Thursday, December 4, 2014

The Cost of Moving Money...

When you need to transfer money from one place to another, there are a variety of ways to do it.  Each one of them has a different cost involved.

Western Union is popular because it is fast, but it is also very expensive.  Fees usually reach up into the hundreds of dollars or more for a single transaction.  There are also limits as to how much you're allowed to spend, and your transaction (if large enough or to a country that the U.S. doesn't like) will likely be reported to the "authorities".

Imagine if you could move millions of dollars to anyone, anywhere in the world for free...  Well, that is the power of Bitcoin.

In fact, on Dec 2, 2014, someone moved more than $80 million USD for less than $0.04.  The transaction is publicly visible on Bitcoin's public ledger that forms the backbone of the currency.  It occurred in block #332586.

A screen cap from Blockchain.info (the website that allows you to view and search the blockchain) is shown here:

For those of you are still learning, this gives you an idea of what the Blockchain looks like.  It is a public ledger of all Bitcoin transactions which can be viewed, searched, and audited by anyone.  You will also notice that there is no personal information connected to these transactions.  It's anyone's guess who this person is.  All we know is that they moved over $82 million USD in the form of 217,517.63438199 BTC and paid less than 4 cents (0.0001BTC) to do it.

That sure beats the hell out of Western Union!

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

The End of Oppression - Part 3: Good Funding Evil by Josie Wales

"The End of Oppression" is a six-part series of videos which show what it will take for humanity to finally outgrow and escape its long history of violence and oppression.

Part Three ("Good Funding Evil") illustrates how the legalized extortion known as "taxation" creates a situation in which millions of decent, productive people end up inadvertently funding and enabling mass injustice.

follow Josie on Twitter at @JosietheOutlaw1

and share with anyone and everyone YOU feel needs to hear this message.)

Please visit Josie's Wales' website, then join and/or donate:  JosieTheOutlaw.com

Also visit all her other pages:

YouTube Channel
Google + Page
Twitter Feed

Monday, October 13, 2014

The End of Oppression - Part 2: The Game by Josie Wales

"The End of Oppression" is a six-part series of videos by Josie Wales which shows what it will take for humanity to finally outgrow and escape its long history of violence and oppression.

Part Two ("The Game") shows how tyrants use the game called "politics" to legitimize violent domination and to deceive decent people into advocating their own subjugation and enslavement.

follow Josie on Twitter at @JosietheOutlaw1

and share with anyone and everyone YOU feel needs to hear this message.

Click Here for Part 1

Also visit all her other pages: 

YouTube Channel
Google + Page
Twitter Feed

The End of Oppression - Part 1: The Problem by Josie Wales

"The End of Oppression" is a six-part series of videos by Josie Wales which shows what it will take for humanity to finally outgrow and escape its long history of violence and oppression.

Part 1:  The Problem  explains why it is not greed, hatred, or merely the nature of man which is preventing humanity from achieving peace, prosperity and freedom for all.

follow Josie on Twitter at @JosietheOutlaw1

and share with anyone and everyone YOU feel needs to hear this message.

Click here for Part 2

Please visit Josie's Wales' website, then join and/or donate:  JosieTheOutlaw.com

Also visit all her other pages:

YouTube Channel
Google + Page
Twitter Feed

Friday, October 10, 2014

Stopping the Police State

Article by Josie The Outlaw Wales, originally posted at: The Free Thought Project

We now live in a world where it is legal for police officers to murder not only animals, but innocent people, use the threat of force to coerce peaceful people into submission, and not only avoid punishment, but are ENCOURAGED to act this way. We live in a police state, and before we figure out how to fix it, we have to understand how this situation came to be.

It’s easy to focus our anger only on the ones actually committing the violence, but cops didn’t just wake up one day and decide to start violently oppressing people. Injustice flows from the top down. What we’re seeing today is largely the result of the politicians WANTING the people living in fear of the police, WANTING the police brutality which causes so many people to quietly obey whatever arbitrary, oppressive legislation the politicians decide to enact. So while we should definitely be condemning those who blindly follow orders, the ones giving the orders shouldn’t be let off the hook either, and most of us know this, which is why a lot of people, in an effort to fight against tyranny and government abuses, focus on the political process, on voting, campaigning and petitioning. This approach basically amounts to begging the government for freedom, which to me has two major flaws: first, it has a completely horrible track record of ever achieving freedom, and second, it pretty much tells the politicians that we accept that we can only be free if and when they tell us we’re allowed to. I don’t know about you, but I don’t need legislation to tell me exactly how free I am.
Now a lot of people ask what the alternative is, how, besides voting and petitioning can we prevent or stop tyranny? After centuries of one society after another voting themselves further into oppression, what we’re left with, our power, is resistance and disobedience. This can come in many forms – some people quietly find ways to circumvent or avoid the powers that be and their laws; some practice civil disobedience, and some forcibly resist. However, a lot of people can’t bring themselves to disobey at all, even quietly and passively, because they’ve been thoroughly convinced that, while it’s okay to ASK the politicians to change their laws, it’s never okay to disobey them, no matter how immoral and unjust. Unfortunately, a lot of the people who will never disobey a command happen to be walking around in a blue uniform with a shiny badge and false sense of authority.
Police like to pretend that their job is to “protect and serve.” It isn’t. Their job is to forcibly control the rest of us in whatever way the politicians tell them to. The politicians make up commands, call them laws, and their hired guns–“law ENFORCERS”–hurt any who disobey. Police know this, which is why you will often hear them say things like, “I don’t make the law, I only enforce it,” with the implication being that they aren’t to blame, because they’re just following orders and doing as they’re told. But that excuse was invalid when the Nazis used it, and it’s invalid today. It’s also completely cowardly to deny responsibility for your OWN actions, just because someone else told you to do something. How do you suppose the police would respond to some common thief saying,”don’t blame me for mugging this old lady; someone else told me to”? They would respond exactly how we should respond to it when they use the excuse: You are responsible for what YOU do.
Now, some people make a distinction between police violence that is legal and police violence that is illegal. If you ask me, that distinction is meaningless. If you violently assault someone who hasn’t threatened or harmed anyone else, that is immoral, regardless of whether the politicians wrote a law telling you to do that or not. Legislation does not determine what is right or wrong. If you use force only to defend against aggressors, that is perfectly legitimate and noble. But if you initiate violence, attacking someone else who wasn’t threatening or harming anyone, then you are the bad guy, whether you have a badge or not and whether some “law” told you to or not. So when it comes to police abuse, I don’t care whether it’s politician-approved violence or “illegal” violence. Either way it’s wrong, and it’s up to ALL OF US to stop it.
But how do we do that?
Police are human beings, and whenever we can, we should begin by appealing to their reason and morality, by trying to persuade them to do the right thing, including disobeying immoral orders. However, such appeals only work on people who still have the ability to reason and to judge right from wrong. Unfortunately, a whole lot of people in “law enforcement” don’t fit that description. I don’t know what those shiny badges they wear are made of, but sometimes it definitely seems like wearing a badge causes a type of brain damage, making a person incapable of judging right from wrong, incapable of thinking for himself, and giving him a twisted, backwards
view of reality.
Of course, not every cop is the same, and they shouldn’t all be treated the same. When we approach someone in uniform or they approach us, we don’t have to start by being defensive and angry. If they can be calm, polite, considerate and rational, we should also be calm, polite, considerate and rational. I’ll be the first to admit, that’s not always how I’ve approached police. I consider their job to be inherently immoral, and I’ve done my share of screaming at them, which I now view as less than effective in most cases.
While not every cop is the same, and some are less violent than others, I would think of a GOOD cop as one who would stop a BAD cop when he sees him doing something wrong…and that rarely – if ever -happens. This is not to say that all cops are inherently evil, but as a whole they very much seem to think and act like any other street gang. In the event that a police officer with a conscience tries to stop or speaks out against violence or injustice perpetrated by his fellow officers, he is said to have “broken the blue code,” and will usually be condemned, ostracized, threatened and intimidated. If he isn’t terminated outright for doing the right thing, he will usually be bullied into resigning. In other words, the system as it now stands, instead of weeding out the bad cops, weeds out the good ones.
This reinforcing of bad behavior comes not just from other individual officers, but from police unions, and the official policies of entire police departments. For example, the Dallas police department just issued a policy allowing cops involved in shootings–as shooters or witnesses–to say nothing about what happened for 72 hours, giving them time to review any available video or other evidence before saying anything. The purpose of this policy seems pretty clear: to make it so that cops don’t get caught blatantly lying, in reports and under oath about such incidents, as has occurred over and over again in the past. Obviously, the agenda here is not to get to the truth and expose the truth, but to cover it up.
When the truth can’t be covered up, police departments will still usually make excuses for misconduct. Rarely does an officer face any retribution, even for committing violent, criminal acts. Often they even get REWARDED. When you hear that an officer has been suspended with pay, what that actually means is that he was given a paid vacation for his actions. If that doesn’t reinforce bad behavior, I don’t know what does. The average cop knows that, nine times out of ten, whatever he does he will receive unconditional support from his peers and superiors. The resulting “us versus them” mentality among cops has been getting worse and worse in recent years, to the point now where many police departments are essentially telling the public, “we not only view police abuse as acceptable, we encourage it.” Then they wonder why so many people now hate cops.
So whenever dealing with the police, make sure you know what consequences to expect. Dealing with police can be like dealing with wild animals: sometimes you might want to talk softly and move slowly just out of self-preservation. If you go in yelling, with arms waving, you may very well get viciously attacked. Then again, the creature known as “law enforcer” can be very unpredictable, and even if unprovoked, might decide to tase you, cage you, or kill you. This is more true now than ever, with the police state growing as it has been, and the politician’s hired guns becoming more and more hostile and violent.
But there’s an important distinction to be made here. On the one hand, we should remain calm and polite, unless THEY make things confrontational and violent. On the other hand, it would be a huge mistake to act as if their misconduct is okay with us. Often, remaining civil is a good idea, whether it’s because you’re trying to win them over with logic and compassion, or just because you’re trying to avoid being assaulted. But we should never talk or act as if we think those shiny badges give them special authority and extra rights.
In most cases, if they are doing something immoral, we can peacefully point out to them that they are the bad guys, that we don’t view their actions as legitimate; that we don’t view them as protectors, but as aggressors. It may be uncomfortable, even scary to do this, but it is important that we make it uncomfortable for them to mindlessly follow orders. Don’t try to win them over by pretending that what they do is legitimate or just, or by condoning or making excuses for their actions. Our end goal is peaceful coexistence, an end of violent aggression, but if you’re so eager to get along that you will excuse and tolerate oppression, you aren’t helping peace or justice, you’re just reinforcing the idea in THEIR minds that they’re supposed to treat you that way.
There are a lot of practical suggestions about things to do or not do whenever you come face to face with someone with a badge. Most of you know most of these already, but it can be difficult to keep them in mind when you’re under duress or being physically assaulted. Things like: don’t ever consent to questioning or searches, always record the actions of the police, get their badge numbers and names, call attention to what they are doing to try to get as many witnesses as possible–and witnesses with cameras are obviously especially valuable.
But then there is the more uncomfortable question. When things get really bad, if those wearing badges are brutally assaulting someone, or are about to kill someone, when do you stop talking, and actually intervene? And yes, I mean by force if necessary; I mean doing whatever it takes to stop the aggressors with badges from harming innocent people. When do you put down the camera, and break out the fists? Or the guns? I know it’s an uncomfortable topic, and I don’t presume to tell anyone else what their answer should be, or where they should draw that line. But think of it this way: if a group of people–uniformed or not–were in the process of beating you to death, while a couple dozen others were watching, what would YOU want the spectators to do for YOU? Whatever it is, do that. The bottom line is, unless the police know we HAVE such a line, they will assume they can get away with absolutely anything, including outright murder.
When watching yet another example of police brutality, whether on YouTube or right in front of your face, it’s easy to think of THAT as the problem. In reality, each individual case of police abuse is merely a symptom of a larger problem. Whatever injustice happens in front of you, or happens to be caught on tape, know that thousands of cops are doing worse and getting away with it. Yes, sometimes we have to treat the symptom, especially if someone’s life depends upon it. But treating the symptoms won’t fix the problem until we identify and defeat the underlying disease, which is authoritarianism.
When it comes to the symptoms, there are many ways to create deterrence, whether it’s by appealing to a cop’s conscience, or shaming him, or even scaring him away. Sometimes mere words can accomplish it; sometimes injustice can only be stopped by using opposite and equal force to stop the aggression of the agents of the state. But the ultimate solution is to end the mentality and philosophy which makes those symptoms happen in the first place.
The idea that legislation, and badges and uniforms, actually grant special authority and special rights to certain people, making it okay for them to forcibly control, extort, assault and cage others who have harmed no one, that is the lie that has to go. And right now, not only do those in law enforcement believe that lie, but most of their victims, and most of the general public, believe that lie as well. Until we can destroy that lie, and help people to realize that we each own ourselves and that no one has the right to rule another, expect the symptoms to keep getting worse. As long as the people think we NEED to be dominated and controlled by government, we will be. But when the people finally figure out that society should be free, with no masters and no slaves, that is what we will have.
A quick message to the people who wear the badges. You’ve probably noticed that more and more people distrust, fear, and hate the police. Have you ever asked yourself why that is? Has the whole world turned into malicious criminals, who just can’t stand you dishing out righteous justice? Or are YOU doing things which are giving more and more people good reason to resent and despise you? If someone was talking about having to forcibly defend themselves against ME, I would at least wonder if I was doing something to deserve that. Do you hear people talking about forcibly resisting plumbers, or mechanics? I don’t. Why is that? If you’re only here to protect people, and to perform a service, why do you suppose more and more people are arming themselves – mentally and physically – for a possible violent confrontation with you?
You CAN choose not to do something that makes so many people hate you. Good people won’t need to forcibly resist you if you choose not to inflict injustice on them in the first place. And saying it’s your “job” doesn’t make it okay, and won’t make your victims or their families any more happy about it. The fastest, most peaceful way for oppression to end is for agents of the state to refuse to commit it. If you don’t want people to call you a fascist, don’t BE a fascist.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/josie-the-outlaw-wales-people-call-fascist-fascist/#FT8t1dQGzgfAuiET.99

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Bitcoin's Biggest Hater, Peter Schiff, Now Accepting Bitcoin. The Rise of Darkcoin

Peter Schiff, son of the imprisoned author/tax protestor Irwin Schiff, has been a very vocal critic of Bitcoin.  He has appeared in many debates with Bitcoin evangelists.  He has always been a strong advocate of hard assets, specifically precious metals over crypto-currencies.

His company which sells gold and silver just began accepting Bitcoin, though he claims he still doesn't believe in it.  

In this video, Max Keiser has some fun calling out Peter Schiff on his stance then goes on to discuss the importance of Darkcoin and interviews one of the developers of Dark Wallet.  

 This is well worth watching in its entirety.

Friday, September 19, 2014

Vote Counter Fraud in Scotland

Statists love to speak of democracy, the power being in the hands of "the People", and how "We the People" are the government.  They cite the power of voting as the means to secure a peaceful, fair, equitable, and righteous government.  Many of them like former Minnesota governor, Jesse Ventura believe that the election is something so sacred that it should be a national holiday (Holy Day).  
But we need to remember that elections are run by the state, so they will always favor the state.  The taxpayer pays for elections, and the government is the only one who benefits.  

We are told repeatedly, that voting is the very foundation of our civilization and that democracy is the fabric of peaceful  governance.  If that's the case why are state-employed election workers always working to subvert that process?  

They will try to spin these as "isolated incidences" that are too small to have affected the outcome of the election.  The truth is that this the way it has always been.  What has changed is the fact that video cameras have become ubiquitous along with the ability to live-stream video feeds.  Thanks to this, we are watching more of the process than ever before and thus seeing and exposing the corruption that used to remain hidden.

Monday, September 8, 2014

Samsung Ready to Sue Apple Over iPhone 6

As the world awaits the unveiling of Apple's iPhone 6 which is set to launch on September 9th, trouble is already brewing between Apple and their arch-rivals Samsung.  Rumors are that Apple will announce two versions of the iPhone 6, one with a 4.7-inch screen and one with a 5.5-inch screen.

Apple, which has historically protected its designs using patents (most-notably the patent for rounded
corners) now embarrassingly finds itself at the business end of a lawsuit for patent infringement after Samsung announced that they plan to sue for Apple's blatant infringement on their patent of 5.5 inches.

After losing a 1 billion dollar lawsuit for infringing on Apple's patents, Samsung seeks to recover their losses by going after Apple for infringing on their 5.5 inch design that was used on their highly-successful Galaxy Note II "Phablet".

Apple's Tim Cook responded to Samsung's threats to sue by suggesting that Samsung's flippant use of the letter 'i' has caused Apple irreparable damages.

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

World's First Decentralized, Encrypted Market - The Untouchable Black Market is Almost Here

The Silk Road was a thing of beauty.  It was a totally free online market, where you could buy or sell anything (legal or illegal) anonymously thanks to the Deep Web/Tor Browser and Bitcoin.  But the FBI was eventually able to locate the alleged man behind it all - the kid who was known as the Dread Pirate Roberts (DPR).  After S.W.A.T. teams raided his house and stole his computers, they had shut down The Silk Road and at the same time seized the world's largest Bitcoin wallet.

The Silk Road represented total freedom in the marketplace - the freedom to buy or sell anything you want, without the need to report your activities to anyone, no tax returns, no government regulations, it was totally anonymous.  But it's weakness was centralization.  A single point of failure took it all down, that was the computers owned by the DPR.

The day after the raid someone else created The Silk Road 2.0, but after a short while, it got hacked and $2.7 million worth of Bitcoins were stolen.  Again, the weakness was a single point of failure caused by centralization.

Centralization is what allows government to control and regulate business and entire industries.  To control the cell phone industry, you only need to regulate the cellular network providers of which there aren't very many, and each one operates using centralized networks.

Along came Decentralized Networks or Fully-Distributed Networks.  These are networks that operate
on many machines or devices all over the world.  Bitcoin is an example of a Decentralized/Fully-Distributed currency.  It is not produced or put into circulation by a single bank or government, but by Bitcoin miners scattered all over the world.  Transactions take place on a public ledger that has millions of copies scattered across computers and devices all over the globe.  There is no single computer, data center, or server farm anywhere on earth that can be shut down to destroy it.  Even if the United States  government destroyed every computer, cell phone, tablet, and cut off all electricity in the U.S., the Bitcoin network would be largely unaffected other than a mere drop in transaction volume.

Now comes OpenBazaar.org, the world's first decentralized, fully-distributed free market, where anyone can buy or sell anonymously and there are no single points of failure.  It is censor-proof, oblivious to governmental borders, and cannot be regulated, censored, or controlled by any government.  It can never be seized, shut down, or stopped in any way.  

The site promises to be much like Amazon and eBay, where sellers and buyers can rate each other and write reviews so people can see who the trustworthy buyers and sellers are.  We are definitely looking forward to the launch of some much-needed freedom in the economy

Read more:

Openbazaar the Untouchable Online Market Inches Closer to Game Time

Monday, September 1, 2014

Fully-Distributed Disruptive Technologies Set to Break Up Big Conglomerates and Monopolies

The key to government control of an industry sector is regulation of large corporations that are the backbone of that industry.  For example, you buy electricity from a local provider.  That provider is a regional monopoly that is highly regulated by the government.  The monopoly enjoys a guaranteed profit without any risk.  Large companies love government regulation because it socializes their risks and they earn guaranteed profits.  This rent-seeking behavior is the driving force of monopolization.

Local electricity providers name their price, and you have no choice but to pay it, for this reason monopolistic businesses are called Price Setters.

In free markets, businesses must sell for what the market is willing to pay since there are many competitors vying for the sale, for this reason businesses operating in a free market are called Price Takers.  Free markets are the exact opposite of a monopoly.  Free and unregulated markets have not really existed in this country for quite a long time (think centuries), but now with the advent of Fully-Distributed Networks, we are starting to see them return and there is nothing the government can do to stop it.

Using our electrical monopoly example...  the monopoly enterprise must generate the power, then distribute it to their customers many of whom are located many miles away.  Transmitting electricity over long distances like this creates losses due to the inefficiency (impedance in transmission lines).  The consumer must pay for these inefficiencies as well as tolerate any regulations that are placed on them in order to guarantee the profits to the utility company.  Those regulations are getting more and more intrusive with lightbulb restrictions, the increased usage of Smartmeters, remote air conditioner cycling, etc.

Now imagine that you had a device in your backyard (and/or on your roof) that produced all the
The DFC300 Fuel Cell pictured here can provide power to 250 homes
electricity you needed, perhaps a combination of fuel cell, solar, and wind technologies.  There would be virtually no transmission losses since the distance to your house is very short.  You have just become a threat to the local monopoly.  Now imagine that everyone had them.  The monopoly would cease to exist despite their guarantee of profit from the government.  This form of peaceful rebellion is spreading through many industries, and for this reason, Fully-Distributed Networks are often referred to as "Disruptive Technologies".

Microgrids are another type of disruptive technology that is on the rise throughout the world.  These usually incorporate a power plant that can power a small neighborhood, office building, or residential development.  Several companies can operate small electrical utility networks that compete against each other.

Larger fuel cells or solar/wind stations can be used for whole neighborhoods.  Imagine if you had the option to buy power from one of several providers or your Home Owners Association.  That freedom of choice in providers that the consumer enjoys forces those utility companies to compete by lowering prices and improving service.

Bitcoin is one of the biggest currently growing and spreading throughout the world and it seeks to destroy or disrupt national and world banking cartels such as the Federal Reserve Bank and International Monetary Fund.

Open Source Development is another example.  Historically, inventors and manufactures sought protection of their ideas from competition in the market through the obtaining of a patent by the government.  The patent grants the inventor a temporary monopoly on their invention for a period of time.  Other companies are not allowed to infringe on the invention without a licensing agreement which usually involves paying a licensing fee plus royalties.

Companies will spend billions of dollars protecting their patents by suing other companies and small inventors for patent infringement.  This behavior wastes resources that could be spent on innovating and improving their existing designs, and also discourages others from making improvements to existing inventions.  Many small inventors are put off by the expense of needing to hire a lawyer to do a patent search before proceeding with their invention, so they are defeated before they even begin.

So, along comes Open-Source Development.  Open-Source Development is a development strategy that does not seek patents, copyrights, or other intellectual property protections.  In fact it encourages competitors to co-develop a product by providing all blueprints, schematics, design documents, software code, etc. to the public free of charge.  Companies that use this development strategy have seen massive increases in the speed of  product improvement, growth in sales, and a massive decrease in legal expenses in trying to protect their invention.  Some examples of this strategy and their effects on the competition are listed here:

Wikipedia:  Anyone can create an entry or edit an existing entry on the online encyclopedia Wikipedia which currently boasts over 32 million articles in 287 languages.  This is over 100 times the volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Encyclopedia Britannica, which was once the largest seller and publisher of encyclopedias ceased publishing their famed books in 2010 after dominating the market for over 240 years.

3D Printing:  Imagine if everybody owned a manufacturing facility that was simple to operate - as
easy as printing out a document on your computer...  That is the future of personal manufacturing through 3D Printing which allows you to print physical objects with plastic or metal.  3D printing is not a new technology - it's been around about 30 years, but it has recently become much more affordable thanks to Open Source Development.

Android: Android began in 2003 as a secret project to make digital cameras and cellphones smarter.  In 2005, it was acquired by Google and became the foundation for their mobile Operating System (OS).  In 2007, Google launched the Open Handset Alliance which is a consortium of phone manufacturers, cellular carriers, chipset manufacturers.  These companies mutually agreed not to sue each other for patent infringements and to refrain from developing on incomplete forks in the Android development chain.

About this same time in 2007, Apple released their first iPhone.  Apple chose not to be a part of the consortium, but to compete against Android using patents and Intellectual Property rights to protect their innovations (many of which were taken from the Android).

Apple started off with a good chunk of market share, primarily due to getting a better product out to market faster.  They held on as long as they could, but in the end it was one company doing all the software and hardware development vs. the rest of the world.  The inevitable result is illustrated in the graph below as well as in this story in Business Insider.


There are plenty of other examples where Fully-Distributed Networks are making the big monopolies, oligopolies obsolete.  The most notable is how email has just about completely destroyed the U.S. Postal Service, which only remains in business due to taxpayer subsidies and the fact that it is against the law for other companies to deliver mail.

There is no doubt that the Internet is at the core of many of these new disruptive technologies.  While most of us can only access the Internet through an Internet Service Provider (ISP) which is a highly regulated entity, this may not always be the case.  For the wireless Internet, many of use our cellphones and/or tablets which are connected to the Internet through a cellphone company like Verizon, Sprint, Vodaphone, AT&T or T-Mobile.

Now there is apparently a device coming to market this winter which will allow you to bypass your cellular company and communicate using, text, voice, using your own miniature "cell towers".  Check out the GoTenna.    The concept looks like it could present a new future in wireless communications.  While the first generation has a limited range, there is no reason that these devices cannot be networked to send data further, much like the early days of Computer Bulletin Board Systems (BBS) did by hopping data across multiple nodes to get from point A to point B.

There is also no reason to assume that people won't figure out how to use them for repeaters, to extend their ranges all over the world - all without paying for any service whatsoever - free peer-to-peer communications with no ISP, no Cell Phone company.  It could totally take place outside of the Internet as well, offering more privacy from the NSA snoops.

What do you think?

What other industries could use some Disruptive Technologies?

Feel free to throw some answers out in the Comments section...

Thursday, August 28, 2014

Liberation Through Fully-Distributed Networks: Part 2 - 3D Printing

Part 2:  3D Printing as a Fully-Distributed Manufacturing Network.

How Fully-Distributed Networks like Bitcoin and 3D Printing will liberate everyone from the tyranny of monopolies and government.

Liberation through Fully-Distributed Networks: Part 1 - Monopolies

How Fully-Distributed Networks like Bitcoin and 3D Printing will liberate everyone from the tyranny of monopolies and government.

Saturday, August 23, 2014

Cop Publicly States That He Will Shoot You For Walking Wrong

Justin King | The Anti-Media
The Washington Post ran a piece of propaganda written by a Professor in the academically intensive field of “Homeland Security,” you know one of the majors you see on late night TV that’s taught through correspondence courses. He also served the LAPD for 17 years, and the people know how well regarded that particular institution is for its safeguarding of civil rights. Sunil Dutta takes pen to paper to explain to people that the only way they can avoid being gunned down by a cop is to be lead like a lamb to slaughter in any interaction with law enforcement. Image credit: Cris Yarzab (Author of WaPo Op-ed Sunil Dutta not pictured. Generic LAPD photo.)
Rather than let this wonderfully crafted pile of steaming doublespeak go by without comment, the entire opinion piece is included along with appropriate commentary.
“A teenager is fatally shot by a police officer; the police are accused of being bloodthirsty, trigger-happy murderers; riots erupt. This, we are led to believe, is the way of things in America.”
This isn’t what the people are led to believe; this is a pretty good summary of the events.
“It is also a terrible calumny; cops are not murderers. No officer goes out in the field wishing to shoot anyone, armed or unarmed. And while they’re unlikely to defend it quite as loudly during a time of national angst like this one, people who work in law enforcement know they are legally vested with the authority to detain suspects — an authority that must sometimes be enforced. Regardless of what happened with Mike Brown, in the overwhelming majority of cases it is not the cops, but the people they stop, who can prevent detentions from turning into tragedies.”
First, I feel I should compliment Mr. Dutta for his expansive vocabulary. “Calumny” basically means “slander,” for those that don’t want to Google the definition. But it isn’t slander. A teenager was fatally shot by a cop. That’s not in dispute. Here’s a list of other people killed by cops just this month. No doubt that some were justified, but some weren’t. Maybe the officer didn’t wake up that morning and say “Today, I’m going to kill someone.” Maybe he did, but we can’t prove it, so it’s not premeditated. Let’s call it Murder in the Second Degree. Sometimes they kill people just because they “don’t have time” to deal with it. It should also be pointed out, Professor, that cops have the legal authority to detain someone under certain circumstances, not just because they call them a “suspect.”
“Working the street, I can’t even count how many times I withstood curses, screaming tantrums, aggressive and menacing encroachments on my safety zone, and outright challenges to my authority. In the vast majority of such encounters, I was able to peacefully resolve the situation without using force.”
Great, so has every bartender in the country. Your job isn’t that dangerous, stop acting like it is. Your job is less dangerous than being a trash collector. The time of being able to point to the dangers of the job is over. It is also a career path you chose. Journalism can get pretty tense at times too, but when I’m photographing in an area and someone becomes abrasive with me, I don’t get to shoot them with anything but a camera.
“Cops deploy their training and their intuition creatively, and I wielded every trick in my arsenal, including verbal judo, humor, warnings and ostentatious displays of the lethal (and nonlethal) hardware resting in my duty belt. One time, for instance, my partner and I faced a belligerent man who had doused his car with gallons of gas and was about to create a firebomb at a busy mall filled with holiday shoppers. The potential for serious harm to the bystanders would have justified deadly force. Instead, I distracted him with a hook about his family and loved ones, and he disengaged without hurting anyone. Every day cops show similar restraint and resolve incidents that could easily end up in serious injuries or worse.”
Wonderful anecdote. Tell it to Misty Holt-Singh, but you’re going to have to talk really loud because she’s in a cemetery after officers showed so much restraint that their bullets sent her to the grave when she was taken hostage. I’m sure the dozens of other unarmed dead killed this year by cops would love to hear your story. I’m sure they’d love to hear anything at all.
“Sometimes, though, no amount of persuasion or warnings work on a belligerent person; that’s when cops have to use force, and the results can be tragic. We are still learning what transpired between Officer Darren Wilson and Brown, but in most cases it’s less ambiguous — and officers are rarely at fault. When they use force, they are defending their, or the public’s, safety.”
Another standard line the people are told to believe. Cops are just defending the public’s safety. Without the thin blue line, there would certainly be rioting in the streets. Funny, it seems like the thin blue line has caused rioting in the streets. What public safety risk was happening when officers killed Eric Garner? In your 17 years as a cop how many wife beaters, rapists, murderers, and other actual public safety risks did you take off the street? How many times did you initiate violence when there was none when you cuffed someone for illegal possession of a plant, prostitution, or for failing to pay some form of extortion to the state? You aren’t a hero. You’re the armed collection force of the largest extortion racket this country has ever seen.
“Even though it might sound harsh and impolitic, here is the bottom line: if you don’t want to get shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground, just do what I tell you. Don’t argue with me, don’t call me names, don’t tell me that I can’t stop you, don’t say I’m a racist pig, don’t threaten that you’ll sue me and take away my badge. Don’t scream at me that you pay my salary, and don’t even think of aggressively walking towards me.”
I am arguing with you. I think you’re a complete idiot. You can’t stop me. Well, I’m a heterosexual blonde-haired, blue-eyed white male; so I don’t have a race card, but I’ll still call you a pig. Make no mistake, if you violate my rights I will sue you and use your badge as a paperweight. We do pay your salary, and your subjective belief of how I am walking is not grounds for lethal force. It’s funny how I can do all of these things to you as a private citizen, but the second you put on a magic blue costume, it gives you grounds to assault and kidnap me.
This passage shows you for what you are: a hired thug. Thankfully, you don’t represent all cops, but it terrifies me to find out you teach future law enforcement officers. Your students now believe it’s OK to shoot someone for calling them names. That is what you just said. I hope you’re tenured because I have a feeling Colorado Tech University is going to get a whole lot of heat for keeping you on staff.
“Most field stops are complete in minutes. How difficult is it to cooperate for that long?”
That’s the wonderful thing about living in a free country, even though those freedoms are currently on life support. We don’t have to cooperate with you. If you don’t want to receive any resistance, don’t ask me where I’m going, don’t ask me where I’ve been, don’t ask me if you can search my car, don’t ask me what’s in my bag, don’t ask how I know my passenger, and don’t even think of pulling a weapon on me.
Most field stops are complete in minutes. How difficult is it to not violate someone’s rights for the length of time it takes to write a ticket?
“I know it is scary for people to be stopped by cops. I also understand the anger and frustration if people believe they have been stopped unjustly or without a reason. I am aware that corrupt and bully cops exist. When it comes to police misconduct, I side with the ACLU: Having worked as an internal affairs investigator, I know that some officers engage in unprofessional and arrogant behavior; sometimes they behave like criminals themselves.”
Of course, it’s scary. You, someone who is attempting to tell people how to avoid getting shot, has already stated that you might shoot someone because you believe the manner in which they are walking is not proper. Scared animals, including humans, have a fight or flight mechanism. Perhaps your cutesy little piece here attempting to scare people into submission wasn’t such a good idea. All you have done is reinforce the idea that it is better to roll the dice and hope the cop can be subdued with force rather than hoping not to offend your delicate sensibilities. Working LAPD’s Internal Affairs just means you were the Gestapo arm of the department. A cop offends a higher up, and you get turned loose. You weren’t out trying to protect the citizens from bad cops; your opinion piece clearly shows the country that even those responsible for investigating cops believe it’s OK to put a bullet in someone who calls them a name.
“I also believe every cop should use a body camera to record interactions with the community at all times. Every police car should have a video recorder. (This will prevent a situation like Mike Brown’s shooting, about which conflicting and self-serving statements allow people to believe what they want.) And you don’t have to submit to an illegal stop or search. You can refuse consent to search your car or home if there’s no warrant (though a pat-down is still allowed if there is cause for suspicion). Always ask the officer whether you are under detention or are free to leave.”
After your little tirade about what is likely to get people shot, you expect them to question their betters and try to exercise their constitutionally protected rights? Are you kidding? You just told the American people in no uncertain terms this is how people end up getting “shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground.”
“Unless the officer has a legal basis to stop and search you, he or she must let you go. Finally, cops are legally prohibited from using excessive force: The moment a suspect submits and stops resisting, the officers must cease use of force.”
By this point in the piece I became convinced that you lost a bet and had to write this as a joke. Kelly Thomas’sbrutal murder by cops from your neck of the woods shows this to be a complete fabrication. He submitted, and was still beat to death. The courts provided no justice. Now you act surprised that Americans, having lost faith in the police and courts, are holding trial in the streets. Just as prosecutors offer defendants life sentences to get the plea in order to avoid the death penalty, people have come to realize that it’s better to kill a cop and go to prison than be beat to death while begging for their father.
“But if you believe (or know) that the cop stopping you is violating your rights or is acting like a bully, I guarantee that the situation will not become easier if you show your anger and resentment. Worse, initiating a physical confrontation is a sure recipe for getting hurt. Police are legally permitted to use deadly force when they assess a serious threat to their or someone else’s life. Save your anger for later, and channel it appropriately.”
Legality has nothing to do with this anymore. Officers that fail to abide by the law should expect resistance. It may not be wise, but it’s better than bleeding out in a car while the cop delays medical treatment so there is only one story of the chain of events leading up to the shooting. Police departments across the country have made the choice to militarize and enforce unjust laws. Don’t be surprised that people have decided to meet force with force. You wanted to play army, well even in the childhood version; somebody ends up lying on the ground. Don’t cry about it now.
“Do what the officer tells you to and it will end safely for both of you. We have a justice system in which you are presumed innocent; if a cop can do his or her job unmolested, that system can run its course. Later, you can ask for a supervisor, lodge a complaint or contact civil rights organizations if you believe your rights were violated. Feel free to sue the police! Just don’t challenge a cop during a stop.”
Your advice is submit to sexual assault, harassment, deprivation of rights, assault, or whatever the officer decides to dish out, and then contact his supervisor who will probably laugh while he watches the dashcam video before it is erased and the statement goes out that the camera malfunctioned. No thanks. The American people have tried that for long enough. It doesn’t work. Your thin blue line has created a backlash.
“An average person cannot comprehend the risks and has no true understanding of a cop’s job. Hollywood and television stereotypes of the police are cartoons in which fearless super cops singlehandedly defeat dozens of thugs, shooting guns out of their hands. Real life is different. An average cop is always concerned with his or her safety and tries to control every encounter. That is how we are trained.”
Stop. We have all seen the stats. It is not that dangerous. A fisherman has a more dangerous job. Real life is different than the movies. The cops in movies know better than to shoot into a car with hostages, they know better than to shoot unarmed people, they don’t rape “suspects,” they don’t run pedophile prostitution rings, and they don’t flash their guns at sorority girls buying bottled water.
“While most citizens are courteous and law abiding, the subset of people we generally interact with everyday are not the genteel types. You don’t know what is in my mind when I stop you. Did I just get a radio call of a shooting moments ago? Am I looking for a murderer or an armed fugitive? For you, this might be a “simple” traffic stop, for me each traffic stop is a potentially dangerous encounter. Show some empathy for an officer’s safety concerns. Don’t make our job more difficult than it already is.”
If you can’t handle these things without violating people’s rights or shooting unarmed people, then you are in the wrong line of work. Maybe you should take up teaching or something. After all, those that can’t do, teach.
“Community members deserve courtesy, respect and professionalism from their officers. Every person stopped by a cop should feel safe instead of feeling that their wellbeing is in jeopardy. Shouldn’t the community members extend the same courtesy to their officers and project that the officer’s safety is not threatened by their actions?”
This is all true, but now that police use fear as a weapon and attempt to intimidate the populace with armored vehicles, black uniforms, no-knock raids, military tactics, and propaganda pieces in the Washington Post that basically say that they can do whatever the hell they want, the people don’t want you to feel safe. When you behave like an occupying army, expect resistance. The police chose this route, not the people. When people are subjugated by an oppressive control system, they will find a way to dismantle that system. They will exhaust all other options, but then they will use violence. Until police departments remember who pays their salary, I’d suggest you keep your schedule clear for more of your friends’ funerals, because communities across the country are tired of burying people because cops have declared war on the American people.
This article is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Justin King and TheAntiMedia.org. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter to receive our latest articles.