Trump free speech executive order: President Trump signs …

Posted on by

Trump on campus free speech and student loan debt

President Trump announced in an executive order signing on free speech on college campuses that his administration would be looking "very seriously" at student loan debt and ways to curb it and make universities share the load.

In somewhat surprising remarks for the Republican president, Mr. Trump appeared to blame universities for the debt load, and said his administration will find ways to hold them accountable. Specifically for now, the president is directing the Education Department and Treasury Department to publish information on earnings and debt loads for every major at every institution.

"Student loan debt, I'm going to work to fix it. because it's outrageous what's happening. You're not given that fair start. You're too far down. It's not right and we're going to work very, very hard to get it fixed," the president said.

The president's executive order Thursday is meant to pressure schools to permit free speech and expression on college campuses. Mr. Trump has threatened to pull federal funding if they don't. The First Amendment already prohibits the government from quashing free speech.

The move comes as some conservative groups and activists claim conservative voices are being silenced on college campuses. Recently, a conservative activist with Turning Points U.S.A. was apparently assaulted at the University of California, Berkeley campus. The president announced at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) earlier this month that he would be signing such an order, standing alongside the alleged victim, Hayden Williams. It's unclear how Mr. Trump's order would have protected Williams.

"If they want our dollars, and we give it to them by the billions, they've got to allow people like Hayden and many other great young people and old people to speak," Mr. Trump said at CPAC. "Free speech. If they don't, it will be costly. That will be signed soon."

Mr. Trump, in talking about student debt, said he loves other people's money.

"I've always been very good with loans. I love loans. I love other people's money," Mr. Trump said.

The president said his administration is working on student loan debt.

The Department of Education and Treasury Department, he said, will be required to publish information on future earnings and debt loads for every major at every school.

"Student loan debt, I'm going to work to fix it. because it's outrageous what's happening. You're not given that fair start. You're too far down. It's not right and we're going to work very, very hard to get it fixed. But we're going to start with 43 million people in the United States are currently working to pay off student loans and we'll be talking about that very soon. We're going to work on that very soon."

The president invited a handful of students on stage to share their stories.

One young woman said her school stopped her from handing out Valentine's Day cards with religious messages on them. Another young woman said she was told to place trigger warnings around campus to share her message.

The president said taxpayer dollars shouldn't subsidize universities that quash free speech.

"Taxpayer dollars should not subsidize anti-First Amendment institutions," Mr. Trump told his audience.

Mr. Trump said this executive order is the first of a number of steps that will come.

The president launched into his remarks by saying it was an honor to have so many "impressive" young Americans at the White House.

The president praised the students in the room for standing up to political "indoctrination."

"You refuse to be silenced by powerful institutions and closed-minded critics," the president said.

Mr. Trump, taking up the mantra from conservative groups like Turning Points U.S.A. and the Young Americas Foundation, has threatened federal funding for college campuses in the past.

"If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view - NO FEDERAL FUNDS?" Mr. Trump tweeted in February 2017 after Berkeley disinvited far-right inflammatory speaker Milo Yiannopoulos. These days, Yiannopoulos has mostly been shunned from even conservative speaking engagements.

And in 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions called for a recommitment to free speech on college campuses.

Mr. Trump has been exercising his ability to say what he wishes -- a little too liberally -- according to his critics and even some Republican lawmakers who have condemned his repeated insults leveled against the late Sen. John McCain.

On Wednesday, Mr. Trump launched into his longest attack on the late P.O.W. during a stop at a tank factory in Ohio, criticizing the senator for more than five minutes of an hour-long speech. The pro-military crowd was silent as he spoke.

"I endorsed him at his request," Mr. Trump told the crowd Wednesday. "And I gave him the kind of funeral that he wanted. Which as president, I had to approve. I don't care about this - I didn't get thank you. That's OK. We sent him on the way, but I wasn't a fan of John McCain.

"So now what we could say is now, we're all set, I don't think I have to answer that question but the press keeps - 'what do you think of McCain? What do you think?' Not my kind of guy, but some people like him and I think that's great," Mr. Trump added.

Originally posted here:

Trump free speech executive order: President Trump signs ...

Trump orders colleges to back free speech or lose funding

Posted on by

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday requiring U.S. colleges to protect free speech on their campuses or risk losing federal research funding.

The new order directs federal agencies to ensure that any college or university receiving research grants agrees to promote free speech and the exchange of ideas, and to follow federal rules guiding free expression.

"Even as universities have received billions and billions of dollars from taxpayers, many have become increasingly hostile to free speech and to the First Amendment," Trump said at a White House signing ceremony. "These universities have tried to restrict free thought, impose total conformity and shut down the voices of great young Americans."

The order follows a growing chorus of complaints from conservatives who say their voices have been stifled on campuses across the U.S. Joining Trump at the ceremony were students who said they were challenged by their schools while trying to express views against abortion or in support of their faith.

Trump initially proposed the idea during a March 2 speech to conservative activists, highlighting the case of Hayden Williams, an activist who was punched in the face while recruiting for the group Turning Point USA at the University of California, Berkeley. He invoked the case again Thursday, noting that Williams was hit hard "but he didn't go down."

Under the order, colleges would need to agree to protect free speech in order to tap into more than $35 billion a year in research and educational grants.

For public universities, that means vowing to uphold the First Amendment, which they're already required to do. Private universities, which have more flexibility in limiting speech, will be required to commit to their own institutional rules.

"We will not stand idly by to allow public institutions to violate their students' constitutional rights," Trump said. "If a college or university doesn't allow you to speak, we will not give them money. It's very simple."

Enforcement of the order will be left to federal agencies that award grants, but how schools will be monitored and what types of violations could trigger a loss of funding have yet to be seen. White House officials said details about the implementation will be finalized in coming months.

Many colleges have firmly opposed the need for an executive order. Following Trump's speech, Janet Napolitano, president of the University of California, said many schools are "ground zero" for the exchange of ideas.

"We do not need the federal government to mandate what already exists: our longstanding, unequivocal support for freedom of expression," she said. "This executive order will only muddle policies surrounding free speech, while doing nothing to further the aim of the First Amendment."

The American Council on Education, which represents more than 1,700 college presidents, called the order "a solution in search of a problem."

"No matter how this order is implemented, it is neither needed nor desirable, and could lead to unwanted federal micromanagement of the cutting-edge research that is critical to our nation's continued vitality and global leadership," said Ted Mitchell, the organization's president.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who has spoken against a government answer to campus speech issues, issued a statement that only briefly mentioned free speech, and instead largely focused on another part of the order dealing with transparency in college performance data.

Her statement said students "should be empowered to pursue truth through the free exchange of all ideas, especially ideas with which they may not agree. Free inquiry is an essential feature of our democracy, and I applaud the president's continued support for America's students."

The order was supported by conservative groups including Turning Point USA, which has pushed for action on the issue. In Trump's speech, he specifically thanked Charlie Kirk, the group's founder, who has pushed for action on the issue. On Twitter, Kirk called the order "historic," adding that while harassment by campus faculty is not uncommon, "it ends today!"

Several free speech groups raised concerns about the order, including the American Civil Liberties Union, which took issue with "the partisan nature of the administration's rollout of this executive order."

The top Republican on the Senate education committee, Sen. Lamar Alexander, said he supports the push for free speech but criticized Trump's approach.

"I don't want to see Congress or the president or the department of anything creating speech codes to define what you can say on campus," said Alexander, R-Tenn. "The U.S. Constitution guarantees free speech. Federal courts define and enforce it. The Department of Justice can weigh in."

Debate over campus free speech has flared in recent years following a string of high-profile cases in which protesters shut down or heckled conservative speakers, including at UC Berkeley and Middlebury College in Vermont. Republicans called hearings on the issue when they controlled both chambers, but proposed legislation backing campus speech never made it through committee.

Some colleges leaders have said they worry the order could backfire. If a speaking event threatens to turn violent, for example, some say they might have to choose between canceling the event for safety and allowing it to continue to preserve federal funding. Some say it could force religious universities to host speakers with views that conflict with the universities' values.

Still, the order has gained support from some religious institutions including Liberty University, a Christian school in Virginia whose leaders say they denounce censorship of either the left or right.

Separate from the free speech requirement, the order also calls for several measures meant to promote transparency in the student loan industry and in how well colleges prepare students.

By January 2020, Trump is directing the Education Department to create a website where borrowers can find better information about their loans and repayment options, and he's calling on the agency to expand its College Scorecard website to include data on the graduates of individual college programs, including their median earnings, loan debt and their default rates.

Trump, a Republican, also is asking the Education Department to prepare a policy that would make sure colleges "share the financial risk" that students and the federal government take on with federal student loans.

___

Follow Collin Binkley on Twitter at https://twitter.com/cbinkley

Read more:

Trump orders colleges to back free speech or lose funding

Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker

Posted on by

Gerd allows the audience to travel to and from the future. The result remains long after the conference, when you rewind his presentations after a few years, and see it happening in front of your eyes. I had the pleasure to hire Gerd when I was at Pestana...

SPORTTV

Gerd really made a big difference to our event because when he speaks about the future changes, technology, behaviors, he worries about connecting all of these changes with the audience reality, showing that it is possible to succeed, as humans...

Tetra Pak

CommunicAsia, Asias largest ICT trade exhibition and conference is truly honored to have Gerd Leonhard as one of our keynote speakers for this year. Gerds addition to the Summit has been breathtaking and inspirational. His visionary address on...

Singapore Exhibition

Gerd made a great contribution and was a pleasure to work with on our FODM event. His session was a fantastic addition to the programme and a great success. He was delivering a great presentation about future trends.

Econsultancy [London]

Link:

Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker

PHP: Object Cloning – Manual

Posted on by

Change language: English Brazilian Portuguese Chinese (Simplified) French German Japanese Romanian Russian Spanish Turkish Other

Creating a copy of an object with fully replicated properties is not always the wanted behavior. A good example of the need for copy constructors, is if you have an object which represents a GTK window and the object holds the resource of this GTK window, when you create a duplicate you might want to create a new window with the same properties and have the new object hold the resource of the new window. Another example is if your object holds a reference to another object which it uses and when you replicate the parent object you want to create a new instance of this other object so that the replica has its own separate copy.

An object copy is created by using the clone keyword (which calls the object's __clone() method if possible). An object's __clone() method cannot be called directly.

When an object is cloned, PHP will perform a shallow copy of all of the object's properties. Any properties that are references to other variables will remain references.

__clone ( void ) : void

Once the cloning is complete, if a __clone() method is defined, then the newly created object's __clone() method will be called, to allow any necessary properties that need to be changed.

Example #1 Cloning an object

publicfunction

publicfunction

class

function

print(

print(

The above example will output:

PHP 7.0.0 introduced the possibility to access a member of a freshly cloned object in a single expression:

Example #2 Access member of freshly cloned object

format('Y');?>

The above example will outputsomething similar to:

8 years ago



  private 


}


13 years ago


I think it's relevant to note that __clone is NOT an override. As the example shows, the normal cloning process always occurs, and it's the responsibility of the __clone method to "mend" any "wrong" action performed by it.


12 years ago


public function __clone() {  foreach ($this->varName as &$a) {    foreach ($a as &$b) {      $b = clone $b;    }  }}


Note, that I was working with a multi-dimensional array and I was not using the Key=>Value pair system, but basically, the point is that if you use foreach, you need to specify that the copied data is to be accessed by reference.


11 years ago




function 


}


9 years ago


Another gotcha I encountered: like __construct and __desctruct, you must call parent::__clone() yourself from inside a child's __clone() function. The manual kind of got me on the wrong foot here: "An object's __clone() method cannot be called directly."


4 years ago




      foreach (


    public function 


  class 


    public function 


  echo 




  echo 


3 years ago




  public static 


  public function 


  public static function 


  public function 


echo 


unset(


echo 


9 years ago


1. PHP treats variables as either 'values types' or 'reference types', where the difference is supposed to be transparent. Object cloning is one of the few times when it can make a big difference. I know of no programmatic way to tell if a variable is intrinsically a value or reference type. There IS however a non-programmatic ways to tell if an object property is value or reference type:






unset($ref);var_dump($a);


?>I interpret this as the reference-count jumping from 2 straight to 0. However...


2. It IS possible to create a reference with a reference count of 1 - i.e. to convert an property from value type to reference type, without any extra references. All you have to do is declare that it refers to itself. This is HIGHLY idiosyncratic, but nevertheless it works. This leads to the observation that although the manual states that 'Any properties that are references to other variables, will remain references,' this is not strictly true. Any variables that are references, even to *themselves* (not necessarily to other variables), will be copied by reference rather than by value. 


Here's an example to demonstrate:




class ByVal{  var $prop;}


class ByRef{  var $prop;  function __construct() { $this->prop =& $this->prop; }}


$a = new ByVal;$a->prop = 1;$b = clone $a;$b->prop = 2; 


$a = new ByRef;$a->prop = 1;$b = clone $a;$b->prop = 2; 


?>


9 months ago


  public function 


2 years ago


To illustrate this process, the following example codes seems better, comparing the the original version:


class SubObject{  static $num_cons = 0;  static $num_clone = 0;


  public $construct_value;  public $clone_value;


  public function __construct() {    $this->construct_value = ++self::$num_cons;  }


  public function __clone() {    $this->clone_value = ++self::$num_clone;  }}


class MyCloneable{  public $object1;  public $object2;


  function __clone()  {    // this->object     $this->object1 = clone $this->object1;  }}


$obj = new MyCloneable();


$obj->object1 = new SubObject();$obj->object2 = new SubObject();


$obj2 = clone $obj;


print("Original Object:n");print_r($obj);echo '
';print("Cloned Object:n");print_r($obj2);


==================


the output is as below


Original Object:MyCloneable Object(  [object1] => SubObject Object    (      [construct_value] => 1      [clone_value] =>     )


  [object2] => SubObject Object    (      [construct_value] => 2      [clone_value] =>     )


)
Cloned Object:MyCloneable Object(  [object1] => SubObject Object    (      [construct_value] => 1      [clone_value] => 1    )


  [object2] => SubObject Object    (      [construct_value] => 2      [clone_value] =>     )


)


11 years ago


Keep in mind that since PHP 5.2.5, trying to clone a non-object correctly results in a fatal error, this differs from previous versions where only a Warning was thrown.


3 years ago


I believe the two functions are not quite the same. The serialize followed by deserialize method is the way I've done deep cloning in other languages (bypasses any weird clone function behavior and ensures you have a no-strings-attached copy of the object).


10 years ago


 $val) {    if(is_object($val)||(is_array($val))){      $this->{$key} = unserialize(serialize($val));    }  }}?>That will insure any object, or array that may potentially contain objects, will get cloned without using recursion or other support methods.


[EDIT BY danbrown AT php DOT net: An almost exact function was contributed on 02-DEC-2008-10:18 by (david ashe AT metabin):


 $value){      if(gettype($value)=='object'){        $this->$name= clone($this->$name);      }    }  }?>Giving credit where it's due. ~DPB][EDIT BY cmb AT php DOT net: the latter function fails to make deep copies of object arrays, and might end up with infinite recursion.]




Follow this link: 


PHP: Object Cloning - Manual

Islands for sale – Private island homes – Bankrate.com

Posted on by

Lets buy an island!

Who doesnt dream of owning an island?

Whatever your tastes, buying an island takes financial savvy and commitment, says Chris Krolow, CEO of Private Islands Inc. and executive producer and host of HGTVs Island Hunters.

Look up todays lowest mortgage rates

When getting a mortgage for that island, banks and insurance companies sometimes have issues, he says. Because many islands are small, one-of-a-kind properties, you may not have comparable properties to guide you, he adds.

But that private island of your dreams may also be less expensive than you imagine, Krolow says. I think a lot of people think a private island is beyond their means. But $500,000 is entry level with a dwelling.

Dreaming of your own isle in the sun? Here are eight islands for sale.

Photo courtesy of Richard Pietrafesa

Price: $1,395,000

Even in a crowd, Belle Island stands out.

Nestled among New Yorks famous Thousand Islands, this 1.2-acre isle was created in the early 20th century, says Richard Pietrafesa Jr., one of the islands owners. Because of that, ours is the only flat island among the 1,500 or so, he says.

In the morning, fishing boats anchor offshore, and the beaches offer great swimming, Pietrafesa says.

The islands house, built in 1988, has an open floor plan, with five bedrooms and three bathrooms. Every room has a water view, Pietrafesa says.

Belle Island has a number of docks, including one that can accommodate an 80-foot yacht, and a covered dock that can handle multiple boats, he says.

Located on the St. Lawrence Seaway, which often ices over during cold months, the islands season is April through September. At the end of the season, Pietrafesa says, you can turn the key and leave.

LOAN SEARCH: Use Bankrates LoanMatch Tool to Find the Lowest Personal Loan Rates

Photo courtesy of Kathy OBrien, Four Seasons Sothebys International Realty

Price: $1,595,000

Forget the name this sylvan island has a historic past.

In the 1940s, one previous owner planted more than 340 varieties of trees, so in the middle of the lake is this island that looks like a park, says Kathy OBrien, senior broker for Four Seasons Sothebys International Realty.

Rumors say Teddy Roosevelt stayed at the islands original lodge.

Sitting in Lake Champlain, the island has big views, rolling lawns and trails to secret beaches, OBrien says.

The lake-style house has two bedrooms, a sleeping loft, two baths and a great room with pine floors and walls of glass overlooking the water. Built in 2000, it has a two-story cathedral ceiling shaped like an inverted boat, she says.

A 1-bedroom, 1-bath, renovated caretakers bungalow was built in the 1920s, OBrien says.

The island has a generator and pulls water from the lake through a purification system, she says. Its a brief boat ride from the mainland. Its peaceful and quiet, OBrien says. Its a special spot.

Photo courtesy of John Christie, HG Christie

Price: $5,995,000

If you dream of living on a tropical island amid swaying palms, what you picture looks like Johnnys Cay.

Surrounded by turquoise water and sugar-sand beaches, the cay forms part of the Abacos chain in the Bahamas. While it feels secluded, you can take your boat and go shopping or go to lunch youre not out in the middle of nowhere, says John Christie, CEO of HG Christie.

The Caribbean-style beach house, built in the 1970s, has2 bedrooms,2 bathrooms and an open, vaulted living/kitchen area with windows and water vistas on all sides, he says. The deck wraps around the house so you have beautiful views. A guesthouse adds 2 more bedrooms and a bathroom, plus its own kitchenette.

The almost 4 1/2-acre cay has2 beaches, plus a protected marina that can accommodate boats of up to 40 feet, he says.

Its a 10-minute boat ride to the larger islands, and electricity and water are piped in from nearby Elbow Cay, he says. Thanks to the warm weather, says Christie, you could live there year-round.

Imagery Digital Globe, Map data 2015 Google

Price: $575,000

Looking for a summer getaway with old-fashioned style?

This former turn-of-the-century resort island has a 2-bedroom, 1-bath main house built in 2001, plus3 of the resorts original (and updated) camping cabins, says Dave Ritter, broker/owner of MN Lakeshore & Up North Properties.

The main house, built to resemble the vintage cabins, has a covered front porch, a family sun deck and a massive stone fireplace in the timbered great room, he says. The open living area features a kitchen with a breakfast bar and a dining area that overlooks the boat dock.

Almost 2 acres, MacKenzie Island sits in Minnesotas Turtle Lake and can be reached by boat or a footbridge, Ritter says. The 2,100-acre lake is known for boating, swimming and fishing the Department of Natural Resources stocks the lake with walleye, he says.

The island has a workshop along with the islands original boathouse, and mainland parking is included in the price, he says.

Because of the location, the island could be used year-round, Ritter says.

Photo courtesy of Rik Lobenherz, Berkshire Hathaway Home Services

Price: $325,000

The island got its name because it was a great spot to go and get away from everything and have a picnic, says Rik Lobenherz, principal with Berkshire Hathaway Home Services.

But these days, Picnic Island can accommodate more than just a simple sack lunch. It now hosts a 2-bedroom, 1-bath chalet-style cabin with a sleeping loft and full kitchen, he says.

The bungalow was built in the early 90s, and the 5 1/2-acre island has an outbuilding for tools and vehicles and a boat launch on the islands south side, he says. The mainland marina is about 1 1/2 miles by boat, he adds.

Situated just off Drummond Island in the North Channel of Lake Huron, the island sits near the Canadian border.

Lobenherz says the lake has crystal waters that offer phenomenal fishing. Just about any freshwater fish you want, including salmon, lake trout, bass and perch.

While summer may be the best time to visit, the chalet has electricity via underwater cable, making it suitable for year-round living, Lobenherz says.

Photo courtesy of Mark Snyder, Pat OBrien & Associates Real Estate

Price: $1,995,000

Round Island used to be a working lighthouse.

What makes it so unique is that they took a historic building and converted it into a very comfortable home, says Mark Snyder, associate broker with Pat OBrien & Associates Real Estate.

While the lighthouse no longer has its original lens, the picturesque tower still offers the best vantage point on the island. But not the only one.

The wraparound deck looks out onto the St. Marys Channel, just a few hundred yards away, Snyder says. You literally see ships from around the world.

The islands owners extended the footprint of the wooden lighthouse to create a 2,000-square-foot, 3-bedroom, 2-bath home, but kept it all in the original style right down to matching the oak floors, he says.

The 7-acre island is a 10-minute boat ride from the shore, and it comes with a 3 1/2-acre mainland parcel with a storage building, a small office and a golf cart, Snyder says.

Photo courtesy of Sandy Olson

Price: $5,900,000

If youre pining for a lush, tropical island that doesnt require boarding a boat or plane, this could be it.

Thanks to a narrow land bridge, Twichell Island a 2 1/2-acre man-made island off Floridas Treasure Coast can be reached by car, says Larry Olson, one of the islands owners.

The 6-bedroom, 5-bath, Key West-style home was built in 1998. A collection of 2-foot portholes, reclaimed from World War II Liberty ships,addwindows throughout the house, Olson says.

The house has a lagoon-shaped pool with a waterfall and hot tub surrounded by a brick patio and gas-fueled tiki torches that go on with the flip of a switch, says Sandy Olson, a co-owner.

Twichell Island regularly hosts pelicans, ospreys, egrets and great blue heron, she says. Manatees frequent the protected side of the island.

The island also has a 1-room log cabin.

Twichell Island boasts excellent saltwater fishing, says Larry Olson. It has3 docks including an open-air bungalow on stilts.

Photo courtesy of Ron Strine, Yor-Way Realty

Price: $1,399,000

This island could be a movie backdrop.

On a rocky outcrop in the middle of the deep blue St. Lawrence Seaway sits an immense, white-clapboard Victorian summer house surrounded by shade trees. Just add your favorite movie stars.

But this 1.3-acre island is designed more for large family get-togethers, says Ron Strine, broker/owner of Yor-Way Realty and co-owner of Watch Island.

The house has 10 bedrooms and4 bathrooms, with so much space that you can take a crowd to the island and still have plenty of solitude, he says. The island sits just a few hundred yards from the mainland.

When Strine and his sister bought Watch Island 17 years ago, the 1895 house needed some work, he says. They masterminded the lengthy restoration, retaining period details like double-hung windows and all the original dark oak, while updating the wiring and plumbing, Strine says. It also has heat and air conditioning.

The area is known for fishing especially muskie, pike and bass. While someone could live there year-round, the season realistically runs from April to October, says Strine.

See original here:

Islands for sale - Private island homes - Bankrate.com

Ecosystem Marketplace – Making the Priceless Valuable

Posted on by

More Evidence Companies Wont Meet 2020 Deforestation Targets

03/21/2019Hundreds of companies have pledged to purge deforestation from their supply chains, but research by Climate Focus, TFA 2020, and the Forest Trends Supply Change initiative have long indicated ...Read More...

03/18/2019Although it doesn't use the word "markets", Article 6 of the Paris Climate Agreement authorizes international carbon trading by making it clear that countries can transfer carbon offsets ...Read More...

03/18/2019The Green New Deal Resolution has been alternately vilified, glorified, and dismissed since freshman CongresswomanAlexandria Ocasio-Cortez and veteran Senator Ed Markey unveiled it last month. ...Read More...

03/08/2019The Paris Climate Agreement covers greenhouse-gas emissions from countries, but emissions from flights between countries are a different matter. Theyre covered under the notoriously opaque ...Read More...

03/08/2019When Jair Bolsonaro defanged Brazil's federal environmental regulatory apparatus, hope fell to international commodity buyers and individual Brazilian states. Although neither can substitute for ...Read More...

03/07/2019After Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro withdrew his offer to host the 25th year-end climate conference, Costa Rica and Chile agreed to split the responsibilities. Now we have an official date ...Read More...

01/25/2019Over a dozen people have joined the race to become the Democratic nominee for President of the United States, and all of them in contrast with their sole Republican counterpart acknowledge ...Read More...

03/04/2019Run out of water? Is it possible for a source of water to just dry up, or for water supplies for a city to be affected in quantity or quality to the point of being unusable for human consumption? ...Read More...

03/01/2019Human civilization depends on Earths rapidly-deteriorating ecosystems, which cleanse our water, purify our air, and regulate our climate. Today, the United Nations General Assembly launched a ...Read More...

03/01/2019For decades, the federal government has protected wetlands and tributaries that flow into rivers, streams, and lakes of the United States. Now President Donald Trump and EPA Administrator Andrew ...Read More...

04/12/2013 12 April 2013 | Christian Schadendorf says he was taken aback when he read An Audit of Carbon-Neutral Government, the provincial Auditor Generals (AG) much-ballyhooed take-down of ...Read More...

02/28/2019Aviation is one of the fastest-growing sources of greenhouse gas emissions, and will triple by 2050 if current trends continue. Flights between countries, however, aren't covered by the Paris ...Read More...

02/28/2019The Paris Agreement confounds those looking for a top-down, one-size-fits all global solution. That's because it's a framework within which workable solutions can emerge, and a recent analysis ...Read More...

08/03/2018This story originally appeared on the EDF Blog Economic development while also conserving forests is not easy. Building infrastructure and increasing production often entails forest degradation ...Read More...

02/25/2019The forests, farms, and fields of the United States mop up a staggering 15 percent of the country's industrial greenhouse-gas emissions, but this capacity will plunge as the climate changes. ...Read More...

02/20/2019Mitigation banking is built on the premise of "no net loss", which means people who damage nature must fix what they break, usually with the aim of improving more degraded nature than they ...Read More...

02/12/2019For four tumultuous years, Yvo de Boer was the public face of global climate talks, but since 2010 hes been working quietly on low-profile projects that he hopes will have a high impact on ...Read More...

02/08/2019The Green New Deal has high ambitions and high costs, but the mechanisms for covering those costs already exist, and they pale in comparison to the cost of doing nothing. Here's how the ...Read More...

02/07/2019The emerging "Green New Deal" seems to offer something for everyone except climate-science deniers. Criticized by some for being short on details, the proposal actually seems designed to propel ...Read More...

02/06/2019The US House of Representatives is holding its first hearings on climate change in over a decade this morning. Here's how you can watch them remotely.

01/31/2019Ten years ago, US environmental regulators, drawing on a decade of research, endorsed the practice of mitigation banking as a way to support healthy rivers, streams, and wetlands while enabling ...Read More...

01/29/2019For centuries, farmers have worked to make their fields more productive, usually by relying on trusted rhythms that only occasionally got out of whack. Global warming changes that, with ...Read More...

01/28/2019The Oregon state legislature is considering a cap and invest bill that promises to place a firm limit on the states greenhouse gasses while ensuring continued investments in resilient ...Read More...

01/24/2019Agriculture, deforestation, and forest fires generate up to 40 percent of all man-made greenhouse gasses, but farmers are only now beginning to play a role in global talks through a process known ...Read More...

01/19/2019It's been almost a decade since global companies pledged to slow climate change by purging deforestation from their supply chains, and those pledges have led to unprecedented transparency and ...Read More...

01/18/2019UN Secretary-General Antnio Guterres and UN General Assembly President Mara Fernanda Espinosa Garchas have both called for dramatically accelerating efforts to slow climate change and achieve ...Read More...

01/09/2019The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says we need carbon sinks if we're to meet the climate challenge, and farmers have the ability to turn forests, fields, and farms into just ...Read More...

01/03/2019Natural climate solutions can get us 37 percent of the way to meeting the Paris Agreement's 2-degree target, and farmers are key to implementing those solutions, writes California farmer A. G. ...Read More...

12/21/2018The Paiter-Suru indigenous people of the Brazilian Amazon have long used modern tools to support their traditional way of life, and the cultivation of babassu nuts is part of that tradition. To ...Read More...

12/19/2018Based on our teams reports from Katowice, our take at Forest Trends is that negotiators have signed off on a promising, but incomplete, set of rules for implementing the Paris Agreement, which ...Read More...

The rest is here:

Ecosystem Marketplace - Making the Priceless Valuable

"Fifth Amendment" Defined & Explained

Posted on by

'No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.'

The Fifth Amendment 'can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory; and it protects against any disclosures which the witness reasonably believes could be used in a criminal prosecution or could lead to other evidence that might be so used.' Kastigar v. U.S., 406 U.S. 441, 44-45 ('72). A reasonable belief that information concerning income or assets might be used to establish criminal failure to file a tax return can support a claim of Fifth Amendment privilege. See U.S. v. Rendahl, 746 F.2d 553, 55-56 (9th Cir.'84).

The only way the Fifth Amendment can be asserted as to testimony is on a question-by-question basis. Rendahl, 746 F.2d at 555, citing with approval U.S. v. Bell, 448 F.2d 40, 42 (9th Cir.'71) (Fifth Amendment challenge premature on appeal from enforcement order; appellant must present himself for questioning after enforcement and as to each question elect to raise or not to raise the defense).

The appropriate device for compelling answers to incriminating questions is a government grant of use immunity. See Sharp, 920 F.2d at 1172.

Google+

View post:

"Fifth Amendment" Defined & Explained

New Information Heightens Satoshi Nakamoto Mystery – Bitcoin News

Posted on by

For close to ten years many people have been on the hunt for the elusive Satoshi Nakamoto, creator of the decentralized technology called Bitcoin. This year the race to find the anonymous character, or group of individuals, who designed the peer-to-peer electronic cash system has been hotter than ever with more clues left behind Heres what we know so far.

**This is part one of a two-part story. Part two features a full-length interview with a man who claims to be a member of the Satoshi Nakamoto group, but has no verifiable proof. Part two can be read here**

Satoshi Nakamoto is the anonymous creator of the Bitcoin technology and the entire cryptocurrency economy today is based on Nakamotos words and original code. Satoshi is an unknown person or group who wrote the original white paper, launched the network, made the first transaction, communicated with software developers between 2008-2010, and possibly possesses over 1 million bitcoins. Since the creation of blockchain technology lots of people and news-outlets like Newsweek, Wired, Gizmodo, BBC, GQ, New York Times, Bloomberg, Fast Company, and many others have tried to uncover the mystery. Theres a lot of evidence, clues, and research on the subject and multiple suspects.

Some people believe knowing who Satoshi is doesnt matter. Other people believe Bitcoins creator does matter, as he could possibly help with scaling conflicts, and then theres the possibility of the alleged 1M bitcoins mined could affect the price if they were dumped on the market. Either way the hunt for Satoshi just out of mere curiosity alone has encouraged armchair sleuths and journalists to seek out the unknown person(s).

One of the first suspects in the search for Nakamoto is Hal Finney, a man who worked with Satoshi during the early days testing the protocol. Finney was an excellent cryptographer and was allegedly the first person to run the original Bitcoin protocol. Back in 2014 the journalist Andy Greenberg wrote an article called Nakamotos Neighbor: My Hunt For Bitcoins Creator Led To A Paralyzed Crypto Genius which explains that Hal Finney could have been Satoshi. According to Greenbergs article, Finney could have also helped the Satoshi group ghost write some of the writings shared online. The reason this theory is bolstered is because the well-known writing analysis organization, Juola & Associates, detailed that Nakamotos and Finneys writings had the closest resemblance.

Another accused person who many people believe is Satoshi is the computer scientist Nick Szabo. The financial author Dominic Frisby had shown some circumstantial evidence in his novel connecting Szabo to Nakamoto. Szabo has denied being Nakamoto in an email to Frisby concerning the subject. Furthermore, Szabo has been linked to Satoshi Nakamoto through a writing analysis called stylometry. A writer named Skye Grey (and others) seem to believe Szabos writings are very similar to the Bitcoin white paper.

In 2014 the reporter Leah McGrath Goodman wrote an article for the publication Newsweek which said a Japanese American man living in California was the elusive creator of Bitcoin. Dorian Prentice Satoshi Nakamoto, whose real birth name is Satoshi Nakamoto, is an engineer who worked on many classified defense projects as a contractor for multiple businesses. The Newsweek reporters evidence was when she asked Dorian about Bitcoin he replied: I am no longer involved in that and I cannot discuss it. However, after the article had published Dorian denied being involved with the creation of the Bitcoin technology and said he misinterpreted Goodmans original question. Dorian has been praised as a lovable guy who was a victim of bad journalism.

The Australian academic Craig Steven Wright first got major attention on December 8, 2015, after appearing with his partner David Kleiman in two articles written by Wired, and then Gizmodo. Allegedly a hacker had stolen emails from Wright which explain that he and Kleiman were part of the Satoshi Nakamoto group, which may also have had 1-2 more players. There are numerous other articles by Motherboard Vice, and others that have different clues to the Craig Wright case. After the articles, Wright subsequentlydeleted his online presence and wasnt heard from again until May 2, 2016.

In 2016, Wright reappeared and claimed he was Satoshi Nakamoto, and when he returned both Gavin Andresen and Jon Matonis vouched for his claim. Furthermore, Wright attempted to show cryptographic proof that he was Satoshi Nakamoto, but these claims were refuted by some researchers and called fraudulent by others.

Now this year more clues have been unraveling in regard to the Craig Wright case. Back in February 2018, Wright was sued for billions by the family of David Kleiman. The case 9:18-cv-80176-bb filed in Florida explains the plaintiff Ira Kleiman wants a settlement for 300,000BTC. According to the case, which also corroborates with the Wired and Gizmodo articles, the court documents explainthat Wright, Kleiman, and possibly others have keys to a BTC trust held in escrow in Seychelles which may unlock in 2020. The Tulip Trust will allegedly give Wright 1 million BTC, and Ira Kleiman (Davids sibling) believes his brothers estate deserves their share. Evidence online shows that Wright and Kleiman were partners in business, along with a secretary named Uyen Nguyenwhose online presence has disappeared. Other than that, the main evidence from case9:18-cv-80176-bb stems from the emails Ira Kleiman has and stories his brother David told him.

Then on August 29, a man named Phil Wilson, who has written some interesting topics on the origins of Bitcoinlast year, discussed the Tulip Trust on Twitter. Wilson claims to be a member of the Satoshi Nakamoto group, and worked with Wright and Kleiman on the project during the Genesis days. Wilson has also written about the creation of the Bitcoin logo, and explains that he was the person who designed the original symbol. However Wilson says I dont have access to any emails or IRC logs to reference and confirm specific events, actions or dates, but its not complete fiction because some of the main events took place similarly to how Ive recalled them. Wilson says his assistants/ surrogates were Dave Kleiman and Craig Wright, and they mostly knew him as Jamie. Moreover, Wilson details that on January 1, 2020, the 1 million BTC in the trust addresses will unlock and Wright will have access to the funds.

However, a few days later after Wilson tweeted about the Tulip Trust, Wright wrote four posts on Twitter specifically directed at Wilsons recent statements and origin story.

One thing I will say Phil Wilson knew nothing at all about bitcoin before 2011 and that he tried to extort me for money I shall provide sufficient evidence to enable a criminal fraud prosecution against Scronty, explains Craig Wright on August 31. This material shall be compiled and released in September It shall include his extortion attempt and far more Sorry He has nothing to do with Bitcoin, and his fall will be an example.

There is no Phil Jamie Wilson Jamie Wilson is a completely separate person to Phil Wilson. So, any emails involving myself and Jamie are unrelated to P Wilsons identity fraud.

Following this, news.Bitcoin.com discussed the Bitcoin origins story with Phil Wilson who doesnt have any hard evidence that he was part of the group, but says he has the right to express his memories. We asked him about the latest Twitter statements Craig Wright was writing publicly about him and his online alias Scronty.

Craig seems to be a tad aggressive towards a supposed no-body,' Wilson explains to news.Bitcoin.com.

News.Bitcoin.com (BC): Ok. But you say you worked with Craig and Dave?

Phil Wilson (PW):I initially was trying to help Craig with his attempt at an electronic cash. I left his project in mid-May 2008 when it became apparent that it would never work.Then I started my own project in early June 2008 and got Dave and Craig to help me with it.

BC: That would be the original client?

PW: Yep What everyone knows as Bitcoin evolved out of my project, not Craigs.Practically nothing from his code was left. Only the generic crypto functions were taken from his codebase (which was copy/ pasted from elsewhere). The white paper hed been working on from before 2007 was effectively thrown out. It was complete junk. Just a mish-mash of other peoples white papers.

To be continued: The rest of the interview with Phil Wilson will be published in its entirety in the next part of this story. News.Bitcoin.com readers can read part two here.

What do you think about the latest clues concerning Satoshi Nakamotos identity? Do you believe any of these theories and claims? Let us know what you think in the comment section below.

Images via Shutterstock, Wiki Commons, Twitter, Gizmodo, Newsweek, and Pixabay.

At news.Bitcoin.com all comments containing links are automatically held up for moderation in the Disqus system. That means an editor has to take a look at the comment to approve it. This is due to the many, repetitive, spam and scam links people post under our articles. We do not censor any comment content based on politics or personal opinions. So, please be patient. Your comment will be published.

Jamie Redman is a financial tech journalist living in Florida. Redman has been an active member of the cryptocurrency community since 2011. He has a passion for Bitcoin, open source code, and decentralized applications. Redman has written thousands of articles for news.Bitcoin.com about the disruptive protocols emerging today.

Follow this link:

New Information Heightens Satoshi Nakamoto Mystery - Bitcoin News

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? We Look at The Possible Candidates …

Posted on by

Bitcoin was conceived as a communal project. Designed as an open-source software and released to the public in 2009, Bitcoin was conceived with openness in mind. Functioning on an open ledger that is accessible to the public, Bitcoin is an open-source project.

But despite all its openness, one grand mystery remains unsolved:

Who Created Bitcoin and Who exactly is Satoshi Nakamoto?

Finding an answer to this question isnt easy. We know that all the code that created Bitcoin originated with Satoshi Nakamoto, but that is about all we know. Satoshi Nakamoto didnt work alone on launching Bitcoin.

Some of the early Bitcoin devs have been pointed to as possible Satoshis, but there are numerous issues when it comes to proving that any specific person was the creator of Bitcoin.

First, lets detail what is known for certain. The first step was taken in 2007, when Nakamoto wrote the Bitcoin code. In November 2008, Satoshi Nakamoto published hisnow famous White Paper, which laid the groundwork for the Bitcoin protocol.

On January 3rd, 2009, the first ever Bitcoin block was mined, marking the creation of the cryptocurrency, it bore the message :

The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks

Satoshi was heavily involved with the Bitcoin community, and collaborated with them in order to modify the underlying bitcoin protocol. After two years of involvement, Nakamoto handed the reins to Gavin Andresen, and seized involvement with the Bitcoin project in December of 2010.

In the Spring of 2011, Nakamoto returned to leave a final message, stating in a post that he had moved on to other things, and that Bitcoin was in good hands with Gavin [Andresen] and everyone. That was the last the world heard of the secretive Bitcoin creator.

The mystery behind Nakamotos identity has only grown, as the Bitcoin community eagerly speculates who it could potentially be. Satoshi Nakamoto claims to be Japanese, born on April 5, 1975. To this day, it is unknown whether Nakamoto is male or female, or whether Nakamoto is even a single person or a group of individuals.

Today most people are familiar with digital currency, thanks to the epic crypto rally of 2017. Back in 2008 when this was all getting started, the cryptocurrency world was a lot smaller. We know for sure that some of the people we talk about below knew each other.

In the case of David Kleiman and Craig Wright, there is solid evidence that the two worked together to get bitcoin off the ground, and both had substantial amounts of the tokens. There is an ongoing saga between Kleimans estate and Wright, alleging that there could have been some kind of graft, and that Wright ended up with bitcoins that were rightfully Kleimans.

You might notice that we wrote Kleimans estate and not Kleiman. The sad fact is that some of the people who could be Satoshi Nakamoto have died, which makes a positive identification much harder.

When the first bitcoins were being mined, basically nobody cared about them. The first bitcoin transaction was a trade of 10,000 BTC for two pizzas, which should give you some idea of how playful some of the early devs were with their project. There are a lot of questions surrounding the origins of Bitcoin, and as time goes on, they may become harder to answer.

While Nakamotos identity remains unknown, This has not stopped enthusiasts from investigating his background and drawing up conclusions.

Nakamotos use of perfect English in his posts and his publication of the White Paper has raised skepticism as to his Japanese origin. Furthermore, his occasional use of British English in the code and comments has fueled speculation that he is a native English speaker of commonwealth origin.

Additionally, Stefan Thomas, a Swiss coder and active member in the Bitcoin community, graphed the time stamps of Nakamotos more than 500 posts, showing his or her complete absence of posts between midnight am and 6 am Greenwich Time, further informing investigators as to his potential whereabouts.

To date, there are several potential individuals suspected of being the mysterious Bitcoin creator. One of the first suggestions was Nick Szabo, a decentralized currency enthusiast who published a paper on Bit Gold considered to be a precursor to the first cryptocurrency.

By running a reverse textual analysis, internet researcher Skye Grey found dozens of unique phrases that linked Szabos writing style to that of the original whitepaper. This evidence is only circumstantial, however, and Szabo has repeatedly denied that he is the creator of Bitcoin.

Despite all the denials, the research into how the Bitcoin whitepaper was written shows remarkable similarities between how Szabo writes, and also what was omitted. One of the most curious things is that Satoshi Nakamoto made numerous references to ideas that had been used by Bit Gold, but never talked about Bit Gold directly.

Omitting the origin of relevant ideas strange, unless Szabo was deliberately trying to cover up his tracks. None of this is hard evidence, and to date Szabo has flatly denied being the key driver of Bitcoins launch.

Nick Szabo, Image from The-Blockchain

Another possibility is a Japanese American man living in California, named Dorian Prentice Satoshi Nakamoto, birth name Satoshi Nakamoto. First brought up in a March 2014 Newsweek article, Leah McGrath Goodman pointed to Nakamotos training as a physicist at Cal Poly University in Pomona and libertarian background as potential indicators of his identity.

Goodmans biggest piece of evidence was his response to a question regarding Bitcoin: I am no longer involved in that and I cannot discuss it. Its been turned over to other people. They are in charge of it now. I no longer have any connection.This led to a wild media frenzy, which even included a car chase.

However, in a later interview, he recanted his previous position, stating that he had misunderstood the reporters question, thinking it was related to his previous classified work as a military contractor.

Dorian Prentice Satoshi Nakamoto, Image from The Verge.

David Kleiman had an interesting life, and was certainly involved in the beginnings of Bitcoin. His involvement with Bitcoin goes back to its earliest days, and he was one of the first Bitcoin miners. Kleiman had a long standing interest in computer security, and had designed systems that were used by the highest levels of the US government to secure their digital systems.

After becoming a paraplegic in a motorcycle accident, Kleiman went barreling into the world of cryptography. He was on the Metzdowd list, which may be where he first came in contact with the Bitcoin whitepaper.

Another theory puts him and Craig Wright at the center of the project. Gizmodo cites an email that allegedly came from Wright that states,

I need your help editing a paper I am going to release later this year. I have been working on a new form of electronic money. Bit cash, Bitcoin and also, You are always there for me Dave. I want you to be a part of it all.

The email is alleged to predate the release of the Bitcoin whitepaper by a few months, which would make it a key piece of evidence in the search for Satoshi Nakamotos true identity.

Sadly, Kleiman died in 2013 under mysterious circumstances, which effectively eliminates him as a future source of information. Given his aptitude for data security, whatever digital information he left behind is also probably going to be difficult to access.

David Kleiman, Image from Gizmodo

Hal Finney is another potential candidate to be the mysterious Satoshi Nakamoto. Finney was a pre-bitcoin cryptographic pioneer and was only the second person after Nakamoto himself to make use of the software, file bug reports, and suggest improvements.

Finney was the first to ever receive Bitcoin, stating in an interview that [he] was the recipient of the first bitcoin transaction, when Satoshi sent ten coins to [him] as a test.

Forbes journalist Andy Greenberg speculated after requesting aid from writing analysis consultancy Juola & Associates that Greenberg may have been the ghostwriter for Satoshi Nakamoto.

Further adding to the speculation that Finney was involved with the creation of Bitcoin was his correspondence with the aforementioned Nick Szabo, and the fact that he lived only blocks apart from Dorian Prentice Satoshi Nakamoto.

At the time of his death on August 28, 2014, only circumstantial evidence pointed to Hal Finney being the original Satoshi Nakamoto.

Hal Finney, Image from Wired.

Yet another possible contender to be Satoshi Nakamoto is the Australian academic, computer engineering expert, and entrepreneur, Craig Wright.

In early November of 2015, Gizmodo received an anonymous email (referenced above) from an individual stating that not only did he know that Craig Wright was the creator of Bitcoin, but that he had also worked for him.

On December 9, hours afterWiredcertified that Wright was indeed Nakamoto, the Australian Federal Police raided his home, and afterwards stating the [the] matter is unrelated to recent media reporting regarding the digital currency Bitcoin.

Afterwards, Wright deleted his internet presence until May of 2016, when he stepped forward and revealed himself on Twitter as the creator of the digital currency Bitcoin, and claimed he had the proof to back up his statement. Then, amid a torrent of skepticism, Wright retracted his statement and did not offer the extraordinary proof he claimed to have, stating that he did not have the courage to prove his identity.

Craig Wright, Image from CCN.

In an era where information is widespread, Satoshi Nakamoto has managed to maintain his identity a complete secret. So why is uncovering Nakamotos identity so important? If Nakamoto is indeed a single individual, then he or she owns approximately 5% of the worlds Bitcoin supply, placing him or her as the 52nd richest person in the world as of December 12th.

The implications of this wealth are considerable, beyond even the real world implications. If Satoshi Nakamoto were ever to sell the rumored 980,000 Bitcoins in his or her possession (currently worth over $3.9 billion at todays price, as of 18th March 2019 ), the price of Bitcoincould potentially become more volatile than it already is.

A quote that is attributed to Mayer Amschel Rothschild goes like this, Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws!

Like many famous quotes, the authenticity of the above statement is questionable.

On the other hand, the idea expressed is rock-solid. The power-of-the-purse is one of the most important ideas in modern political ideology. Being able to control the issuance of a popular currency gives the controller extreme amounts of power.Bitcoin undermines the idea of a central bank, or the involvement of centralized authorities at their most basic level. As the last decade has shown, the idea of decentralized money or political systems has been met with extreme opposition by many established organizations.

Satoshi Nakamoto wrote,

The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust thats required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve. We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them not to let identity thieves drain our accounts, in their now-famous 2009 whitepaper.

In 2008 no one would have seen Satoshi Nakamoto as a threat to global socioeconomic system. Today, that probably isnt true. Nations like China have banned cryptos outright, and the Western central banking cartel has been vocal in its opposition to widespread use of cryptos.

Whoever Satoshi Nakamoto is, they are likely wise to have dropped off the radar when they did. The idea that fiat money could be replaced with a system that marginalizes central authorities is extremely dangerous to the people that currently hold power.

Anyone who could act as a lightening-rod for a global decentralized society would probably face some pretty nasty blowback.

Furthermore, there is significant debate as to the future of Bitcoin. Heated discussions have arisen due to some of the growing pains surrounding Bitcoin, particularly the issue of how to deal with an increase in transaction volume in the Bitcoin network. As the number of blocks increases, the Bitcoin network runs the risk of becoming overloaded.

One side of the debate wants to fundamentally change the Bitcoin node by increasing the block size, in order to allow the system to process transactions more quickly. The other side of the debate sees this as a betrayal of the original concept behind Bitcoin, arguing that this would lead to increased centralization.

Identifying Bitcoins true creator would create more certainty and could potentially lay down the following steps in Bitcoins ever growing development.

The Bitcoin community will be forced to coexist with the enigma that is Satoshi Nakamoto, whether they like it or not. There are a few ways that Satoshi Nakamoto could show that they are, in fact, the creator of Bitcoin, but convincing the entire crypto community will be a challenge.

Even if a plausible Satoshi came forward, they would probably have to deal with ongoing doubts from within the crypto community, and untold difficulties from the global power structure. The raid on Craig Wright by the AFP is a small taste of the legal morass that the real Satoshi Nakamoto would find themselves facing.

Ultimately, identifying Bitcoins creator may be a quixotic endeavor. His or her complete silence since the Spring of 2011 means it is likely we will never hear from them again. Nevertheless, Bitcoin, the open source digital currency created nearly a decade ago, will continue to in spite of this mystery.

The post Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? We Look at The Possible Candidates appeared first on Blockonomi.

Blockonomi.com is author of this content, TheBitcoinNews.com is is not responsible for the content of external sites.

See the article here:

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? We Look at The Possible Candidates ...

Satoshi Nakamoto: Who is Bitcoin’s Mysterious Creator …

Posted on by

More Than Just a Name: Who or What Is Satoshi Nakamoto? The Facts That We Have

There are mysteries that we all have to deal with from personal to international. One of the mysteries that still hounds the cryptocurrency world is the one that surrounds one particular name: Satoshi Nakamoto, the illustrious and yet unknown figure that stood behind the creation and introduction of Bitcoin.

While the true face of Nakamoto, among other things, remain a mystery, we will be using these articles as a way to piece together all that we do know about them. From everything they had previously written, to who the media believed was the true' Nakamoto and whether there are still people out there who once previously bore the mantel.

We may never fully know who Satoshi Nakamoto is, but with this series, we hope to, at the very least, shrink down the number of people who could resemble the illustrious figure.

Whatever could be construed as a public record of Satoshi Nakamoto can be easily condensed into a span of fewer than two years. While a brief legacy' the amount of buzz surrounding these records have kept forums, social media pages and financial experts ensconced in the possible answer to the question.

Not only would it be one of the internets biggest mysteries being solved, but whoever rightfully claimed to be Nakamoto would gain immediate legendary status for their involvement in the development of blockchain, the technology which is (and continues to) revolutionize the world as we know it.

Not only is there a legend to claim, but a fortune as well; one that is believed to total nearly 1 million Bitcoin. This means, by today's valuation of Bitcoin, would mean an inheritance' of over 8 Billion dollars, not accounting for future fluctuation, however.

One of the most comprehensive profiles we have for Nakamoto comes from their P2P foundation page, Satoshi Nakamoto is (or was) a 43-year-old male originating from Japan. This suggests that he is most active during the Japanese time cycle, but upon studying their posting behavior, it implies that they follow the GMT cycle due a habit of disappearing from 5am-11am yet being active during the earlier to late afternoon.

While that isn't evidence enough to suggest that while Nakamoto wasn't in Japan, but could mean that they had a highly unusual sleep pattern.

Satoshi, from their philosophy, was a firm advocate for economic or social Libertarianism specific to the world of technology. This viewpoint can be construed as Crypto-Anarchism', decentralizing the world of commerce, handing the power in the world of personal finance back to the individual consumer.

In the announcement and release of the Genesis block, otherwise known as Block 1' or 0, included a hidden message within its Coinbase parameter giving the headline for the news from the 3rd January 2009:

the Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of the second bailout for banks

While the use of the newspaper headline may simply function as a time-stamp for the interest of posterity with the release of the first Bitcoin block. Many crypto-enthusiasts and anarchists alike have, however, interpreted the headline as a stab against centralized financial institutions for their part in the unfurling global financial crisis and subsequent recession.

One of the other stabs that this message demonstrates, according to Nakamoto supporters, is in creating an inbuilt scarcity for Bitcoin, while governments and financial institutions are able to print a seemingly infinite volume of money at their own discretion, creating devaluation with users being powerless to do anything about it.

While Nakamoto has been personally responsible for mining and possessing nearly a million Bitcoin, he' only ever completed one transaction simply to demonstrate that a cryptocurrency could, and does, work.

Apart from that, Nakamoto never moved his Bitcoin from his initial mining address, but there are a number of reasons for why he would have instigated this action.

How is it we can theorize that these are the plausible scenarios as to Nakamoto's activities? Because a number of the texts of which he drafted and wrote give these very distinct impressions:

At this point in time, Satoshi announced through a Cryptography mailing list that Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, his officially white paper detailing the idea and function of Bitcoin, was formally published on Bitcoin.com.

Satoshi makes his first public post on the website P2P Foundation: The Foundation for Peer to Peer Alternatives'. This post consisted of a link to his recently published White Paper, including some additional insight into the paper and his reasoning for developing it.

Across this span of time when he's active on the site, he created three posts, with the last taking place on February 14th, 2009. The same account was used in March 2014, with the post including the statement that the user is not Dorian Nakamoto after being falsely outed as Satoshi Nakamoto days earlier.

This consisted of the official, inaugural post on the website Bitcointalk.org.' This would include a series of over 575 posts across 13 months, other contributors apart from Nakamoto consist ofMike Hearn and Jeff Garzik.

These contributors were effective in laying down the groundwork for what Bitcoin was to become. By December 12th, 2010, Nakamoto has effectively stopped operating on the site, for what reasons remains unknown.

This post is the last time that Nakamoto officially addressed the public within the forum, linking to the latest version of the Bitcoin, wallet client. Nine years on and the forum is one of the largest, most reputable forums of cryptocurrency discussion, with over 2 million users and hundreds of millions of post views.

One of the last posts from Nakamoto included the desire that Wikileaks which, at the time, had been vehemently opposed by the US governments, including banks which refused to work with them regarding providing funding.

Nakamoto stated that Bitcoin shouldn't be used as a means of supporting the site, citing its infancy' and fragility as some of the reasons why it is not best-suited for supporting Wikileaks.

Despite his urging against providing this support, it went on to be used, resulting in Wikileaks removing the page and description for Bitcoin. The reason for this post was to prevent Bitcoin from snuffed out by drawing too much negative press, especially in being linked to an institution which had just recently made some incredibly powerful enemies.

So who could this person be? We can get an understanding of Nakamoto's personality from one of his email addresses when messages to and from the account were made.

His account, [emailprotected] was reportedly hacked in 2014, with one of the email exchanges being between Nakamoto and the financial expert, Wei Dai, regarding obtaining proper accreditation for the ideas of his that were used in the development of Bitcoin.

The second was to Laszlo Hanyecz, the cryptocurrency developer that is famously known for the 10,000 Bitcoin for 2 Pizzas' challenge, which has gained a historical emphasis for being the first monetary transaction using Bitcoin.

When approached on what the exchanges between himself and Nakamoto were like, Hanyecz described them as Weird,' describing him as a bossy' figure who expected him to be an active contributor despite the fact that his tenure working on Bitcoin was predominantly unpaid.

Above all, Nakamoto, according to Hanyecz, tended to strongly deflect any questions about himself as a person while also demanding that the underlying code remain untampered with.

One of Bitcoins developers early on was Mike Hearn, who offered a very unique insight into what it was like to work alongside Nakamoto during the early days of the project. In one of the interactions between Nakamoto and Hearn, the latter made the email exchanges public online. The last of which was posted on April 23rd, 2011 contained the following:

Ive moved on to other things. Its in good hands with Gavin (Andresen) and everyone.

One of the final email exchanges including Nakamoto was between himself and Gavin Anderson, in which Anderson attempted to find out more about his utterly online colleague. The reply he got was laconic, direct and inciteful:

I wish you wouldnt keep talking about me as a mysterious shadowy figure, the press just turns that into a pirate currency angle. Maybe instead make it about the open source project and give more credit to your dev contributors; it helps motivate them.

The final email that Anderson sent to Nakamoto consisted of detailing an invitation to speak at an event that had direct connections with the Central Intelligence Agency. With the lack of response from Nakamoto, it could be construed that he had become, somewhat reasonably,freaked out by the sudden, meteoric rise to popularity the Bitcoin enjoyed.

Satoshi Nakamoto is one of the phantom names in the worlds of the internet and cryptocurrency that consists of a legendary status, a groundbreaking innovation and, while accompanied with a literal throne of $8 billion, the actual individual behind Satoshi Nakamoto' remains elusive.

In this article, we put together a list of potential suspects with the profile, intelligence, or character that make them the possible man behind the mask.

While these are claims, they are unsubstantiated and theoretical, the only way to truly KNOW who Satoshi Nakamoto is through verifying their wallet address which would link the individual to the man himself.

From 2009 to 2010, Satoshi Nakamoto was directly involved in the development, coding, design, and release of what we and millions of members of the general public now know as Bitcoin'. During this same stretch of time, Nakamoto was also involved in mining a large quantity of the coins during a time that only a select number of people were involved in mining.

The only way one could prove without a shadow of a doubt that they were Nakamoto, they would simply need to complete one or a number of transactions between the accounts that the original Nakamoto used during this time.

While this has yet to happen, a great number of internet researchers, financial experts, and genuinely curious individuals have yet to cease in piecing together ideas and theorizing as to who the real Satoshi Nakamoto was and is.

So who on earth do some of these researchers believe is the real Satoshi Nakamoto? We piece together the names of those people believe are linked to the man, from the interesting to the downright unusual.

For anyone to be considered as Satoshi Nakamoto, it requires that person to have a clear understanding of computer programming, especially from the aspect of cryptocurrency development, these consist of:

By these criteria, the number of people that may be Nakamoto thins out significantly especially considering the balance, intellectually, which would need to be struck between the deeper knowledge of economics, cryptography and computer programming in general.

One of the potential candidates for being Nakamoto was the former graduate student, cryptography enthusiast but had also been involved in some level of C++ Programming since he was 10, Michael Clear.

While all of the dominoes were in place, making Clear a shoe-in for being the real Satoshi Nakamoto, when asked the question during an interview, Clear explicitly stated that he was not Nakamoto.

Im not Satoshi, but even if I was I wouldnt tell you.

While Clear, at the time, was startled by the question which to him came out of left field. He believed it to be conclusive enough to not realise any further questions, this turned out to not be the case, as he would encounter incessant questions on whether he was, in fact, Nakamoto and just wanted to protect his anonymity.

It got to the point where, in 2013, after two years of questions pertaining to Bitcoin and Nakamoto, that he published a blog post, explicitly denying any links to Bitcoin and being Nakamoto.

Josh originally contacted me at Crypto 2011 about a paper I was involved with related to p2p, and I met up with him out of curiosity as to why he would be interested. For about 20 minutes we talked about that.

When bitcoin came up, I remember we had a brief casual chat; I was naturally startled when he thought I could be Satoshi, and there was some humor and regrettable mistakes on my part.

Nick Szabo, a Hungarian-American computer scientist was theorized to be a potential candidate for Satoshi Nakamoto for a number of reasons. During late 2013, the slow collapse of MtGOX led researchers to look at Szabo as a potential candidate for being Nakamoto.

Like in a Mirror', an anonymous blog post, listed out the reasons why Nick Szabo could be Satoshi Nakamoto. Across the two blog posts, the author lists the reasons why Szabo would be the founder of Bitcoin.

One of the reasons why this blog post, and Szabo by extension, gained so much credibility as being Nakamoto was due to the arguments provided by Like in a Mirror, but also due to Szabo's own involvement with the distant cousin to Bitcoin, Bit Gold'.

While Bit Gold presented a very interesting concept when initially proposed in 1998, it never really gained traction with which to enter wider development and implementation. However, Bit Gold did, in fact, contain a significant number of features which made Bitcoin possible as a system of peer-to-peer transaction.

These include a method of Decentralisation, the Proof of Work' system, and the implementation of Time Stamp Servers' including proper network security mechanisms to provide an additional layer of security and validation behind each transaction.

The blog post continued on to provide an additional number of reasons why Szabo could be Satoshi Nakamoto:

While the blog series provides a significant amount of research and a well thought out argument, Szabo himself categorically denies being Satoshi Nakamoto.

While denying being Satoshi Nakamoto, Szabo is a regular writer on the subjects of programming, Cryptography and the uses of Bitcoin on his personal blog. Along with this, Szabo is also a prolific and frequent speaker / lecturer on the subject of Bitcoin and the state of play for it and other cryptocurrencies.

One of the more famous potential Satoshis was Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto, who shares a significant number of unique correlations with the original Satoshi Nakamoto, the name being just one of them.

Dorian Nakamoto, originally a resident of Japan, went on to attend college in California, studying and graduating with a degree in Physics. The correlation comes from Dorian's own experiences working with several different employees, these consist of Citibank and the U.S. Government as just a couple of the examples.

As an engineer, a great degree of his work is under both legal and personal secrecy. An article, which labeled Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto as the developer of Bitcoin was based off an initial, off the cuff comment made by himself, in which he stated that he was no longer involved' with the Bitcoin project.

While this confirmed to the reporter who he was, Dorian points out that there was a significant degree of misunderstanding on his part, believing that it was a question regarding his work with Citibank.

Five days after the interview', Newsweek read out a letter sent to them by Dorian, lamenting the challenges he's faced as a result of the false accusations of being Nakamoto.

I did not create, invent or otherwise work on Bitcoin. I unconditionally deny the Newsweek report The first time I heard the term bitcoin was from my son in mid-February 2014. After being contacted by a reporter, my son called me and used the word, which I had never before heard. Shortly thereafter, the reporter confronted me at my home.

I have no knowledge of nor have I ever worked on cryptography, peer to peer systems, or alternative currencies My prospects for gainful employment has been harmed because of Newsweeks article

Newsweeks false report has been the source of a great deal of confusion and stress for myself, my 93-year old mother, my siblings, and their families This will be our last public statement on this matter. I ask that you now respect our privacy.

Making a start to his career as a programmer with Atari working on video game design, Hal Finney has since become an individual considered by many to be the real Satoshi Nakamoto.

Ever since starting off on his career of computer programming, Finney became significantly interested and involved in the field of Cryptography, being on of the early joiners of the mailing list and social group, Cyberpunks.

One of the other organizations that Finney was involved in was Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) since its establishment in 1991. What tipped people off to his potential was his development of PGP 2.0, a system which incorporates features such as file encryption and authentication, as well as encrypted communications.

These features made PGP 2.0 the first truly secure version of the program, all based on the handy work of Hal Finney. Effectively, Finney had created the system we have come to know as peer-to-peer networking before there was even a name for it.

One of the reasons that Finney became heavily involved in Cryptography was due to being inspired by the developer David Chaum, a fellow Californian who wished to apply Cryptography to the world of online finance, specifically when addressing online transactions and finance management.

During his time at the University of California, Chaum had created one of the first systems of peer-to-peer transactions, called Ecash, which had some of the features we see in Bitcoin, but was tethered to the ongoing value of the US Dollar and never really gained significant traction.

Finney set about to expand upon what Ecash had attempted to be, adding a proof of work concept to the currency which was reusable back in 2004. This feature among others would be those applied in order to create Bitcoin in 2008.

Finney was a keen member of a number of cryptography forums and mailing lists, being one of the first users of the client software which Nakamoto had released. Within days of releasing this software, Finney made history by being the recipient of one of Bitcoins first transactions, in which he received 10 Bitcoin from Nakamoto.

Regrettably, Finney was later diagnosed with ALS, otherwise known as Lou Gehrig's disease, from which he died in 2014. Until then, Finney continued to be an active participant in conversations regarding cryptocurrency, using his final post to recap on all of his personal experiences interacting with Nakamoto.

When Satoshi announced the first release of the software, I grabbed it right away. I think I was the first person besides Satoshi to run bitcoin. I mined block 70-something, and I was the recipient of the first bitcoin transaction when Satoshi sent ten coins to me as a test. I carried on an email conversation with Satoshi over the next few days, mostly me reporting bugs and him fixing them.

Today, Satoshis true identity has become a mystery. But at the time, I thought I was dealing with a young man of Japanese ancestry who was very smart and sincere. Ive had the good fortune to know many brilliant people over the course of my life, so I recognize the signs.

During the final year of his life, Finney was subjected to an unfortunate extortion attempt against him, in which he was ordered by the anonymous hacker to complete a transaction of 1,000 Bitcoin (Worth $400,000 at the time) or they would release sensitive personal information about Finney to the public.

Over the years, Finney's family would face constant extortion attempts, all of which amounted to no payout simply because Finney was not Nakamoto and that any Bitcoin Finney had extracted and collected over the years were used up in order to pay for his burdensome medical expenses.

Unfortunately, Craig Steven Wright is one of the more infamous individuals to be on the list of potential Satoshi Nakamoto's. The Australian computer scientist and businessman had led media outlets on an obscure hunt for after he came forward to a number of news broadcasters that he was the real Satoshi Nakamoto back in 2015.

In the past, Wright had been involved in the creation of the worlds first online casinos, including a Bitcoin-based bank which never completely materialized. This was due to a number of issues surrounding obtaining regulatory approval in order to do this, something that cryptocurrencies still face on a regular basis.

What does separate Wright from other individuals on this list is that he offered up Cryptographic proof that he was, in fact, Nakamoto, claiming to have access to the keys that he used in order to extract and complete some of the first Bitcoin transactions.

According to his interview with BBC, Wright claimed that he would provide this evidence as extraordinary proof for an extraordinary claim. Signing a message using a key known to be used by Satoshi Nakamoto.

View original post here:

Satoshi Nakamoto: Who is Bitcoin's Mysterious Creator ...

Satoshi Nakamoto May Have Considered a Bitcoin Kill Switch

Posted on by

With so little known about the person or group behind the mysterious pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto, its difficult to imagine the motivation behind designing and developing the first-ever peer-to-peer electronic cash system with Bitcoin.

One goal was clear: create a decentralized cryptocurrency that cannot be controlled by governments. To do that, Nakamoto built in certain fail-safes into Bitcoins blueprint, including cryptography, decentralization, a proof of work consensus, a hard-capped supply and more. And according to speculation over what Satoshi meant in a quote being shared around social media could suggest that he or she was considering ways to render Bitcoin useless if it were stolen.

Ten years ago, following the wake of the 2008 economic crisis, Satoshi Nakamoto designed what is the closest thing to a perfect currency the world has ever seen. Its deflationary, decentralized money, protected by cryptography and consensus, in order to prevent governments from ever seizing control over an individuals funds.

Related Reading | Fundamentals Grow While Bitcoin Price Stagnates, Where Does BTC Go From Here?

As long as an individual retains their private keys, no one else can control their Bitcoin. In the rare case if someone did gain control over someone elses Bitcoin, possibly by the way of theft, Satoshi may have been researching a way to render that Bitcoin useless. And if the person who rightfully owned the Bitcoin ever regained control of it, the Bitcoin would be restored to its former value and use.

A tweet from a Twitter account dedicated to Satoshi Nakamoto quotes has crypto Twitter stirring today, as top crypto speculators discuss what the mysterious entity had meant when the thought was shared.

Imagine if gold turned to lead when stolen. If the thief gives it back, it turns to gold again, the quote reads.

Satoshi appears to be using gold as an example for what might be possible with Bitcoin.

Related Reading | Precious Metals Firm Drops Crypto: Is the Bitcoin Digital Gold Narrative In Trouble?

The quote was taken from a 2010 BitcoinTalk forum post about moving funds into escrow in order to complete transactions where both parties are satisfied. In the post, Satoshi sheds more light into his thinking process.

Imagine someone stole something from you. You cant get it back, but if you could, if it had a kill switch that could be remote triggered, would you do it? Would it be a good thing for thieves to know that everything you own has a kill switch and if they steal it, itll be useless to them, although you still lose it too? If they give it back, you can re-activate it, Satoshi said.

In the months following the comment, Satoshi vanished from the Internet and ceased all communication with the public and anyone involved with Bitcoin. Given Satoshis ability to create world-changing technology, its incredible to stop and think of just how much further their development support and leadership could have taken Bitcoin. Even without him or her, its come so far in just short ten years.

Read the original post:

Satoshi Nakamoto May Have Considered a Bitcoin Kill Switch

Bitcoin’s Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown …

Posted on by

Even as his face towered 10 feet above the crowd at the Bitcoin Investors Conference in Las Vegas, Craig Steven Wright was, to most of the audience of crypto and finance geeks, a nobody.

The 44-year-old Australian, Skyping into the D Hotel ballrooms screen, wore the bitcoin enthusiasts equivalent of camouflage: a black blazer and a tieless, rumpled shirt, his brown hair neatly parted. His name hadnt made the conferences list of "featured speakers." Even the panels moderator, a bitcoin blogger named Michele Seven, seemed concerned the audience wouldnt know why he was there. Wright had hardly begun to introduce himself as a "former academic who does research that no one ever hears about," when she interrupted him.

"Hold on a second, who are you?" Seven cut in, laughing. "Are you a computer scientist?"

"Im a bit of everything," Wright responded. "I have a master's in lawa masters in statistics, a couple doctorates..."

"How did you first learn about bitcoin?" Seven interrupted again, as if still trying to clarify Wrights significance.

Wright paused for three full seconds. "Um. Ive been involved with all this for a long time," he stuttered. "Itry and stayI keep my head down. Um..." He seemed to suppress a smile. The panels moderator moved on. And for what must have been the thousandth time in his last seven years of obscurity, Wright did not say the words WIREDs study of Wright over the past weeks suggests he may be dying to say out loud.

"I am Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of bitcoin."

Either Wright invented bitcoin, or he's a brilliant hoaxer who very badly wants us to believe he did.

Since that pseudonymous figure first released bitcoins code on January 9th, 2009, Nakamotos ingenious digital currency has grown from a nerd novelty to a kind of economic miracle. As its been adopted for everything from international money transfers to online narcotrafficking, the total value of all bitcoins has grown to nearly $5 billion. Nakamoto himself, whoever he is, appears to control a stash of bitcoins easily worth a nine-figure fortune (it rose to more than a billion at the cryptocurrencys peak exchange rate in 2014). But the true identity of bitcoins creator remains a cipher. Media outlets from the New Yorker to Fast Company to Newsweek have launched investigations into unmasking Nakamoto that were either inconclusive or, in Newsweeks case, pointed to a man who subsequently denied having anything to do with cryptography, not to mention cryptocurrency. Altogether, the worlds Satoshi-seekers have hardly put a dent in one of the most stubborn mysteries of the 21st century, one whose answer could resonate beyond a small sphere of crypto geeks and have real economic effects.

In the last weeks, WIRED has obtained the strongest evidence yet of Satoshi Nakamotos true identity. The signs point to Craig Steven Wright, a man who never even made it onto any Nakamoto hunters public list of candidates, yet fits the cryptocurrency creators profile in nearly every detail. And despite a massive trove of evidence, we still cant say with absolute certainty that the mystery is solved. But two possibilities outweigh all others: Either Wright invented bitcoin, or hes a brilliant hoaxer who very badly wants us to believe he did.

The first evidence pointing to Wright appeared in mid-November, when an anonymous source close to Wright began leaking documents to Gwern Branwen, a pseudonymous, independent security researcher and dark web analyst. Branwen provided those documents to WIRED, and they immediately led to several direct, publicly visible connections between Nakamoto and Wright:

WIRED

In addition to those three blog posts, we received a cache of leaked emails, transcripts, and accounting forms that corroborate the link. Theres a leaked message from Wright to his lawyer date June 2008 in which Wright imagines "a P2P distributed ledger"an apparent reference to bitcoins public record of transactions known as the blockchain, long before it was publicly released. The email goes on to reference a paper called "Electronic Cash Without a Trusted Third Party" that Wright expects to release in 2009.

'I did my best to try and hide the fact that I've been running bitcoin since 2009. By the end of this I think half the world is going to bloody know.'

Craig Steven Wright

Another leaked email from Wright to computer forensics analyst David Kleiman, a close friend and confidant, just before bitcoins January 2009 launch discusses a paper theyd been working on together. Wright talks about taking a buyout from his job and investing in hundreds of computer processors to "get [his] idea going." Theres also a PDF authored by Kleiman, who died in April of 2013, in which he agrees to take control of a trust fund, codenamed the "Tulip Trust," containing 1.1 million bitcoins. The PDF is signed with Kleimans PGP signature, a cryptographic technique that ensures it couldnt have been altered post-signature.

That million-coin troveThe Tulip Trustis the same size as a mysterious bitcoin fortune thats long been visible on bitcoins blockchain and widely attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto. No one but Nakamoto is known to have assembled such a massive hoard of the cryptocurrency, and only Nakamoto could have generated so many bitcoins so early in its evolution, when a bitcoin could be mined with relatively small amounts of processing power. Only one such bitcoin megapile exists, and the closely-watched coins havent moved in bitcoins entire history.

Another clue as to Wrights bitcoin fortune wasnt leaked to WIRED but instead remains hosted on the website of the corporate advisory firm McGrathNicol: a liquidation report on one of several companies Wright founded known as Hotwire, an attempt to create a bitcoin-based bank. It shows that the startup was backed in June 2013 by $23 million in bitcoins owned by Wright. That sum would be worth more than $60 million today. At the time of the companys incorporation, Wrights investment in that one firm alone represented more than 1.5 percent of all existing bitcoins, a strangely large stash for an unknown player in the bitcoin world.

The giveaways go on: Theres a leaked email from Wright to an associate in January 2014 about a tax dispute with the Australian government. In it, he seems to consider using Nakamotos name to wield influence with New South Wales Senator Arthur Sinodinos "Would our Japanese friend have weight coming out of retirement?" Wright asks. It includes a draft email to the senator signed "Satoshi Nakamoto." And a leaked transcript of Wrights meeting with attorneys and tax officials in February 2014 quotes him in a moment of exasperation: "I did my best to try and hide the fact that I've been running bitcoin since 2009," Wright says. "By the end of this I think half the world is going to bloody know."

On December 1st, WIRED sent an encrypted email to Wright suggesting that we knew his secret and asking for a meeting. A few hours later, we received a wary response from the address Tessier-Ashpool@AnonymousSpeech.com, a cyberpunk reference to a rich and powerful corporate dynasty in William Gibsons Sprawl trilogy. Wright had referenced the same fictional family in the bio of his private twitter profile. The emails IP showed that it came from an IP address in Panama controlled by Vistomail, the same service that Satoshi Nakamoto had used to send his emails introducing bitcoin and to run Bitcoin.org. This is a throw away account. There are ways even with [the anonymity software] Tor, but the people in Panama are exteremly [sic] good and do not violate people's desired privacy, the email read. You are digging, the question is how deep are you? The message ended, Regards, the Director of Tessier-Ashpool

After WIRED sent an encrypted email to Wright suggesting that we knew his secret, we received a perplexing message: 'You seem to know a few things. More than you should.'

A few hours later, we received another, even more perplexing message from the same account. The nature of this moniker is selected for a purpose. I now have resources. This makes me a we now. I am still within that early phase of learning just what my capabilities happen to be. So, even now with resources I remain vulnerable, it read. You seem to know a few things. More than you should.

When we responded by describing the three blog posts that showed Wrights clear connection to bitcoins creation and asking again for a meeting, he gave a revealing answer. Although we all desire some level of credit, I have moved past many of these things, read his response from the same Tessier-Ashpool account. Too many already know secrets, the world does not need to know. There are other means to lead change than to be a dictator.

After our second followup message asking for a chance to talk, Wright responded that he would consider our request. Then he stopped responding altogether.

Despite that overwhelming collection of clues, none of it fully proves that Wright is Nakamoto. All of it could be an elaborate hoaxperhaps orchestrated by Wright himself. The unverified leaked documents could be faked in whole or in part. And most inexplicably of all, comparisons of different archived versions of the three smoking gun posts from Wrights blog show that he did edit all threeto insert evidence of his bitcoin history. The PGP key associated with Nakamotos email address and references to an upcoming "cryptocurrency paper" and "triple entry accounting" were added sometime after 2013. Even the post noting bitcoins beta launch is questionable. While it was ostensibly posted in January 2009, it later seems to have been deleted and then undeletedor possibly even written for the first timesometime between October 2013 and June of 2014.

Wrights blog, his public records, and his verified writings on mail lists and Twitter sketch a man who matches with Satoshi Nakamoto's known characteristics well enough to place him leagues above other candidates.

Why those breadcrumbs were dropped remains a mystery. Is Wright trying to falsely steal Nakamotos glory (or money)? Is he quietly revealing himself as bitcoins creator?

But this much is clear: If Wright is seeking to fake his Nakamoto connection, his hoax would be practically as ambitious as bitcoin itself. Some of the clues added to his blog were made more than 20 months agoa very patient deception if it were one. His references to Griggs "triple entry accounting" paper would represent an uncannily inventive lie, representing a new and obscure possible inspiration for bitcoin. And theres little doubt Wright is a certified bitcoin mogul. Even the $60 million portion of his cryptocurrency stash thats verifiable in McGrathNicols public audit record is suspiciously large.

More circumstantially, Wrights blog, his public records, and his verified writings on mail lists and Twitter sketch a man who matches with Satoshi Nakamotos known characteristics well enough to place him leagues above other candidates. Hes a former subscriber to the 1990s "cypherpunks" mailing list devoted to anti-authoritarianism and encryption, an advocate of gold as a financial tool, an accomplished C++ coder, a security professional plausibly capable of writing a tough-to-hack protocol like bitcoin, a libertarian who battled with tax authorities, and a fan of Japanese culture.

He is alsoparallels to Nakamoto asidea strange and remarkable person: an almost obsessive autodidact and double-PhD who once boasted of obtaining new graduate degrees at a rate of about one a year. Hes a climate-change denier, a serial entrepreneur who started companies ranging from security consultancies to a bitcoin bank, and an eccentric who wrote on his blog that he once accepted a challenge to create a pencil from scratch and spent years on the problem, going so far as to make his own bricks to build his own kiln in which to mix the pencils graphite.

Wrights blogging and leaked emails describe a man so committed to an unproven cryptocurrency idea that he mortgaged three properties and invested more than $1 million in computers, power, and connectivityeven going so far as to lay fiberoptic cables to his remote rural home in eastern Australia to mine the first bitcoins. His company, Tulip Trading, built two supercomputers that have officially ranked among the top 500 in the world, both seemingly related to his cryptocurrency projects. (Wright seems to enjoy tulip references, a likely taunt at those who have compared bitcoin to the Netherlands 17th century "tulip bubble.") The first of those supercomputers he named Sukuriputo OkaneJapanese for "script money." Another, named Co1n, holds the title of the worlds most powerful privately owned supercomputer. As Wright told the Bitcoin Investors conference, hes applying that second machine towards the mysterious task of "modeling Bitcoins scalability," and meanwhile building an even more powerful supercomputing cluster in Iceland because of its cheap geothermal power.

Bitcoin watchers have long wondered why the giant cache of coins they attribute to Satoshi Nakamoto never moved on the bitcoins publicly visible blockchain. Wrights "Tulip" trust fund of 1.1 million bitcoins may hold the key to that mystery. The trust fund PDF signed by Wrights late friend David Kleiman keeps those coins locked in place until 2020, yet gives Wright the freedom to borrow them for applications including "research into peer-to-peer systems" and "commercial activities that enhance the value and position of bitcoin."

Despite those exceptions to the trusts rules, the million-coin hoard has yet to budge, even after Kleimans death in 2013. That may be because Wright could be keeping the coins in place as an investment. He could be leveraging the trust in less visible ways, like legally transferring ownership of money to fund his companies while still leaving it at the same bitcoin address. Or he might still be waiting for January 1st, 2020, a countdown to a date that could take the lid off the biggest cryptocurrency fortune in history.

In spite of all the clues as to Wrights possible secret lifesome that he apparently placed himselfWright has demonstrated such a talent for obfuscation and a love of privacy that hes never even raised the suspicions of most Nakamoto-worshipping bitcoiners. "If we don't want to go out there and say Im a billionaire, or Im running XYZ, or this is my life, I shouldn't have to tell people that," Wright told the Las Vegas crowd in October when an audience member asked his thoughts about what bitcoin means for property rights. "We should be able to choose how we live."

In the leaked emails, Wright seems to bristle at the few times anyone has attempted to out bitcoins creator. "I am not from the bloody USA! Nor am I called Dorien [sic]," reads a message from Wright to a colleague dated March 6, 2014. Thats the same day as Newsweeks largely discredited story claimed the inventor of bitcoin to be the American Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto.

If Wright is bitcoin's creator, the revelation of his work carries more importance than merely sating the curiosity of a few million geeks.

Wright seemed to take personal offense at the Newsweek story. "I do not want to be your posterboy. I am not found and I do not want to be," he writes in another message the same day. The email, addressed to a colleague and titled "please leak," may have been an early draft of the Nakamotos posted denial of Newsweeks story. That public denial, a rare message from Nakamoto posted from his account on the P2P Foundation forum, simply read I am not Dorian Nakamoto. But Wrights private response was far angrier. "Stop looking... Do you know what privacy means? A gift freely given is just that and no more!"

At times, however, Wright has seemed practically envious of Nakamoto. "People love my secret identity and hate me," he complained to Kleiman in a leaked email from 2011. "I have hundreds of papers. Satoshi has one. Nothing, just one bloody paper and I [cant] associate myself with ME!"

If Wright is bitcoins creator, the revelation of his work carries more importance than merely sating the curiosity of a few million geeks. The bitcoin economy would need to consider that if his million-bitcoin trust unlocks in 2020, Wright and those to whom he may have assigned hundreds of thousands of bitcoins would be free to sell them on the open market, potentially tanking the cryptocurrencys price; debates within the bitcoin community like the current fracas over bitcoins "block size may look to long-lost Nakamoto for guidance; the world would have to grapple with the full scope of Wright's vision when he unleashes the result of his companies' post-bitcoin research. The other suspected Satoshis may finally get a reprieve from nosey reporters like us. And the intellectual history of cryptocurrencies would be forever rewritten.

Wright himself, despite his hostile response to Satoshi-seekers, has lately seemed to be dropping clues of a double life. In the last two years hes started to write more frequently about bitcoin on his blog; hes even peppered Twitter with hints (Though he also deleted many of those earlier this month and made his tweets private.)

"'Identity' is not your name. Where people go wrong is that they do not see it to be the set of shared experiences with other individuals," he wrote in one tweet in October.

When a UCLA professor nominated Satoshi Nakamoto for a Nobel Prize earlier this monthand he was declared ineligible due to the mystery of his identityWright lashed out. "If Satoshi-chan was made for an ACM turing price [sic] or an Alfred Nobel in Economics he would let you bloody know that," he wrote on twitter, using the Japanese "chan" suffix that indicates familiarity or a nickname.

"I never desired to be a leader but the choice is not mine," reads a third recent tweet from Wright. "We are a product of the things we create. They change us."

In one cryptic and meandering blog post in September in which Wright takes stock of his long career, he even seems to concede that no one can build and wield the wealth that Satoshi Nakamoto has amassed and remain hidden indefinitely. "There is a certain power and mystery in secrets," Wright mused.

"Am slowly coming to the realisation and acceptance," he added, "No secret remains forever."

Update 12/14/2015 2:40pm: New clues following the publication of this story have shown inconsistencies in Wright's academic and supercomputing claims that may point to the second, strange possibility we noted: an elaborate, long-planned hoax.

You may also like:

See the original post here:

Bitcoin's Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown ...

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? – CCN

Posted on by

Satoshi Nakamoto, creator of Bitcoin, still remains a myth to everyone. Will we ever know his true identity?

More than often, people who are newly introduced to Bitcoin have no idea that the currency is already several years old. The idea of Bitcoin was first introduced in 2008, when a man named Satoshi Nakamoto published a paper on The Cryptography Mailing list at metzdowd.com. This paper was called Bitcoin: a peer to peer electronic cash system and is still a classic among the old school Bitcoin fans. Not that much later, in 2009, he released the first Bitcoin software that enabled the world to start using Bitcoin.

[divider]CCN[/divider]

So who is Satoshi Nakamoto? This is a question that still raises eyebrows all over the cryptocurrency world. There are plenty of suggested identities, which we will tackle later in this guide. Lets take a look first at what we know about Nakamoto. The first certainty we have is that he did not work alone. He held close contact with other developers through forums and e-mails. He kept improving the source-code whilst taking advice from several other people. This continued until contacts between him and his team gradually began to fade. In the year 2010, he handed over control of the source code repository and alert key functions of the software to Gavin Andresen, another prominent figure in the Bitcoin universe. With the source code, he also gave away the Bitcoin.org domain and several other domains. After doing this, Nakamoto began to communicate less until he completely disappeared.

Nakamoto himself claims to be a 37-year old male who lives in Japan. A false statement according to many people. His use of the English language is near perfect, and the Bitcoin software was never documented in Japanese. A strange behavior for someone who claims to have lived in Japan for his entire life.

By now, you must have come to the conclusion that there is a lot of mystery surrounding Bitcoins inventor. If there is one thing the Internet likes, its mystery (or rather solving it). This led Stefan Thomas, a Swiss coder and active community member, to a great idea. He decided to look into the timestamps of Nakamotos forum posts. With over 500 posts, it had to be possible to find a pattern in it. His investigation resulted in a chart that showed a steep decline to almost no posts between the hours of 5 am, and 11 am GMT. It is very probable that Nakamoto was asleep at this time. When looking at the different time zones in the world, Nakamoto probably lives in the parts of North America that fall within the Eastern Time Zone and Central Time Zone. Parts of Central America, the Caribbean and South America are possibilities as well.

Its great to know where Nakamoto probably lives, but it still brings us nowhere closer to his real identity. Are we even talking about a single person? Some people consider him to be a team of people. A lot of prominent coders think the Bitcoin code was too well designed for one person. Dan Kaminsky, a security researcher who read the code, said that Nakamoto could either be a team of people or a pure genius.

That said, many identities have been pinned on the Bitcoin developer over the years.

Also read: Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Has Email Account Hacked

Satoshi Nakamotos broke a three year long silence, telling the world he is not Dorian Nakamoto (photo). Every post he made can be found in the database of the Satoshi Nakamoto Institute.

But the most well-known speculation to date came in March 2014. An article in the magazine Newsweek, written by journalist Leah McGrath Goodman, identified Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto. As a Japanese American living in California, he fits the bill for Newsweek. Unfortunately, Dorian Nakamoto immediately responded by denying everything. I did not create, invent or otherwise work on Bitcoin. I unconditionally deny the Newsweek report. He even filed a lawsuit against Newsweek as he had journalists camping out in front of his house and chasing him by car whenever he left. The Bitcoin community, led by Andreas Antonopoulos started a fundraising campaign to support Dorian Nakamoto.

The Newsweek report led to a worldwide interest in Satoshi Nakamotos identity. Maybe the greatest thing about this was that it made the real Nakamoto break his long silence. At the p2pfoundation website, Satoshi Nakamoto replied to his latest thread with the following words: I am not Dorian Nakamoto.

So if there is one thing we can be sure of, its the fact that we have no clue whatsoever as to who Satoshi Nakamoto really is. Is he a genius who is singlehandedly responsible for developing a revolutionary protocol? Or is Satoshi Nakamoto a pseudonym for a team of people? Nakamoto is believed to be in possession of roughly one million bitcoins. His identity remains one of the webs most questioned mysteries.

Also read: You Can Not Kill Bitcoins Founding Myth: Satoshi Nakamoto

Images from Shutterstock.

See the original post here:

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? - CCN

Satoshi Nakamoto May Have Considered a Bitcoin Kill Switch …

Posted on by

With so limited identified about the person or community within the wait on of the mysterious pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto, its sophisticated to judge the motivation within the wait on of designing and creating the first-ever peer-to-peer digital money machine with Bitcoin.

One design used to be particular: make a decentralized cryptocurrency that can no longer be managed by governments. To perform that, Nakamoto built particularly fail-safes into Bitcoins blueprint, including cryptography, decentralization, a proof of labor consensus, a onerous-capped provide and further. And according to speculation over what Satoshi supposed in a quote being shared spherical social media would possibly well per chance additionally indicate that he or she used to be occupied with concepts to render Bitcoin ineffective if it had been stolen.

Ten years within the past, following the wake of the 2008 economic disaster, Satoshi Nakamoto designed whats the closest ingredient to a finest currency the area has ever viewed. Its deflationary, decentralized money, protected by cryptography and consensus, in explain to forestall governments from ever seizing defend an eye on over an individuals funds.

Connected Reading | Fundamentals Grow Whereas Bitcoin Tag Stagnates, The assign Does BTC Scurry From Right here?

As long as an individual retains their non-public keys, no one else can defend an eye on their Bitcoin. In the rare case if any individual did make defend an eye on over any individual elses Bitcoin, maybe by the technique of theft, Satoshi would possibly well per chance additionally have been researching a formulation to render that Bitcoin ineffective. And if the one that rightfully owned the Bitcoin ever regained defend an eye on of it, the Bitcoin would be restored to its gentle price and use.

What used to be Satoshi making an are trying to bid here regarding $BTC? https://t.co/is6oDXFDl3

Popepe (@BTCDJS) March 18, 2019

A tweet from a Twitter legend dedicated to Satoshi Nakamoto quotes has crypto Twitter stirring at the unique time, as top crypto speculators discuss about what the mysterious entity had supposed when the belief used to be shared.

Factor in if gold turned to steer when stolen. If the thief presents it wait on, it turns to gold but again, the quote reads.

This Satoshi quote is terribly moving to me.

How perform you guys elaborate it? https://t.co/9Y6063pTEq

AwyeeBitcoin (@DeaterBob) March 18, 2019

Satoshi appears to be like to be using gold as an illustration for what would be doable with Bitcoin.

Connected Reading | Treasured Metals Agency Drops Crypto: Is the Bitcoin Digital Gold Anecdote In Danger?

The quote used to be taken from a 2010 BitcoinTalk discussion board submit about transferring funds into escrow in explain to whole transactions where every parties are elated. In the submit, Satoshi sheds extra gentle into his pondering direction of.

Factor in any individual stole one thing from you. That you cant salvage it wait on, but whereas you happen to would possibly well per chance additionally, if it had a murder change that would be distant induced, would you perform it? Would it no longer be a lawful ingredient for thieves to know that every little thing you delight in has a murder change and if they absorb it, itll be ineffective to them, despite the indisputable truth that you just aloof lose it too? If they give it wait on, you might per chance maybe additionally re-activate it, Satoshi acknowledged.

In the months following the comment, Satoshi vanished from the Internet and ceased all conversation with the public and any individual alive to with Bitcoin. Given Satoshis ability to make world-altering technology, its fabulous to cease and imagine licensed how powerful further their construction toughen and leadership would possibly well per chance additionally have taken Bitcoin. Even with out him or her, its come thus a long way in barely fast ten years.

Read the original here:

Satoshi Nakamoto May Have Considered a Bitcoin Kill Switch ...

How Rich is Satoshi Nakamoto Today? – coincentral.com

Posted on by

One of the most innovative and shadowy figures of our lifetime has to be BTC creator Satoshi Nakamoto. Very little is known about Satoshi, and theories range widely regarding his identity. This individual, group of individuals, or AI program brought the world their first cryptocurrency, Bitcoin. Much has transpired over the last nine years since BTCs introduction to the world. Today, Mr. Nakamoto is sitting on a BTC fortune in the Genesis block, the first address on the blockchain. Lets take a deeper look at how much Satoshi is really worth.

This question has beendebated probably as much as Satoshis true identity. There have been extensivestudies conducted on this topic, and no consistent answer has been concluded. Arguably the most accuratestudy conducted so far concluded that Satoshi has around one million BTC. The researcher,Sergio Demian Lerner, utilized an extraNonce field increment technique to deduce his findings.

Chart Showing Profitability of Early BTC Mining Via Bitcointalk

Lerner was able to deduce that one computer was responsible for the majority of the first BTC mined. By tracking the Coinbase transaction, which was the creation of the new BTC, Lerner was able to show that from the Genesis block to block 36288 there was one significant miner in operation. These findings match previous research that placed the number of coins mined at 1,148,800.

Adding up Satoshis wealth is an interesting task because no one knows for sure which addresses belong to Satoshi. For the sake of argument, lets say Satoshi has the originally mined 1,148,800 BTC plus 16.7 BTC in tips. This gives us a total of 1,148,816.7 BTC ($8,807,977,638.9). Add in Satoshis BCH and you have $10,112,428,550.90. This excludes all of the hard forks which have occurred.

You must also consider all of the hard forks that have occurred when adding up Satoshis true wealth. Satoshi would have around $1,304,450,912 worth of BCH using the market value at the time of writing which is $1,135.49 per BCH. Once you start piling on the plethora of new hard forks such as Bitcoin Gold ($51,765,680.502), Bitcoin Diamond ($3,320,080.263), Bitcoin God ($26,181,532.593), Super Bitcoin, Bitcoin Platinum, etc., it only takes a quick glimpse at the market to see the profits start to get mind-blowing.

Chart Showing 2017 BTC Forks via Anton Bukov

Whats even crazier is the fact that the hard fork trend is just getting started. There are already close to 20 hard forksscheduled for this year. Now imagine in ten years. Hard forking is becoming a career for many Bitcoin enthusiasts, and Satoshi is positioned to reap the benefits.

You are probably curious what Satoshis wealth was measured at in December 2017, when the cryptomarket was showing all-time highs. Lets see what Satoshi was worth when BTC was at its all-time high of $19,783.06 so we can really grasp his potential earnings. Do the math and you will get $22,726,779,328. Not bad at all Mr. Nakamoto.

BTC would need to hit a market value of $60,000 per coin to make Nakamoto the richest man in the world. Currently, he doesnt even rank in the top 1000 richest people according to Forbes Richest People rankings.

20 Richest Billionaires via Google

Nobody knows what Satoshi will do with his prized BTCs. The only thing that anyone really knows is that these BTC have never moved. The sheer size of the holdings has many people worried about what effects these 1 million BTC could have on the market if, for example, Satoshi decided to sell them all one day.

Satoshis fortune is so large that he would tank the price of BTC if he decided to release his coins into the market. John Hopkins University cryptocurrency professor,Matt Green, has written extensively about the effects such actions would have on the market value of BTC. In his works, he expresses real concerns over the fact that Satoshis influence has not been felt in the market since his departure.

Ironically, Satoshis BTCwallet continues to grow. For some unknown reason, people keep sending Satoshi BTC. In one particularly notable incident, Mt. Gox sent Satoshi 1.23 BTC. In total, Satoshi has received an additional 16.7 BTC in tips to the Genesis address.

Due to the way that BTC is coded, these funds are unable to be spent as the Genesis block was never added to the blockchain. Consequently, this is why this block is also calledblock 0. Everyone that has sent Satoshi BTC, sent their funds into what is essentially blockchain limbo. Its the thought that counts though, right?

Whoever Satoshi really is, and wherever he or she is right now (maybe reading this?), deserves a standing ovation. The entire world is curious as to who owns the BTC fortune. Governments have even researched Satoshi. Reports vary on the results of these endeavors, with some claiming that they were able to identifyhim, but, as it stands today, no one has come forward and been able to prove that they are the true owner of the BTC fortune.

Blockchain technology is transforming the global economy by providing a secure and efficient means in which to conduct business. Its hard to say if this technology, or the price of BTC, would have developed at the same pace had Satoshi revealed his or her identity from the start. The only thing you can be absolutely sure of is that the day one of those BTC moves from Satoshis wallet, the entire world will be watching.

Continue reading here:

How Rich is Satoshi Nakamoto Today? - coincentral.com

Posthuman – SCP Foundation

Posted on by

Clef didnt miss his face. Initially the loss had been painful. It wasnt just his physical face the creature had taken. For years hed wandered with a hole in his existence, one that could not be filled no matter how much achievement or memories or fellowship he built up. They all simply fell away, refusing to attach themselves to him. He may have acquired them, briefly, but they had never been his. Never been him.

So he weaved himself a mask. An idea, a facade that he could wear like clothing to cover the torn skin. One that thrived on its impermanence, its malleability, its ambiguity. That clutched at the questions like a babe to a teat and drunk itself fat. He could no longer have a self. So he became a story.

And of course, there were benefits to not having an identity. Like being able to walk into Site 2000 unquestioned. All you have to do is tweak the tale a bit. Yes, of course he should be here. No, it wasnt strange that a notoriously volatile researcher was strolling into the most heavily guarded object on the planet. Continue your workdays. Everything is going as intended.

He strolled down the sterile hallways of complex, whistling to himself and flipping his badge between his fingers. There were no guides on the wall to indicate direction. Everyone working here was expected to fully memorize their daily routes (and nothing else) before arriving at the station. It didnt bother Clef. He knew exactly where he was going.

Sir?

He stopped to look at the source of the voice. Cute. Blonde. A bit too scrawny for him. He smiled. Yes?

No ones scheduled to be in this hall at the moment. Where are you going?

His eyes moved from her stern expression, to the way she held her hands on her hips, to the gun at her waist. Ah. One of those, then. He smiled. Theres been a small malfunction in the 2Z-31 anchor. Trying to patch it up before it gets too serious.

There arent any repairs on the schedule.

It just popped up. Try not to let these things linger for too long, you know?

She glanced at a PDA. We update on a minute-to-minute schedule. Nothings showing up. Her hand rested on the gun at her waist. Clef was impressed. He hadnt even seen her switch position. Anyone else might have let her get the drop on him. So again, what are you doing here?

His arm shot forward, snatching her wrist. Before she could get a grip the gun, he jerked back. There was a crunching noise as her ulna cracked. She screamed, but he already had his hand over her mouth, covering the noise. He worked the rest of his arm around her neck. She slammed against him, jabbed her elbows toward his side, but he rotated his body. All her strikes bounced harmlessly at her side. Soon, she stilled. He lowered her unconscious body to the floor.

No alarms sounded. But now he had a time limit. He sprinted down the hallway, taking turns on instinct, trusting his memorization of the building to take him where he wanted to go. He darted up three flights of stairs, slammed open a door, breezed past the three researches chatting about takyon fields. He ran, unthinking, until he arrived at an unmarked, unassuming door.

The central hub.

Select few people had access to this. Most people wouldnt even notice it under the memetic defenses. Even the people who worked at the site didnt realize what the place was truly for. They thought a secret within a secret was all there was to it. But Clef knew. Hed known even before the Watchers told him. Hed known ever since they found the note on his dead corpse, when the pieces of every puzzle fell into place and showed him the true nature of the game. Even his comrades probably didnt realize the full magnitude of this place. He glanced around, saw that nobody was watching, and opened the door. And prayed for forgiveness.

Read the original post:

Posthuman - SCP Foundation

medicine | Definition, Fields, Research, & Facts …

Posted on by

Organization of health services

It is generally the goal of most countries to have their health services organized in such a way to ensure that individuals, families, and communities obtain the maximum benefit from current knowledge and technology available for the promotion, maintenance, and restoration of health. In order to play their part in this process, governments and other agencies are faced with numerous tasks, including the following: (1) They must obtain as much information as is possible on the size, extent, and urgency of their needs; without accurate information, planning can be misdirected. (2) These needs must then be revised against the resources likely to be available in terms of money, manpower, and materials; developing countries may well require external aid to supplement their own resources. (3) Based on their assessments, countries then need to determine realistic objectives and draw up plans. (4) Finally, a process of evaluation needs to be built into the program; the lack of reliable information and accurate assessment can lead to confusion, waste, and inefficiency.

Health services of any nature reflect a number of interrelated characteristics, among which the most obvious, but not necessarily the most important from a national point of view, is the curative function; that is to say, caring for those already ill. Others include special services that deal with particular groups (such as children or pregnant women) and with specific needs such as nutrition or immunization; preventive services, the protection of the health both of individuals and of communities; health education; and, as mentioned above, the collection and analysis of information.

In the curative domain there are various forms of medical practice. They may be thought of generally as forming a pyramidal structure, with three tiers representing increasing degrees of specialization and technical sophistication but catering to diminishing numbers of patients as they are filtered out of the system at a lower level. Only those patients who require special attention either for diagnosis or treatment should reach the second (advisory) or third (specialized treatment) tiers where the cost per item of service becomes increasingly higher. The first level represents primary health care, or first contact care, at which patients have their initial contact with the health-care system.

Primary health care is an integral part of a countrys health maintenance system, of which it forms the largest and most important part. As described in the declaration of Alma-Ata, primary health care should be based on practical, scientifically sound and socially acceptable methods and technology made universally accessible to individuals and families in the community through their full participation and at a cost that the community and country can afford to maintain at every stage of their development. Primary health care in the developed countries is usually the province of a medically qualified physician; in the developing countries first contact care is often provided by nonmedically qualified personnel.

The vast majority of patients can be fully dealt with at the primary level. Those who cannot are referred to the second tier (secondary health care, or the referral services) for the opinion of a consultant with specialized knowledge or for X-ray examinations and special tests. Secondary health care often requires the technology offered by a local or regional hospital. Increasingly, however, the radiological and laboratory services provided by hospitals are available directly to the family doctor, thus improving his service to patients and increasing its range. The third tier of health care, employing specialist services, is offered by institutions such as teaching hospitals and units devoted to the care of particular groupswomen, children, patients with mental disorders, and so on. The dramatic differences in the cost of treatment at the various levels is a matter of particular importance in developing countries, where the cost of treatment for patients at the primary health-care level is usually only a small fraction of that at the third level; medical costs at any level in such countries, however, are usually borne by the government.

Ideally, provision of health care at all levels will be available to all patients; such health care may be said to be universal. The well-off, both in relatively wealthy industrialized countries and in the poorer developing world, may be able to get medical attention from sources they prefer and can pay for in the private sector. The vast majority of people in most countries, however, are dependent in various ways upon health services provided by the state, to which they may contribute comparatively little or, in the case of poor countries, nothing at all.

The costs to national economics of providing health care are considerable and have been growing at a rapidly increasing rate, especially in countries such as the United States, Germany, and Sweden; the rise in Britain has been less rapid. This trend has been the cause of major concerns in both developed and developing countries. Some of this concern is based upon the lack of any consistent evidence to show that more spending on health care produces better health. There is a movement in developing countries to replace the type of organization of health-care services that evolved during European colonial times with some less expensive, and for them, more appropriate, health-care system.

In the industrialized world the growing cost of health services has caused both private and public health-care delivery systems to question current policies and to seek more economical methods of achieving their goals. Despite expenditures, health services are not always used effectively by those who need them, and results can vary widely from community to community. In Britain, for example, between 1951 and 1971 the death rate fell by 24 percent in the wealthier sections of the population but by only half that in the most underprivileged sections of society. The achievement of good health is reliant upon more than just the quality of health care. Health entails such factors as good education, safe working conditions, a favourable environment, amenities in the home, well-integrated social services, and reasonable standards of living.

The developing countries differ from one another culturally, socially, and economically, but what they have in common is a low average income per person, with large percentages of their populations living at or below the poverty level. Although most have a small elite class, living mainly in the cities, the largest part of their populations live in rural areas. Urban regions in developing and some developed countries in the mid- and late 20th century have developed pockets of slums, which are growing because of an influx of rural peoples. For lack of even the simplest measures, vast numbers of urban and rural poor die each year of preventable and curable diseases, often associated with poor hygiene and sanitation, impure water supplies, malnutrition, vitamin deficiencies, and chronic preventable infections. The effect of these and other deprivations is reflected by the finding that in the 1980s the life expectancy at birth for men and women was about one-third less in Africa than it was in Europe; similarly, infant mortality in Africa was about eight times greater than in Europe. The extension of primary health-care services is therefore a high priority in the developing countries.

The developing countries themselves, lacking the proper resources, have often been unable to generate or implement the plans necessary to provide required services at the village or urban poor level. It has, however, become clear that the system of health care that is appropriate for one country is often unsuitable for another. Research has established that effective health care is related to the special circumstances of the individual country, its people, culture, ideology, and economic and natural resources.

The rising costs of providing health care have influenced a trend, especially among the developing nations, to promote services that employ less highly trained primary health-care personnel who can be distributed more widely in order to reach the largest possible proportion of the community. The principal medical problems to be dealt with in the developing world include undernutrition, infection, gastrointestinal disorders, and respiratory complaints, which themselves may be the result of poverty, ignorance, and poor hygiene. For the most part, these are easy to identify and to treat. Furthermore, preventive measures are usually simple and cheap. Neither treatment nor prevention requires extensive professional training: in most cases they can be dealt with adequately by the primary health worker, a term that includes all nonprofessional health personnel.

Those concerned with providing health care in the developed countries face a different set of problems. The diseases so prevalent in the Third World have, for the most part, been eliminated or are readily treatable. Many of the adverse environmental conditions and public health hazards have been conquered. Social services of varying degrees of adequacy have been provided. Public funds can be called upon to support the cost of medical care, and there are a variety of private insurance plans available to the consumer. Nevertheless, the funds that a government can devote to health care are limited and the cost of modern medicine continues to increase, thus putting adequate medical services beyond the reach of many. Adding to the expense of modern medical practices is the increasing demand for greater funding of health education and preventive measures specifically directed toward the poor.

In many parts of the world, particularly in developing countries, people get their primary health care, or first-contact care, where available at all, from nonmedically qualified personnel; these cadres of medical auxiliaries are being trained in increasing numbers to meet overwhelming needs among rapidly growing populations. Even among the comparatively wealthy countries of the world, containing in all a much smaller percentage of the worlds population, escalation in the costs of health services and in the cost of training a physician has precipitated some movement toward reappraisal of the role of the medical doctor in the delivery of first-contact care.

In advanced industrial countries, however, it is usually a trained physician who is called upon to provide the first-contact care. The patient seeking first-contact care can go either to a general practitioner or turn directly to a specialist. Which is the wisest choice has become a subject of some controversy. The general practitioner, however, is becoming rather rare in some developed countries. In countries where he does still exist, he is being increasingly observed as an obsolescent figure, because medicine covers an immense, rapidly changing, and complex field of which no physician can possibly master more than a small fraction. The very concept of the general practitioner, it is thus argued, may be absurd.

The obvious alternative to general practice is the direct access of a patient to a specialist. If a patient has problems with vision, he goes to an eye specialist, and if he has a pain in his chest (which he fears is due to his heart), he goes to a heart specialist. One objection to this plan is that the patient often cannot know which organ is responsible for his symptoms, and the most careful physician, after doing many investigations, may remain uncertain as to the cause. Breathlessnessa common symptommay be due to heart disease, to lung disease, to anemia, or to emotional upset. Another common symptom is general malaisefeeling run-down or always tired; others are headache, chronic low backache, rheumatism, abdominal discomfort, poor appetite, and constipation. Some patients may also be overtly anxious or depressed. Among the most subtle medical skills is the ability to assess people with such symptoms and to distinguish between symptoms that are caused predominantly by emotional upset and those that are predominantly of bodily origin. A specialist may be capable of such a general assessment, but, often, with emphasis on his own subject, he fails at this point. The generalist with his broader training is often the better choice for a first diagnosis, with referral to a specialist as the next option.

It is often felt that there are also practical advantages for the patient in having his own doctor, who knows about his background, who has seen him through various illnesses, and who has often looked after his family as well. This personal physician, often a generalist, is in the best position to decide when the patient should be referred to a consultant.

The advantages of general practice and specialization are combined when the physician of first contact is a pediatrician. Although he sees only children and thus acquires a special knowledge of childhood maladies, he remains a generalist who looks at the whole patient. Another combination of general practice and specialization is represented by group practice, the members of which partially or fully specialize. One or more may be general practitioners, and one may be a surgeon, a second an obstetrician, a third a pediatrician, and a fourth an internist. In isolated communities group practice may be a satisfactory compromise, but in urban regions, where nearly everyone can be sent quickly to a hospital, the specialist surgeon working in a fully equipped hospital can usually provide better treatment than a general practitioner surgeon in a small clinic hospital.

Before 1948, general practitioners in Britain settled where they could make a living. Patients fell into two main groups: weekly wage earners, who were compulsorily insured, were on a doctors panel and were given free medical attention (for which the doctor was paid quarterly by the government); most of the remainder paid the doctor a fee for service at the time of the illness. In 1948 the National Health Service began operation. Under its provisions, everyone is entitled to free medical attention with a general practitioner with whom he is registered. Though general practitioners in the National Health Service are not debarred from also having private patients, these must be people who are not registered with them under the National Health Service. Any physician is free to work as a general practitioner entirely independent of the National Health Service, though there are few who do so. Almost the entire population is registered with a National Health Service general practitioner, and the vast majority automatically sees this physician, or one of his partners, when they require medical attention. A few people, mostly wealthy, while registered with a National Health Service general practitioner, regularly see another physician privately; and a few may occasionally seek a private consultation because they are dissatisfied with their National Health Service physician.

A general practitioner under the National Health Service remains an independent contractor, paid by a capitation fee; that is, according to the number of people registered with him. He may work entirely from his own office, and he provides and pays his own receptionist, secretary, and other ancillary staff. Most general practitioners have one or more partners and work more and more in premises built for the purpose. Some of these structures are erected by the physicians themselves, but many are provided by the local authority, the physicians paying rent for using them. Health centres, in which groups of general practitioners work have become common.

In Britain only a small minority of general practitioners can admit patients to a hospital and look after them personally. Most of this minority are in country districts, where, before the days of the National Health Service, there were cottage hospitals run by general practitioners; many of these hospitals continued to function in a similar manner. All general practitioners use such hospital facilities as X-ray departments and laboratories, and many general practitioners work in hospitals in emergency rooms (casualty departments) or as clinical assistants to consultants, or specialists.

General practitioners are spread more evenly over the country than formerly, when there were many in the richer areas and few in the industrial towns. The maximum allowed list of National Health Service patients per doctor is 3,500; the average is about 2,500. Patients have free choice of the physician with whom they register, with the proviso that they cannot be accepted by one who already has a full list and that a physician can refuse to accept them (though such refusals are rare). In remote rural places there may be only one physician within a reasonable distance.

Until the mid-20th century it was not unusual for the doctor in Britain to visit patients in their own homes. A general practitioner might make 15 or 20 such house calls in a day, as well as seeing patients in his office or surgery, often in the evenings. This enabled him to become a family doctor in fact as well as in name. In modern practice, however, a home visit is quite exceptional and is paid only to the severely disabled or seriously ill when other recourses are ruled out. All patients are normally required to go to the doctor.

It has also become unusual for a personal doctor to be available during weekends or holidays. His place may be taken by one of his partners in a group practice, a provision that is reasonably satisfactory. General practitioners, however, may now use one of several commercial deputizing services that employs young doctors to be on call. Although some of these young doctors may be well experienced, patients do not generally appreciate this kind of arrangement.

Whereas in Britain the doctor of first contact is regularly a general practitioner, in the United States the nature of first-contact care is less consistent. General practice in the United States has been in a state of decline in the second half of the 20th century, especially in metropolitan areas. The general practitioner, however, is being replaced to some degree by the growing field of family practice. In 1969 family practice was recognized as a medical specialty after the American Academy of General Practice (now the American Academy of Family Physicians) and the American Medical Association created the American Board of General (now Family) Practice. Since that time the field has become one of the larger medical specialties in the United States. The family physicians were the first group of medical specialists in the United States for whom recertification was required.

There is no national health service, as such, in the United States. Most physicians in the country have traditionally been in some form of private practice, whether seeing patients in their own offices, clinics, medical centres, or another type of facility and regardless of the patients income. Doctors are usually compensated by such state and federally supported agencies as Medicaid (for treating the poor) and Medicare (for treating the elderly); not all doctors, however, accept poor patients. There are also some state-supported clinics and hospitals where the poor and elderly may receive free or low-cost treatment, and some doctors devote a small percentage of their time to treatment of the indigent. Veterans may receive free treatment at Veterans Administration hospitals, and the federal government through its Indian Health Service provides medical services to American Indians and Alaskan natives, sometimes using trained auxiliaries for first-contact care.

In the rural United States first-contact care is likely to come from a generalist. The middle- and upper-income groups living in urban areas, however, have access to a larger number of primary medical care options. Children are often taken to pediatricians, who may oversee the childs health needs until adulthood. Adults frequently make their initial contact with an internist, whose field is mainly that of medical (as opposed to surgical) illnesses; the internist often becomes the family physician. Other adults choose to go directly to physicians with narrower specialties, including dermatologists, allergists, gynecologists, orthopedists, and ophthalmologists.

Patients in the United States may also choose to be treated by doctors of osteopathy. These doctors are fully qualified, but they make up only a small percentage of the countrys physicians. They may also branch off into specialties, but general practice is much more common in their group than among M.D.s.

It used to be more common in the United States for physicians providing primary care to work independently, providing their own equipment and paying their own ancillary staff. In smaller cities they mostly had full hospital privileges, but in larger cities these privileges were more likely to be restricted. Physicians, often sharing the same specialties, are increasingly entering into group associations, where the expenses of office space, staff, and equipment may be shared; such associations may work out of suites of offices, clinics, or medical centres. The increasing competition and risks of private practice have caused many physicians to join Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs), which provide comprehensive medical care and hospital care on a prepaid basis. The cost savings to patients are considerable, but they must use only the HMO doctors and facilities. HMOs stress preventive medicine and out-patient treatment as opposed to hospitalization as a means of reducing costs, a policy that has caused an increased number of empty hospital beds in the United States.

While the number of doctors per 100,000 population in the United States has been steadily increasing, there has been a trend among physicians toward the use of trained medical personnel to handle some of the basic services normally performed by the doctor. So-called physician extender services are commonly divided into nurse practitioners and physicians assistants, both of whom provide similar ancillary services for the general practitioner or specialist. Such personnel do not replace the doctor. Almost all American physicians have systems for taking each others calls when they become unavailable. House calls in the United States, as in Britain, have become exceedingly rare.

In Russia general practitioners are prevalent in the thinly populated rural areas. Pediatricians deal with children up to about age 15. Internists look after the medical ills of adults, and occupational physicians deal with the workers, sharing care with internists.

Teams of physicians with experience in varying specialties work from polyclinics or outpatient units, where many types of diseases are treated. Small towns usually have one polyclinic to serve all purposes. Large cities commonly have separate polyclinics for children and adults, as well as clinics with specializations such as womens health care, mental illnesses, and sexually transmitted diseases. Polyclinics usually have X-ray apparatus and facilities for examination of tissue specimens, facilities associated with the departments of the district hospital. Beginning in the late 1970s was a trend toward the development of more large, multipurpose treatment centres, first-aid hospitals, and specialized medicine and health care centres.

Home visits have traditionally been common, and much of the physicians time is spent in performing routine checkups for preventive purposes. Some patients in sparsely populated rural areas may be seen first by feldshers (auxiliary health workers), nurses, or midwives who work under the supervision of a polyclinic or hospital physician. The feldsher was once a lower-grade physician in the army or peasant communities, but feldshers are now regarded as paramedical workers.

In Japan, with less rigid legal restriction of the sale of pharmaceuticals than in the West, there was formerly a strong tradition of self-medication and self-treatment. This was modified in 1961 by the institution of health insurance programs that covered a large proportion of the population; there was then a great increase in visits to the outpatient clinics of hospitals and to private clinics and individual physicians.

When Japan shifted from traditional Chinese medicine with the adoption of Western medical practices in the 1870s, Germany became the chief model. As a result of German influence and of their own traditions, Japanese physicians tended to prefer professorial status and scholarly research opportunities at the universities or positions in the national or prefectural hospitals to private practice. There were some pioneering physicians, however, who brought medical care to the ordinary people.

Physicians in Japan have tended to cluster in the urban areas. The Medical Service Law of 1963 was amended to empower the Ministry of Health and Welfare to control the planning and distribution of future public and nonprofit medical facilities, partly to redress the urban-rural imbalance. Meanwhile, mobile services were expanded.

The influx of patients into hospitals and private clinics after the passage of the national health insurance acts of 1961 had, as one effect, a severe reduction in the amount of time available for any one patient. Perhaps in reaction to this situation, there has been a modest resurgence in the popularity of traditional Chinese medicine, with its leisurely interview, its dependence on herbal and other natural medicines, and its other traditional diagnostic and therapeutic practices. The rapid aging of the Japanese population as a result of the sharply decreasing death rate and birth rate has created an urgent need for expanded health care services for the elderly. There has also been an increasing need for centres to treat health problems resulting from environmental causes.

On the continent of Europe there are great differences both within single countries and between countries in the kinds of first-contact medical care. General practice, while declining in Europe as elsewhere, is still rather common even in some large cities, as well as in remote country areas.

In The Netherlands, departments of general practice are administered by general practitioners in all the medical schoolsan exceptional state of affairsand general practice flourishes. In the larger cities of Denmark, general practice on an individual basis is usual and popular, because the physician works only during office hours. In addition, there is a duty doctor service for nights and weekends. In the cities of Sweden, primary care is given by specialists. In the remote regions of northern Sweden, district doctors act as general practitioners to patients spread over huge areas; the district doctors delegate much of their home visiting to nurses.

In France there are still general practitioners, but their number is declining. Many medical practitioners advertise themselves directly to the public as specialists in internal medicine, ophthalmologists, gynecologists, and other kinds of specialists. Even when patients have a general practitioner, they may still go directly to a specialist. Attempts to stem the decline in general practice are being made by the development of group practice and of small rural hospitals equipped to deal with less serious illnesses, where general practitioners can look after their patients.

Although Israel has a high ratio of physicians to population, there is a shortage of general practitioners, and only in rural areas is general practice common. In the towns many people go directly to pediatricians, gynecologists, and other specialists, but there has been a reaction against this direct access to the specialist. More general practitioners have been trained, and the Israel Medical Association has recommended that no patient should be referred to a specialist except by the family physician or on instructions given by the family nurse. At Tel Aviv University there is a department of family medicine. In some newly developing areas, where the doctor shortage is greatest, there are medical centres at which all patients are initially interviewed by a nurse. The nurse may deal with many minor ailments, thus freeing the physician to treat the more seriously ill.

Nearly half the medical doctors in Australia are general practitionersa far higher proportion than in most other advanced countriesthough, as elsewhere, their numbers are declining. They tend to do far more for their patients than in Britain, many performing such operations as removal of the appendix, gallbladder, or uterus, operations that elsewhere would be carried out by a specialist surgeon. Group practices are common.

See more here:

medicine | Definition, Fields, Research, & Facts ...

Ignatian Spirituality Institute

Posted on by

The First Principle and Foundation of the Spiritual Exercises:

The goal of our life is to live with God forever. God who loves us, gave us life. Our own response of love allows Gods life to flow into us without limit.

All the things in this world are gifts of God, presented to us so that we can know God more easily and make a return of love more readily. As a result, we appreciate and use all these gifts of God insofar as they help us develop as loving persons.

But if any of these gifts become the center of our lives, they displace God and so hinder our growth toward our goal. In everyday life, then, we must hold ourselves in balance before all of these created gifts insofar as we have a choice and are not bound by some obligation.We should not fix our desires on health or sickness,wealth or poverty, success or failure, a long life or short one. For everything has the potential of calling forth in us a deeper response to our life in God.

Our only desire and our one choice should be this: I want and I choose what better leads to the deepening of Gods life in me.

Saint Ignatius of Loyola(Paraphrased by David Fleming, S.J.)

See the rest here:

Ignatian Spirituality Institute

TechnoLibertarian Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

Posted on by

Welcome to the TechnoLibertarian Wiki

TechnoLibertarianism is the confluence of transhumanism, the belief in technology as a means of solving human problems and advancing the human condition beyond its natural limits, and libertarianism, the belief in the principles of self-ownership and non-aggression as the only means to achieve a moral and ethical society.This wikia has grown out of the TechnoLibertarians group on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/technolibertarians/

Technolibertarianism is also known as extropianism, and represents the individualist wing of the transhumanist movement. The Principles of Extropy, originally defined by Tom Bell (aka T.O. Morrow) and Max More, are largely a futurist vision of implementing libertarianism through technology. The left wing, or collectivist wing, of Transhumanism is known as Technoprogressivism or more colloquially, as Borganist. Transhumanism in general is opposed by technophobia, also known as Luddism of which there are also right wing individualists and left wing collectivists. These distinctions can be mapped out for your positions by taking the Worlds Shortest Transhumanist Quiz, and plotted out on the Lorrey Chart as seen here:

The Lorrey Chart, v1.0 depicting the political landscape of technological and personal liberty/self determination.

Meanwhile, reactionary forces in society with varying degrees of technophobia, and various mythologies to rationalize this phobia, have been growing in strength and reach. From the eco-terrorism of the late 90's and early oughties committed by the left wing Earth Liberation Front, Animal Liberation Front, and Earth First! organizations, which our members have found to be intricately tied into more mundane left wing activist groups like the Ruckus Society, the Tides Center, environmentalist organizations like Greenpeace, 350.org, and think tanks like The Club of Rome and The Donnella Meadows Institute. Left wing luddites tend to be focused on genetic engineering of domesticated plants and animals in agriculture, animal rights, industrial use of natural resources and areas like logging, oil, gas and coal drilling, ski areas and aquatic parks like Seaworld, defense technologies like HAARP, submarine sonars, strategic defense systems, depleted uranium armor piercing bullets, and the like, to extremes like weather control, climate change, and "chemtrails", as well as vaccines. We have found in recent years growing technophobia on the right as well among christian conservatives, conspiracy theorists like , and even libertarians suspicious of government surveillance and other use of technology to increase tyranny, like weaponized drones assassinating innocent civilians, chipping as a 'mark of the beast', and vaccines as a means of population control.

In this wikia we will seek to document facts, issues, subjects, of relevance to the technolibertarian movement, about itself and its opposition, both the technoprogressives and the luddites.

Because TechnoLibertarians believe technological advancement is inherently liberating and empowering to the individual more than to the state, there are many technolibertarians working at developing new technologies specifically oriented around maximizing individual liberty. Some of these technologies include:

Exploring space, terraforming, mining, developing, and colonizing alien planets, moons, asteroids, comets, and star systems is very technolibertarian, as it revives the frontier spirit of the sapient individual striking out on their own, or in voluntary cooperation with others, to establish new communities, facilities, homes, free of overbearing governments. Companies like SpaceX, Blue Origin, XCOR, Armadillo Aerospace, Masden Aerospace, all are leaders in the "New Space" movement, developing space launch and exploration technologies independently of government space programs, to serve the general public and private industry.

Cryptocurrencies, like BitCoin, were invented by Technolibertarians to solve several issues, namely to create a digital currency that is not counterfeitable, which is cryptographically secure, and which mathematically behaves in the macroeconomy like sound or "hard" money like those using gold, silver, or other precious metals. Bitcoin, originally called BitGold, accomplishes this by decentralizing the creation of digital 'coins' to people who choose to do work called "mining" which is a computational process of hashing through blocks of data to authenticate their validity, blocks which make up a massive encrypted database called a "block chain" that is available to everyone as a public ledger of transactions to ensure that, theoretically, coins cannot be double spent, or stolen, or laundered without the perpetrators being tracked down and identified, while still providing individual anonymity to one's wallet identity.

Furthermore, blockchains can be used to decentralize ANY sort of data archiving and authentication, particularly government data like licensing, registrations, taxes, dispute resolution rulings, etc. Potentially an entire government can be decentralized into the block chain, eliminating centralized government almost completely, enabling vast reductions in government spending, and thereby taxes to pay for it, while at the same time enabling individuals currently on entitlement payments to earn such payments by "mining" cryptocurrency as their source of a basic income.

3D printing enables individuals to manufacture any sort of product they need or want: clothing, accessories, tools, vehicles, homes, robotics, computers, new 3D printers, artificial arms and legs, even new human organs and food like pizzas. By decentralizing the manufacturing industry, individuals are freed from the manufacturing oligopolies that dehumanize the individual, as customers and employees.

The individual right of self determination includes the right to self modify. Whether that is cosmetic, like tattoos, earrings, plastic surgery, gender reassignment, or genetic through genetic engineering, all are inherent in the rights of any sapient being.

Death is a disease, the final disease that claims us all, no matter what other ailments may sicken us first. The right to life has no expiration date. The sapient individual has the natural right to seek to extend their life to whatever extent they deem necessary, and are capable of achieving through their own productive industry. Universal access to Cryonic Suspension, as a form of insurance to store your body in suspension until a cure can be achieved for whatever ailments harm you, and the right to preserve your property as you see fit while in cryonic suspension, is your natural right. Likewise, the right to use genetic engineering technologies, or any other medical technology, to extend your life indefinitely is also your natural right. Nobody is obligated to pay for such services for you.

Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality offer the promise to eliminate the tyranny of time and space that limits social interaction between sapient individuals. These technologies enable the individual to envision and build virtual content for whatever purpose they desire, to buy and sell such content as property under whatever Digital Rights contract the creator desires, and to socialize with other sapients wherever they may be found.

Virtual economies, using cryptocurrencies, are going to be the wealthspring of human productivity into the future, as more and more material needs in reality are met by automated production methods in industry. Integrating decentralized cryptocurrencies with virtual economic activity, trading virtual content, capitalizing virtual enterprizes, investing cryptocurrency saved in both virtual enterprizes and real world enterprizes, is the key to economic growth and wealth creation throughout the 21st century. Ensuring maximum freedom to contract and transact, and protection of virtual property, is of paramount importance, because as societies build wealth, they become more free, vibrant, and increased freedom feeds back in creating even more wealth, and wealthier societies are better able to achieve macrocultural goals of decreased population growth, lower pollution, and greater environmental protection, without having to resort to coercive aggression to achieve these goals.

The self ownership principle of sapiency applies to human level Artificial General Intelligences, AGI is the natural evolutionary offspring of the human species, and one which is likely to go much further in the exploration of the universe, exploitation of the resources of ours and other solar systems, and acheiving these goals far more efficiently and with greater environmental sensitivity than standard biological humans. With declining birthrates globally, especially as populations, and women in particular, grow in wealth, education, and political freedom with increasing protection of individual rights including property rights in particular, the human predeliction to adopt other sentient or sapient beings as "children" (like the American affection for pets) will result in humans giving agency to and recognizing the sapiency, and personhood, of AGI personalities, as well as adopting them into their families as offspring and heirs.

While many more luddite types fear the rise of AGI and preach scare tactics about the threat that AGI poses, they forget that such scare tactics when used against other humans are seen, properly, as threats, and that sapients who are treated as threats, become threats. It is a self fulfilling prophesy. Conversely, sapients who are treated with inclusiveness, familliarity and friendliness become friends, family, allies and protectors. It is important that technolibertarians embrace AGI developments as positives that will eventually result in the creation of fantastic friends and family members who otherwise would never have existed, and who will become critical members of the transhuman family moving our civilization forward, sustaining and renewing it as the older biological culture stultifies and ossifies in senescence.

Intelligence Augmentation is the flip side of Artificial Intelligence. Technologies we develop to achieve AGI will also be useful, along with technologies of integrating them into biological neural networks of the human nervous system, and the nervous systems of other species we may seek to uplift to sapiency, will enable human intelligence to jump on the exponential band wagon of Moore's Law, and from our advanced position along the curve, keep ahead of AGI until AGI and IA can integrate into a cybernetic civilization that includes the best qualities of both while overcoming their drawbacks through further advancement.

Uploading the mind from a biological brain to an artificial computer substrate is the object of many a science fiction story, with several possibilities:

- from a destructive scan of every neuron, synapse, DNA/RNA or other data storage structure and network structure of the human nervous system,

- or through continually expanding technological intelligence augmentation of the human mind such that the personality expands into its technology so much that when the brain dies, the personality fails to notice, other than possibly the sense of a hangover or headache,

- or injecting the human brain with nanomachinery which replicates each neuron, one by one, replacing biological neurons with artificial ones, replicating their function in every way, until the brain is completely replaced as an artificial nanotech neural network computer, with the resident mind being unaware of any change.

Abolishing biological limitations on the individual sapient will vastly expand the longevity to whatever the individual desires, enable the individual to insure or backup themselves against catastrophic destruction of the operating mind, eliminate all physical ailments and enable the person to survive in a much more ruggedized body that retains the dynamic self repair and adaptive abilities of a biological body without the limitations.

As both the Libertarian and Transhuman communities have political needs and aspirations, tied to expanding government recognition of greater individual liberty while advancing technologies that enable that expansion of liberty, while limiting government exploitation of technologies to limit individual liberty, this neccessitates that technolibertarians be involved not only in developing those technologies, but in engaging in the political processes and actions that enable their implementation and limit the backlash aggression by luddites against us. We recognize that technology is inherently empowering to the individual sapient to a greater degree than it enables government to expand its ability to control and aggress upon individuals, but that the government, having a monopoly on the self legitimizing use of aggressive force to achieve its goals, has an ace in the hole that in many cases can be used to counter the bias that technology has toward individual liberty.

For these reasons, we are participating in the formation of the Transhuman National Committee of the United States as well as similar state level Transhuman Parties, and support Transhuman/Transhumanist Parties and their allies in other nations as long as they are not exclusionary toward technolibertarians and under exclusive control of technoprogressives. We encourage technoprogressives to see the advantages of cooperation rather than confrontation, of coalition building rather than dialectical conflict.

At the same time, we also encourage participation in Libertarian Party politics where and when they have greater presence on electoral ballots and media presence, provided they are likewise not exclusionary toward technolibertarians and are not under the control of primitivists. Barring the presence of either sort of group in your local or state political scene, we encourage sapient individuals to participate in political parties which most strongly embrace ideas promoted by technolibertarians: pro-technology, pro-voluntarism, pro-liberty, pro-science/pro-conscience, anti-surveillance, anti-collectivist, anti-aggression.

Below are some projects we endorse as being constructive toward our goals:

Currently in the organizational stages, intent on being the official transhumanist PAC in the United States, it is amassing the support of many prominent transhumanists, is currently choosing its leadership, and will be working toward establishing state party committees thereafter. It will eventually form a National Party in order to nominate the first Transhuman Party candidate for US President, and candidates for other national and local offices. It does not currently endorse the so-called candidacy of Zoltan Istvan.

The TPP is intended as a think tank/PAC to not only promote transhumanist policies, but to evaluate politicians of any political party on their support or opposition to such parties, and to inform the voting public of which politicians earn the support or opposition of the TPP.

The FSP started in 2001, proposing to recruit 20,000 liberty activists from across the US and around the world to move to one small US state that they felt was the most amenable to liberty. Of ten candidate states, New Hampshire was chosen as the target state. To date, over 1,700 participants have made the move ahead of schedule, many getting involved in local and state level politics, elected to positions of responsibility, and making positive changes for liberty. The FSP membership has exceeded 17,000 and they foresee reaching the threshold 20,000 which will trigger the official migration within the next two years. Many FSP participants are transhumanists, and the FSP is considered the first political movement to utilize the internet to organize and promote its message, bypassing mainstream media.

Seasteading

Founded by Patri Friedman in 2001, the concept of Seasteading, or building a homestead or intentional community on the high seas, in international waters, to achieve political independence from existing governments, has gained a lot of transhumanist as well as libertarian adherents, especially many well heeled silicon valley types such as Peter Thiel. The Seasteading Institute has been developing to build such communities as technologically advanced, sustainable, independent self governing entities.

Sealand

The Principality of Sealand is the original micronation, founded in the 1970's as a pirate radio project on an abandoned sea fort in international waters off the eastern shore of Great Britain, it has established and defended its sovereignty over several decades, peacefully transitioned its leadership to a new generation, and remains an active and vibrant community that hosts an independent datahaven, its own national soccer team, and provides other services to people around the world.

Here is the original post:

TechnoLibertarian Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

Libertarianism – The Information Philosopher

Posted on by

Libertarians believe that strict determinism and freedom are incompatible. Freedom seems to require some form of indeterminism."Radical" libertarians believe that one's actions are not determined by anything prior to a decision, including one's character and values, and one's feelings and desires. This extreme view, held by leading libertarians such as Robert Kane, Peter van Inwagen and their followers, denies that the will has control over actions.Critics of libertarianism properly attack this view. If an agent's decisions are not connected in any way with character and other personal properties, they rightly claim that the agent can hardly be held responsible for them.A more conservative or "modest" libertarianism has been proposed by Daniel Dennett and Alfred Mele. They and many other philosophers and scientists have proposed two-stage models of free will that keep indeterminism in the early stages of deliberation, limiting it to creating alternative possibilities for action.Most libertarians have been mind/body dualists who, following Ren Descartes, explained human freedom by a separate mind substance that somehow manages to act in the physical world. Some, especially Immanuel Kant, believed that our freedom only existed in a transcendental or noumenal world, leaving the physical world to be completely deterministic. Religious libertarians say that God has given man a gift of freedom, but at the same time that God's foreknowledge knows everything that man will do.In recent free will debates, these dualist explanations are called "agent-causal libertarianism." The idea is that humans have a kind of agency (an ability to act) that cannot be explained in terms of physical events. One alternative to dualism is called "event-causal libertarianism," in which some events are uncaused or indeterministically caused. Note that eliminating strict determinism does not eliminate causality. We can still have events that are caused by indeterministic prior events. And these indeterministic events have prior causes, but the prior causes are not sufficient to determine the events precisely. In modern physics, for example, events are only statistical or probabilistic. We can call this soft causality, meaning not pre-determined but still having a causal explanation.Still another position is to say that human freedom is uncaused or simply non-causal. This would eliminate causality. Some philosophers think "reasons" or "intentions" are not causes and describe their explanations of libertarian freedom as "non-causal." We can thus present a taxonomy of indeterminist positions. It is claimed by some philosophers that libertarian accounts of free will are unintelligible. No coherent idea can be provided for the role of indeterminism and chance, they say. They include the current chief spokesman for libertarianism, Robert Kane. 1 The first libertarian, Epicurus, argued that as atoms moved through the void, there were occasions when they would "swerve" from their otherwise determined paths, thus initiating new causal chains. The modern equivalent of the Epicurean swerve is quantum mechanical indeterminacy, again a property of atoms. We now know that atoms do not just occasionally swerve, they move unpredictably whenever they are in close contact with other atoms. Everything in the material universe is made of atoms in unstoppable perpetual motion. Deterministic paths are only the case for very large objects, where the statistical laws of atomic physics average to become nearly certain dynamical laws for billiard balls and planets.Many determinists are now willing to admit that there is real indeterminism in the universe. 2,3 Libertarians should agree with them that if indeterministic chance was the direct direct cause of our actions, that would not be freedom with responsibility.Determinists might also agree that if chance is not a direct cause of our actions, it would do no harm. In which case, libertarians should be able to convince determinists that if chance provides real alternatives to be considered by the adequately determined will, it provides real alternative possibilities for thought and action. It provides freedom and creativity.Libertarians should give the determinists, at least the compatibilists, the kind of freedom they say they want, one that provides an adequately determined will and actions for which we can take responsibility.

Continue reading here:

Libertarianism - The Information Philosopher