include the Digital Tangible Trust, which offers a tradable gold-backed cryptoasset. Non-traditional assets are also emerging, like those being created by MyPowers, whose digital tokens allow people to buy and trade brand equity in artists and organizations. Other projects are moving beyond assets, like Pavilion, which is planning to utilize block chain technology to sign and publicly publish contracts.
Future goals for cryptoassets include smart property linked to physical assets; imagine a rental car whose key was tradable as a token on a decentralized exchange and downloadable to a fob that would unlock the vehicle. There are also plans to launch what are called decentralized autonomous companies (DACs) – namely by projects like BitShares – which operate autonomously on top of a block chain and earn profit for shareholders.
Decentralized applications will hide the block chain
Beyond assets, there have been efforts to utilize the block chain as a way to store data. Namecoin, an attempt to create a decentralized domain name registry outside the control of ICANN, was arguably the second implementation of block chain technology after digital cash transactions. More recently, efforts like MaidSafe and Storj have completed fundraising rounds.
MaidSafe is attempting to use the bitcoin block chain to create a fully decentralized internet by sharing processing and memory power across a distributed network. Its April crypto-crowdsale notably raised $7m in five hours, although, due to the poor liquidity of the Mastercoin it received, it soon revised that number to $5.5m.
Storj completed its crypto-crowdsale on 20th August, raising 910 BTC. The Storj platform offers online storage similar to Dropbox or Google Drive, but does so over a distributed network. Utilizing the bitcoin block chain, Storj allows users to buy available disk space on the network, and in addition, allows users with free storage space to sell it to those in need.
Shawn Wilkinson, founder of Storj and a bitcoin developer, noted the value of expanded applications of the block chain, saying:
“Essentially you can take the technology from bitcoin, which is a $5bn–$6bn industry, and apply it to an existing area like cloud storage, which is a $150bn dollar industry.”
With applications like Storj, Wilkinson pointed out, you move past things like regulation, public perception, price volatility and the complexity of the underlying technology. Decentralized applications provide a user interface whose back-end could be a traditional network but happens to be a distributed one.
Sidechains, treechains and a question of blockchains
One important point of contention within the crytpo 2.0 space is what block chain this next generation of implementations should be built on top of. In one camp are the organizations like Ethereum and BitShares that are building their own, entirely new block chains on top of which their platforms will operate.
In June, bitcoin core developer Gavin Andresen addressed the Ethereum project in a blog post and suggested that Ethereum’s intentions to create a new proof of work system and currency seemed extraneous at first blush.
“Bitcoin already provides a global currency and distributed ledger – there is no need to reinvent those wheels. Combining real-world information with bitcoin is where things start to get really interesting.”
Alternatively, BitShares uses a mechanism called delegated proof-of-stake (DPOS), where stakeholders delegate their voting power to 101 delegates that take turns updating BitShares block chain. Distributed proof-of- helps prevent known risks of proof-of-work, including risk of a 51% attack.
Other crypto 2.0 initiative are seeking to adapt the bitcoin block chain to scale more effectively, be less decentralized and allow for permissionless development. One such effort is through bitcoin core developer Peter Todd’s treechain concept, which Todd is developing while working at crypto 2.0 start-up Viacoin. Side chains are another potential implementation that will allow new features to be added to the existing bitcoin block chain through new block chains that interact with it..."
Bitcoin can be thought of as an open messaging system secured by public key cryptography. In contrast to other systems protected by username and password logins, Bitcoin is secured through digital message signatures created with a unique private key. This single point of access places a very high value on the secure generation, use, and storage of private keys.http://bitzuma.com/posts/six-things-bitcoin-users-should-know-about-private-keys/
|Tuesday, September 2nd, 2014|
We're all going on a summer holiday
Fun fun fun - " A sports jacket may be worn to dinner but not trousers "
Having a Butchers Hook - " I SLAUGHTER MYSELF DAILY "
#ComfortingRemindersOfHome " Ears pierced while you wait. Pay for TWO and get another one pierced FREE! "
#YoudBeSurprised DO NOT USE THE DIVING BOARD WHEN THE SWIMMING POOL IS EMPTY
" Ladies leave your clothes here and spend the afternoon having a good time "
Time for the Drycleaners - " Drop your trousers here for best results "
" Swimming is forbidden in the absence of a savior " #NICE
" Cools and Heats. If you want one or the other please control yourself "
In case of fire do your best to alarm the hotel Porter
" Guaranteed to work throughout its useful life "
We highly recommend the Hotel tart
NO SMOOTHEN THE LION
#SochiMemories A new swimming-pool is rapidly taking shape since the contractors have thrown in the bulk of their work-force.
Our nylons cost more - but they are the best in the long run
Retweeted by professor rat
Milton Mueller @miltonmueller · 28m
Damn. Another "internet" governance forum that can't deliver internet access to most of the people here #IGF2014
Ladies are requested not to have children at the bar
Spend your honeymoon with us and we'll guarantee its the best you ever had
Steak and Chops are grilled before customers.
#Timely There will be a Moscow exhibition of arts by 15,000 Soviet republic painters & sculptors. These were executed over the past 2 years.
#TinkerTailor " Ladies May Have a Fit Upstairs "
Our gifts will not last long at these prices...
How sweet - " For your convenience we recommend courteous efficient self-service "
Time for the chemistry president - " We dispense with accuracy "
Do not startle wandering horses - stop by roadside till they pass away
...Beef rashers beaten up in the country peoples fashion #TheRussiansAREcoming
Salad's a Firms own make. Limpid red-beet soup with cheesy dumplings in the form of a finger. Roasted duck let loose...
Home wanted for friendly Labrador - will eat anything. Loves children
Simply hang your order before retiring on the doorknob
Please leave your values at the front desk.
The manager has personally passed all the water served here.
Why not rent out a movie for a dull evening?
" If this is your first visit to the USSR you are welcome to it "
#RostovOntheDon " Haircuts half-price today - limit one per customer "
Allthough the Palmer Bikie Party removed a Mining Tax the Outlaw Prospectors remain politically non-aligned #OPMC
Watching An ebola-infected nurse being cared for inside a sealed tent...oh wait, no, that's president Obama. Sorry.
" Don't go into another shop to be cheated - come in here! " #RussiaMustHaveInvaded
Spotted in the Bottle-Shop - * Our wines leave you nothing to hope for *
Sign in my Grocers reads " Do not handle fruit - ask for Hillary "