Bitcoin and the first amendment

Free speech is to a degree, as in nobody can yell "fire" in a crowded theatre to cause panic if there is no danger of fire.

Bitcoin is threatening the way we transact, but in a positive way, imo. The govt has their head in a way that they think it could be funding our enemies/terrorists as a threat to our homeland security. These are the business risks most likely to overcome for future viability in this space, which is why I believe in investing in the blockchain as an opportunity. Which blockchain! I don't know, maybe I'll stick with my original stock.

Good point. You are just writing your opinion to the blockchain. Do I think this transaction is valid or do I disagree. Do I think this fork serves my interests and I'll keep writing there and the rest I'll ignore.

Bitcoin may be "kinda like grammar", we won't argue that, but "A" bitcoin isn't. It is indeed an object, a digital object but still an object.

It pertains to the threats that are real to homeland security. It will be overcome, with proper security, along with our version of free speech.

The SEC won't let me be, or let me be me, so let me see, they try to put me down on CNBC, but it feels so empty without BTC. "La la la la la! La la la la la!"

Does it meet the full definition of a grammar? Let's ask Dr Chomsky...

@K, no, a Bitcoin is most certainly not an object, in exactly the same way that the word “one” is not an object. The pixels in your screen that are used to display the word “one” are objects, but the word itself is not an object. Rather, it is a pattern that is used to convey a particular meaning. Patterns are nouns, but they are certainly not physical objects. The medium is the object. The underground wires and the com towers are objects. Bitcoins are not.

If you can uniquely identify something and manipulate it, it is an object.

A specific bitcoin most certainly is an object. It is a defined data structure that can be uniquely identified and manipulated. It has attributes and methods. It clearly meets the computer science definition of an object. If we get into dictionary definitions, it meets at least one of the definitions.

You did not specify physical object in your post. However, physicality is not necessary for it to be an object or to be regulated. The vast majority of stocks, mutual funds and etf's do not exist IRL but only exist in the digital world. Do you deny they exist? Do you deny they can be regulated?

I was using the word object in the same way as it was used in the HuffPost article that I quoted in the OP. I supposed it was used to mean a physical, tangible object, hence why they used ribbons and cars as examples. If for no other reason, I supposed it was used to convey the word’s first meaning listed in the dictionary (a material thing perceived by the senses).

In the context of a discussion about the details of the Bitcoin computer code, then I suppose a Bitcoin may be called an “object” in the vernacular of computer scientists.

Given that I am using the plain, and first, meaning of the word “object,” I’m pretty sure I’m still correct to say that a Bitcoin is not an object.

Also I never said anything about mere regulation. The question is whether or not our government can make the use of Bitcoin an illegal act without violating the first amendment of the constitution; not merely imposing regulations.

“This court can find no meaningful difference between computer language, particularly high-level languages as defined above, and German or French....Like music and mathematical equations, computer language is just that, language, and it communicates information either to a computer or to those who can read it...”

-Judge Patel, April 15, 1996

This is a complex subject and huffington post is using poor examples. The constitution is clear about the authority of the federal government WRT to currency. Further, it is theoretical since the federal government has not made bitcoin use illegal.

There is well established law and precedent in courts regarding physical alternate currencies such as liberty dollars and foreign currency. A bitcoin may not physically look like a real coin but its intent is clearly the same and that is enough to give Congress the authority to regulate its use including forbidding it. Congress has delegated its authority in this area to various regulatory agencies

however, the last time I explored this, bitcoin most likely was a securities contract and not a currency under US law. Simply calling something a currency does not make it one. As a security contract, the federal government has the authority under interstate commerce and various import/export powers to regulate the sale/purchase or import/export of bitcoins. WRT to intrastate use, that might be left to the individual states. Again, the lack of physical existence is not important.

I was an early miner of bitcoins until I took some contracts with financial services firms and my investments are closely monitored and many investment options are closed to me. I still peak in as there are many interesting computer science problems in blockchain technology

After four years and one regulatory change, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that software source code was speech protected by the First Amendment and that the government's regulations preventing its publication were unconstitutional.

A Bitcoin is NOT a language.

You clearly do not understand the difference between source code and bitcoin. I will stop trying.

Of course not, A Bitcoin is a unit of account. A meter is a unit of distance. A gram is a unit of mass. A barn is a serious unit of area used by nuclear physicists to quantify the scattering or absorption cross-section of very small particles, such as atomic nuclei.

Can the government ban the use of barns by physicists to communicate about their research?

K, you clearly haven’t thought about this long enough, you should try harder.

But I don’t want to antagonize you, so I really shouldn’t say that.

I think I see the problem, You confuse the technology with the product.

I think your last comment gives you away, You clearly do want to antagonize me.

Bitcoin is near and dear to me. I stopped mining bitcoin five years ago due to regulatory reasons. I want it to succeed and I believe misinformation is a bigger threat than government intervention.

I don't expect substantive replies to my questions. I think it important people answer those questions for themselves before investing in any VC.

What are your opinions on the SEC and CFTC decisions on cryptocurrencies and ICO's. Do you think the court decisions on alternate currencies such as the Liberty will apply to cryptocurrencies? Do you think we should adapt distributed ledger technologies into non-cryptocurrency systems? If we do, do you think that these technologies can and will be regulated?

My final comment on this will be to those that actually are interested in virtual currencies, don't take any advice on this board. Educate yourself on what they really are from the experts. Research the SEC, IRS and other regulatory bodies opinions and decisions on VC in general and specific VC before you invest.

The government can and does ban gambling. It can and does ban Ponzi schemes. It can and does ban unregistered securities. It can and does ban people who try to create their own currencies.

SJG

@SJG: the government can and does violate its own laws. Bitcoin can and will survive despite this. A police state might slow it down but it won't stop it. But we aren't prepared to go that far, so anything else is hardly even a speed bumpt.

Well certainly the Internet makes it very hard to enforce, just like the laws against gambling. But it could be done, like by going after some of the bag men, VISA? Mastercard? Declare the debts null and void.

Wouldn't it be more fun to save up some money and just play a few hands of poker with Juice? Of course I would be expecting to lose it all very quickly. But it would still be a tremendous learning experience, and with no bullshit.

SJG

Hey Negrita youtube.com

SJG Coin, now on the market. Don't pass up your chance to get rich! i.ebayimg.com

@SJG demonstrating he has absolutely no understanding of how Bitcoin works. But still talking like he is an expert on the subject. All his usual MO. Nothing new to see here!

"But it could be done, like by going after some of the bag men, VISA? Mastercard? Declare the debts null and void."

• what?

@SJG has no idea how the blockchain works. But he'll follow his usual pattern. Think he is the ultimate expert about it without knowing anything. Make some glaringly stupid statements like the one FTS just quoted and get called down on them. Then read a 15 minute article somewhere and try again. Again get called out for knowing nothing again. Rinse and repeat 100 times.

Notice that Dougster no longer talks about the stock market and the boom of 2015?

How bitcoin works: i.ebayimg.com

SJG

Notice how @SJG is a complete faggot?

Dougster, I understand markets just as well as you do. We both have learned from the same sorts of people, heirs to Carlo Ponzi

SJG

amazon.com

SJG: " I understand markets just as well as you do."

As clearly evidence by your excellent market calls over the year. E.g. in Feb 2016 when you said the crash you had been calling for had finally arrived. Turned out that you spoke that just a few days before the bottom.

You don't understand anything, @SJG. Don't understand people. Don't understand computers. Don't understand math. Don't understand politics. Only thing you may understand is how to be the biggest faggot possible.

Dougster understands people, just like P.T. Barnum did, just Carlo Ponzi did, and just like Bernie Madoff did.

SJG

Truck Stop Strippers youtube.com

How Capitalism is Destroying Itself youtube.com

youtube.com

Gimme Shelter youtube.com

Neil Young and Pearl Jam - Rockin' In The Free World youtube.com

Syrian arrested today for purchasing Bitcoin and transferring to ISIS!

The threat is real, and the solutions are too.