ISIS scenario - Assume: Gavin Andresen and/or Daniel Larimar are arrested

[Ben Mason]

Never forget that BitShares is code + community. Without either one you get nothing. If BitShares evolved into something that went against our principals (and I don't for a nanosecond believe that Dan or Stan would ever be the architects of such a change) then the community can either fire dev delegates and replace or fork the BitShares code.

The community of people who value BitShares for it's integrity will grow.  How could it be otherwise? 

[jakub]

Damn I sure hope BitShares doesn't grow into itBit!!!!! Can you say elite takeover? I want BItShares to stay as far away from itBit as possible.
I consider working with itBit to be the equivalent to working with the FED, or Rockefeller or Rothchild -- the elite, who have enslaved us and wish to maintain their control over us.
For any of you that have not looked into the movers & shakers of itBit I encourage you to do so. They are people who are NOT friends to the BitShares mission.
WE MUST NOT LET THAT HAPPEN!!!!!!

Exactly. itBit = Bilderberg, same thing.
 
I feel Dan and Stan's heads are in the right place. I've heard nothing from them, heading up most of the core devs too, that would indicate that they have any intent on exposing our services to such regulation. If we continue to decentralize, we become completely impervious to attack.
 
I know so many of us want direct onramps with fiat, but as soon as we open that door, watch those parasitic bats come flying in. They are not welcome in OUR new world (order?).
 
Bank to kraken to bitcoin to metaexchange has been working for me just fine thanx. For me, it's worth the extra effort.

You got it all wrong. This kind of thinking leads to nowhere.

itBit is good news because it means BTC (and the whole blockchain concept) starts being recognized by the big fish as something valuable and potentially profitable.
And to have mass adoption BitShares needs to function within the legal framework and be easy to use - otherwise it will continue to be niche as it is now.

We're all adults here and each is entitled to their own opinion, no matter how foolish and uninformed it may be.

What does it matter if we're successful but controlled or heavily influenced by the same power brokers that control the mainstream financial markets? I'll tell you it means the BitShares ecosystem has failed to provide a freedom loving service Satoshi Nakamoto envisioned when he invented bitcoin, ideals & principles the mainstream populace cares little about and apparently a few here don't either.

I don't have "it all wrong", those that want mainstream adoption quickly by getting in bed with the minions hired to keep the slaves in line do. Get a clue! We must NOT take any VC money from anyone that seeks to dominate BitShares, steer it into the hands of regulators or mold it into something that can be centrally controlled. It may not start out that way but it will end up there if BitShares is funded by organizations like itBit. If you want that crap go play in the existing manipulated markets or get a bank account. No reason to screw up our nice clean sandbox.

These tactics that reduce crypto's marketcap and apply downward pressure on it are the same as a big supplier dropping prices at a loss in order to capture the market and drive competition into insolvency.  The question has always been, do we sell out, compromise our principles just to gain adoption, or remain true to them and preserve hope for financial freedom?

If it is decided (either by decree or majority of shareholders that care only about profit and little about principles) to embrace regulation, then let it be done in a new chain and leave the core of the existing BitShares chain untouched by FinCen, AML and all other considerations that are contrary to decentralization and financial freedom. Go build it and let them come... somewhere else.

Frankly, if you don't care about the foundational principles that launched bitcoin and live on in the heart and soul of BitShares then you are in the wrong place. People that don't think about the bigger picture and refuse to learn from history and the reasons blockchain technology is a tool we desperately need to reverse the stranglehold of control over the planet need to step back and allow those more responsible to steer this ship, rather than the cannon fodder that just got out of basic training.

I shouldn't have said "you got it all wrong". I apologize for that.

itBit is nothing more than a BTC gateway, all it does is offer a fully compliant way to enter the world of crypto-currencies for those who prefer to do this way.
And I think we all agree that BitShares gateways need to be able to operate within the current legal framework, including AML and KYC. It does not mean all gateways have to do it this way, it only means that those who want to comply are able to do so. Otherwise we can forget about much bigger adoption than we have now.

For me the main principle of BitShares is freedom and privacy. And those principles are baked into BitShares source code and nobody can change that (at least without getting 50% of the voting power). Even if people like itBit become BitShares VC they cannot change those principles, all they can do is add legitimacy to BitShares gateways which is a good thing.

BitShares are strong enough to accommodate anybody, including people from itBit. If they get 50% of delegate power I'd be worried as you are and sell my BTS.

[38PTSWarrior]

I believe in love and not in law. The regulators are only strong because they hide behind their laws. They have no heart and act out of fear or are selfish bad people. They accept collateral damage, psychpaths for sure. Because any idiot with a high school degree can study, noone looks for integrity or sanity. But i fear that anyone here has to go to jail. I dont want to be responsible for that. The earthlings are waiting for a way to change and bitshares is the missing puzzle. We have to go from door to door and tell the people about us. Once there are enough people, it will become a critical mass and then the regulators will be seen and judged for what they are. What we have become. We have to tell them that we dont feel angry about them. Many people just dont know that it is possible to change.

[fuzzy]

These tactics that reduce crypto's marketcap and apply downward pressure on it are the same as a big supplier dropping prices at a loss in order to capture the market and drive competition into insolvency. The question has always been, do we sell out, compromise our principles just to gain adoption, or remain true to them and preserve hope for financial freedom?

 

The cabal that currently controls the world is psychopathic and does not care about you. 
Words of wisdom from a legend I sorely miss:  https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=Y0lNVZyXKI7ZoASD1YHQBQ&url=http://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DeVbgeFgIBms&ved=0CB8QtwIwAQ&usg=AFQjCNGq7Y3hXxJS1TV9aUKSXyGE18t7dA

[Thom]

Damn I sure hope BitShares doesn't grow into itBit!!!!! Can you say elite takeover? I want BItShares to stay as far away from itBit as possible.
I consider working with itBit to be the equivalent to working with the FED, or Rockefeller or Rothchild -- the elite, who have enslaved us and wish to maintain their control over us.
For any of you that have not looked into the movers & shakers of itBit I encourage you to do so. They are people who are NOT friends to the BitShares mission.
WE MUST NOT LET THAT HAPPEN!!!!!!

Exactly. itBit = Bilderberg, same thing.
 
I feel Dan and Stan's heads are in the right place. I've heard nothing from them, heading up most of the core devs too, that would indicate that they have any intent on exposing our services to such regulation. If we continue to decentralize, we become completely impervious to attack.
 
I know so many of us want direct onramps with fiat, but as soon as we open that door, watch those parasitic bats come flying in. They are not welcome in OUR new world (order?).
 
Bank to kraken to bitcoin to metaexchange has been working for me just fine thanx. For me, it's worth the extra effort.

You got it all wrong. This kind of thinking leads to nowhere.

itBit is good news because it means BTC (and the whole blockchain concept) starts being recognized by the big fish as something valuable and potentially profitable.
And to have mass adoption BitShares needs to function within the legal framework and be easy to use - otherwise it will continue to be niche as it is now.

We're all adults here and each is entitled to their own opinion, no matter how foolish and uninformed it may be.

What does it matter if we're successful but controlled or heavily influenced by the same power brokers that control the mainstream financial markets? I'll tell you it means the BitShares ecosystem has failed to provide a freedom loving service Satoshi Nakamoto envisioned when he invented bitcoin, ideals & principles the mainstream populace cares little about and apparently a few here don't either.

I don't have "it all wrong", those that want mainstream adoption quickly by getting in bed with the minions hired to keep the slaves in line do. Get a clue! We must NOT take any VC money from anyone that seeks to dominate BitShares, steer it into the hands of regulators or mold it into something that can be centrally controlled. It may not start out that way but it will end up there if BitShares is funded by organizations like itBit. If you want that crap go play in the existing manipulated markets or get a bank account. No reason to screw up our nice clean sandbox.

These tactics that reduce crypto's marketcap and apply downward pressure on it are the same as a big supplier dropping prices at a loss in order to capture the market and drive competition into insolvency.  The question has always been, do we sell out, compromise our principles just to gain adoption, or remain true to them and preserve hope for financial freedom?

If it is decided (either by decree or majority of shareholders that care only about profit and little about principles) to embrace regulation, then let it be done in a new chain and leave the core of the existing BitShares chain untouched by FinCen, AML and all other considerations that are contrary to decentralization and financial freedom. Go build it and let them come... somewhere else.

Frankly, if you don't care about the foundational principles that launched bitcoin and live on in the heart and soul of BitShares then you are in the wrong place. People that don't think about the bigger picture and refuse to learn from history and the reasons blockchain technology is a tool we desperately need to reverse the stranglehold of control over the planet need to step back and allow those more responsible to steer this ship, rather than the cannon fodder that just got out of basic training.

[julian1]

If legislators/regulators/prosecutors ever go after Bitshares, it will be a signal that we are relevant and gaining ground in the market. Of course, that doesn't mean we should unnecessarily antagonize tptb.
 

[38PTSWarrior]

It*s thrilling to think about who *they* are who plan all these things. In the other thread i saw that statement of r. Reagan a week before They killed him. Scary stuff. Who are these hidden people?

[hadrian]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K73gNKjFx0I
^ I think they are insane and are the types of personalities that would choose to be "Kings in a world of Ash" as opposed to "Citizens in a world of Plenty".  And they have a strangle hold on our entire ecosystem. 

I think we should do everything we can to help protect them.

"There is nothing good that can come by going through their mechanisms" ~Catherin Austin Fitts~

Thanks for the link fuzzy.
This is heavy stuff. If only more people could open their eyes to these kinds of issues.

Catherine said there are three things that could happen:

• War
• Collapse
• Change

I wonder if the new tools being created (crypto stuff like BitShares) could help steer things enough toward the third option of 'change'...

[merivercap]

Damn I sure hope BitShares doesn't grow into itBit!!!!! Can you say elite takeover? I want BItShares to stay as far away from itBit as possible.

I consider working with itBit to be the equivalent to working with the FED, or Rockefeller or Rothchild -- the elite, who have enslaved us and wish to maintain their control over us.

For any of you that have not looked into the movers & shakers of itBit I encourage you to do so. They are people who are NOT friends to the BitShares mission.

WE MUST NOT LET THAT HAPPEN!!!!!!

Thom,
itBit seems like another Coinbase and mainly a tech startup.  Any company like itBit that adopts Bitshares will be very good for the ecosystem.  As long as the regulatory features are optional and used mainly for integration with gateways the independence of the ecosystem will be fine.  I prefer to use the ecosystem without the regulatory burden and as long as those options remain I'm fine with it.  We can't get too carried away about having people from the mainstream establishment affiliated with Bitshares or Bitshare companies.  It's actually a good sign that many high-profile figures from the establishment institutions see the writing on the wall in the existing financial industry. 

[jakub]

Damn I sure hope BitShares doesn't grow into itBit!!!!! Can you say elite takeover? I want BItShares to stay as far away from itBit as possible.
I consider working with itBit to be the equivalent to working with the FED, or Rockefeller or Rothchild -- the elite, who have enslaved us and wish to maintain their control over us.
For any of you that have not looked into the movers & shakers of itBit I encourage you to do so. They are people who are NOT friends to the BitShares mission.
WE MUST NOT LET THAT HAPPEN!!!!!!

Exactly. itBit = Bilderberg, same thing.
 
I feel Dan and Stan's heads are in the right place. I've heard nothing from them, heading up most of the core devs too, that would indicate that they have any intent on exposing our services to such regulation. If we continue to decentralize, we become completely impervious to attack.
 
I know so many of us want direct onramps with fiat, but as soon as we open that door, watch those parasitic bats come flying in. They are not welcome in OUR new world (order?).
 
Bank to kraken to bitcoin to metaexchange has been working for me just fine thanx. For me, it's worth the extra effort.

You got it all wrong. This kind of thinking leads to nowhere.

itBit is good news because it means BTC (and the whole blockchain concept) starts being recognized by the big fish as something valuable and potentially profitable.
And to have mass adoption BitShares needs to function within the legal framework and be easy to use - otherwise it will continue to be niche as it is now.

[Tuck Fheman]

Put in all the regulatory features in to the blockchain, and someone can file to be an official gateway/asset issuer ( like itBit did in bitcoin http://www.coindesk.com/itbit-25-million-series-a/) using bitshares as an alternative trading system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_trading_system). That will make marketcap explode, as it is decentralized and removes this legal liability. That is WAY cheaper (and will make money) compared to destroying bitshares market cap and paying legal defense fees.

Good points.

[Tuck Fheman]

This speculation is ridiculous. No one gets arrested for simply writing software.

I'm pretty sure one of Barrett Brown's charges was for posting a link. So, not so ridiculous after all?

If you piss off a government, you could get picked up for just about any law you violate (pssst, there are a lot of them), and as we know, every law is enforced by a fine, which is enforced by jail, which is enforced by physical aggression that escalates up to murder.

So, be careful out there!

[kenCode]

Damn I sure hope BitShares doesn't grow into itBit!!!!! Can you say elite takeover? I want BItShares to stay as far away from itBit as possible.
I consider working with itBit to be the equivalent to working with the FED, or Rockefeller or Rothchild -- the elite, who have enslaved us and wish to maintain their control over us.
For any of you that have not looked into the movers & shakers of itBit I encourage you to do so. They are people who are NOT friends to the BitShares mission.
WE MUST NOT LET THAT HAPPEN!!!!!!

Exactly. itBit = Bilderberg, same thing.
 
I feel Dan and Stan's heads are in the right place. I've heard nothing from them, heading up most of the core devs too, that would indicate that they have any intent on exposing our services to such regulation. If we continue to decentralize, we become completely impervious to attack.
 
I know so many of us want direct onramps with fiat, but as soon as we open that door, watch those parasitic bats come flying in. They are not welcome in OUR new world (order?).
 
Bank to kraken to bitcoin to metaexchange has been working for me just fine thanx. For me, it's worth the extra effort.

[Thom]

Damn I sure hope BitShares doesn't grow into itBit!!!!! Can you say elite takeover? I want BItShares to stay as far away from itBit as possible.

I consider working with itBit to be the equivalent to working with the FED, or Rockefeller or Rothchild -- the elite, who have enslaved us and wish to maintain their control over us.

For any of you that have not looked into the movers & shakers of itBit I encourage you to do so. They are people who are NOT friends to the BitShares mission.

WE MUST NOT LET THAT HAPPEN!!!!!!

[kenCode]

No one gets arrested for simply writing software. No one could possibly prove in court that Dan or Andresen or even Satoshi are a financial intermediary.

They don't have to. They have unlimited resources.
Let's render them obsolete.

[speedy]

This speculation is ridiculous. No one gets arrested for simply writing software. No one could possibly prove in court that Dan or Andresen or even Satoshi are a financial intermediary.

[liondani]

This is a great advantage of DPOS but if all 6(?) core devs got arrested and needed legal funds do you think that the delegate system would be able to handle it?

Is there the bitsharestalk forum viewed widely enough by the shareholders to see that a new emergency delegate is needed to be voted in?
Would current delegates donate their pay to the legal fund?

I'm sure the community would find a way to make it work but I think it would be a good idea for there to be some kind of established procedure or some kind of plan

if it happened, bitshares value would be tanked as there is a panic sale, and no number of 100% delegates would raise enough for legal fees.
It would be better to save up the legal war chest ahead of time, and do be constantly working with lawyers now (which is what the core devs have been doing).

Instead of being reactionary, why not just go forward with compliance once a "product" is viable and stabilized? Put in all the regulatory features in to the blockchain, and someone can file to be an official gateway/asset issuer ( like itBit did in bitcoin http://www.coindesk.com/itbit-25-million-series-a/) using bitshares as an alternative trading system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_trading_system). That will make marketcap explode, as it is decentralized and removes this legal liability. That is WAY cheaper (and will make money) compared to destroying bitshares market cap and paying legal defense fees.

That is tonyk's magic hand...

The  rumour is it is actually itBit !!! https://www.itbit.com/

Nice try.  

But, itbit is pretty bullish for Bitcoin and the whole sector imo.

I do not know...judge for yourself.

Ever since the time when we all thought the on/off ramps are in the pipeline last year, BM is saying that "the problem with all partners is they are startup(s) too, so they have to go through regulation step and licensing. The current once do not want extra trouble...and I do not blame them." 
UIA allowing regulatory compliance of future partners is arguable the most heavily developed feature for the last what?... any way a lot of months...
Stan start talking about an exiting times this summer, but he cannot actually talk about them. BM is exited about affiliate program + privatized bitAssets (and I guess the said UIAs).
BM talked about a week or so ago with somebody integrating BTS on their (exchange/gateway do not remember exactly).
BM gives the firs clue (in a    form) it is a gateway (at least partly).
bitBIT gets its license.
I become aware of this this rumour - itBit is the partner BM is hinting about and Stan can't talk about....

[bytemaster]

This is a great advantage of DPOS but if all 6(?) core devs got arrested and needed legal funds do you think that the delegate system would be able to handle it?

Is there the bitsharestalk forum viewed widely enough by the shareholders to see that a new emergency delegate is needed to be voted in?
Would current delegates donate their pay to the legal fund?

I'm sure the community would find a way to make it work but I think it would be a good idea for there to be some kind of established procedure or some kind of plan

if it happened, bitshares value would be tanked as there is a panic sale, and no number of 100% delegates would raise enough for legal fees.
It would be better to save up the legal war chest ahead of time, and do be constantly working with lawyers now (which is what the core devs have been doing).

Instead of being reactionary, why not just go forward with compliance once a "product" is viable and stabilized? Put in all the regulatory features in to the blockchain, and someone can file to be an official gateway/asset issuer ( like itBit did in bitcoin http://www.coindesk.com/itbit-25-million-series-a/) using bitshares as an alternative trading system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_trading_system). That will make marketcap explode, as it is decentralized and removes this legal liability. That is WAY cheaper (and will make money) compared to destroying bitshares market cap and paying legal defense fees.

[maqifrnswa]

This is a great advantage of DPOS but if all 6(?) core devs got arrested and needed legal funds do you think that the delegate system would be able to handle it?

Is there the bitsharestalk forum viewed widely enough by the shareholders to see that a new emergency delegate is needed to be voted in?
Would current delegates donate their pay to the legal fund?

I'm sure the community would find a way to make it work but I think it would be a good idea for there to be some kind of established procedure or some kind of plan

if it happened, bitshares value would be tanked as there is a panic sale, and no number of 100% delegates would raise enough for legal fees.
It would be better to save up the legal war chest ahead of time, and do be constantly working with lawyers now (which is what the core devs have been doing).

Instead of being reactionary, why not just go forward with compliance once a "product" is viable and stabilized? Put in all the regulatory features in to the blockchain, and someone can file to be an official gateway/asset issuer ( like itBit did in bitcoin http://www.coindesk.com/itbit-25-million-series-a/) using bitshares as an alternative trading system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_trading_system). That will make marketcap explode, as it is decentralized and removes this legal liability. That is WAY cheaper (and will make money) compared to destroying bitshares market cap and paying legal defense fees.

[Permie]

the Frankenstein that Dan released into the wild would crowdfund the world's best lawyers for his defense, while the bitcoin community would be blogging and ranting in their forums for somebody to help (like they are doing with their "development").

ISIS scenario would finally prove to the crypto community at large that BitShares is the most awesome MEMBERSHIP ORGANIZATION of which Dan is merely just another member with no more control than anybody else.

This is a great advantage of DPOS but if all 6(?) core devs got arrested and needed legal funds do you think that the delegate system would be able to handle it?

Is there the bitsharestalk forum viewed widely enough by the shareholders to see that a new emergency delegate is needed to be voted in?
Would current delegates donate their pay to the legal fund?

I'm sure the community would find a way to make it work but I think it would be a good idea for there to be some kind of established procedure or some kind of plan

[fuzzy]

Guess most of the core devs are located in US!
I don't think this is best location for our movement  ... but this just my personal view!

The problem is world-wide.  The banking cartels only use individual nations to:
A) syphon value through debt
B) to pass the blame away from them

We need to be VERY careful.  This stuff is very real.  Please watch the video I posted Cass (and everyone else).  She ties together the surveillance grid with the economic warfare and really shows the dangers of the system. 

This is why I get so frustrated...people blame the U.S. but we are just really being victimized (just like the rest of the world).  The ILLUSION is that we brought it on ourselves.  The truth is that the population has no choice because if they try to fight back...there are only a few choices:
1) Peacefully disobey laws (and therefore face imprisonment and hefty fines)
2) Do nothing and become slowly enslaved
3) Fight back physically (which is possibly the worst course of action because then it legitimizes the force the state uses against us)

[cass]

Guess most of the core devs are located in US!
I don't think this is best location for our movement  ... but this just my personal view!

[fuzzy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K73gNKjFx0I
^ I think they are insane and are the types of personalities that would choose to be "Kings in a world of Ash" as opposed to "Citizens in a world of Plenty".  And they have a strangle hold on our entire ecosystem. 

I think we should do everything we can to help protect them.

"There is nothing good that can come by going through their mechanisms" ~Catherin Austin Fitts~

[ronald]

The FINCEN fine to Ripple keeps me thinking and worrying how the old sovereign money system will defend their position

Lets assume Gavin Andersen and the other four core developers who have acces to the live code inside the Bitcoin protocol are (coordinated) arrested on arbitrary grounds (like  Julian Assagne) and captive for days/weeks/months and have no access to computers. What would be the impact?

Lets assume that they give NOT the live code into the core protocol to their prosecutors; the result would be that the Bitcoin protocol is defacto beheaded (ISIS scenario)
Lets assume that they give the live code; it would be devastating for Bitcoin? (i am no computer expert; so i ask this question)
Lets assume only 2 or 3 persons are arrested/captive.   Multisig solutions are counterproductive

Am i correct?


What in case of Bitshares? If DL is arrested with six core developers BitShares is beheaded? How must (and can) they defend them  against high payed lawyers and prosecutors from the old sovereign money system? If you have no back up money or lawyers you are toasted.

How funerable are Daniel Larimar and the other six core developpers?
Are they living in the same country?
Is the USA the 'safest' place to be for a core developer?

In Holland (i am Dutch) they say something as: 'to be right' is something else than 'get it right'

So my point is: the old sovereign money system can behead (like ISIS) the initiatives like Bitcoin and BitShares if they arrest/captive the key players. ISIS scenario
I hope a have it wrong.
Please your thoughts on this