- From: Charles Evans <cevans@chyden.net>
- Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 10:18:42 -0400
- To: Ricardo Varela <phobeo@gmail.com>
- CC: Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca>, pindar wong <pindar.wong@gmail.com>, Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <522DD8C2.4020003@chyden.net>
In response to both the Bono Declaration, "Capitalism takes more people out of poverty than aid," and the Tradehill/IAFCU blowup, some of us in South Florida have taken the first steps to establish a non-profit membership organization with plans to establish a appropriate credit union, once we have enough members to justify this. http://bitcountant.com/foundation-for-conscious-entrepreneurship/ Anyone interested is invited to join our Facebook group, even if you are not in South Florida: https://www.facebook.com/groups/MiamiInternationalBitcoin/ We are particularly intrigued by the W3C's plan to integrate payments into the browser, as this would be a HUGE boon to our mission. Yours, Charles Evans CFO, Bitcountant Co-Organizer, Miami International Bitcoin On 09/09/2013 09:48 AM, Ricardo Varela wrote: > hallo all, > > I was going to say that this was very quickly deriving into a "let's > throw out the baby with the bath water" discussion. Some of the > existing regulations are there to contemplate "use cases" that some > projects may not have had to face yet and I think its not so wise to > quickly disregard them all as "no longer relevant" > > On that note: I think it's important to separate the different areas > in WebPayments that have to do with payment technologies, regulation, > and virtual currencies. I don't see why we have such a zeal in linking > all of those together. Are we saying that there will be no WebPayments > standard until we have fully operational virtual currencies? > > If that is the case then we have a long way to go.. particularly > because virtual currencies still have to find its place in an existing > market among existing regulations (some of which as I mentioned are > actually there for a reason) and as such may take a bit of time to > settle in, adapt and evolve.. > > In the meantime, my opinion is that it would be good that at least > some parts of those web payments find their way to real users out > there, even if they have to be built over the "old" payment > infrastructures > > Saludos! > > --- > ricardo > > > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca > <mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca>> wrote: > > RE: "in an era where constraints/requirements are no longer relevant" > > That might or might not be the case. Here's a useful reference, for > example, which the libertarians on this list will recognize: > http://library.mises.org/books/Friedrich%20A%20Hayek/Choice%20in%20Currency.pdf > > There used to be diverse currencies operating under all sorts of legal > frameworks, so it's helpful to look backwards, not just forwards, for > economic and legal foundations. > > BTW, even Thomas Edison worked on a currency proposal: > http://faculty.washington.edu/dtwills/resources/Edisons-Monetary-Option.pdf > http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9E0CEFD71E30E633A25750C2A9619C946395D6CF > > Global peer-to-peer virtual currencies innovate some aspects of money, > but not all. > > Joseph Potvin > > > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 8:10 AM, pindar wong <pindar.wong@gmail.com > <mailto:pindar.wong@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca > <mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca>> wrote: > >> > >> RE: "Not a technical issue" > >> > >> These issues are technical in law. > > > > > > Sure... the legal code to be sure. > > > >> > >> They set some of the business > >> requirements for the application layer. There will be battles about > >> these business requirements because they really matter. > > > > > > Fully agree. Some were set in an era where > constraints/requirements are no > > longer relevant and hence the importance of interfacing with the > traditional > > banking/financial communities to help manage their expectations > of the > > change that is already underway. I guess that's why it's > important to > > participate in non-technical standards discussion, such as the IGF. > > > > p. > > > >> > >> Joseph Potvin > >> > > > > > > -- > Joseph Potvin > Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations > The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman > http://www.projectmanagementhotel.com/projects/opman-portfolio > jpotvin@opman.ca <mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca> > Mobile: 819-593-5983 <tel:819-593-5983> > LinkedIn (Google short URL): http://goo.gl/Ssp56 > > > > > -- > Ricardo Varela - http://twitter.com/phobeo > "Though this be madness, yet there's method in 't"
Received on Monday, 9 September 2013 15:47:49 UTC