2Bit Rigged Legal Tenderings!

The exhale and snicker with relief that, for now, bitcoiners get away with because a judge ruled that its chits should not be called money seems at best disingenuous. It's like a presidential contender celebrating his commitment to gender justice by bashing every woman in site. No one believes the plea. And in the long term, the results are hardly going to be as settling as the happy crowds suggest.

Pretending that bitcoin is NOT money comes across as a case of trying to play and rig the system at the same time. It's a lot like an effort to stack the worth of one's golden coins and deluding one's self into believing these piles will never tumble. Rather transparently wrong and self-serving.

As I’ve mentioned before, I’m hardly an expert on the technology of cybercurrency, thus not an expert on all of the intricacies that MIGHT go into a legal argument. But I don't believe I need to be to recognize the bad move this decision portends.

Then again, in reality, this site exists because of the pending blockchain tsunami (the Blockchain Revolution as it has been smartly called) not because of coinage arguments, no matter whether in the shape of bits or bytes or any other kind of tender.

The BlockChain Society we envision seeks to cash in on how the chained together existence and decentralized nature of a node-based society bodes well for the building of a healthier, smarter, more empowering society. The money is even a bit of a necessary distraction, necessary mostly because it would be nice to have some rich and powerful looking our way.

So let's agree to agree that everyone accepts that Bitcoin is money and it needs to be accepted as such. It will go nowhere pretending otherwise. Not to mention that failing to do so will generate ungodly degrees of cognitive dissonance among the banking types who are already all over these ... things ... called bitcoins!

It's better to simply start working towards monetary compliance. I for one don’t want you distracted by a small issue like this when the real work of blending the values of profit and purpose into a new and better Blockchain Society lies just ahead around the bend of the river of change.

[NOTE: For those interested, I just started creating a CrowdRise site for soliciting business backing. You got it, for money. That site doesn't accept bitcoins. I have to deal with this just as I have to learn how to collect them, but that doesn't mean we should hold up on building the foundation for our better society. Should one of you desire to exhibit her or his charitable side, in hopes of the promise of future ROIs ...  https://www.crowdrise.com/bcvesting----impact-based-blockchain-investments]  

Join TheConversation(.com) on EnGENDERment

I don't generally post just memes, but what the heck. I found this article and pulled a quote because it relates so well. Thought you might enjoy:

Halloween Bowls of PrEP

Most of what I will say here would likely drive public health and medical researchers nuts. But ... be that as it may be ... the fact is that as a nation (and the world) we ought to be treating HIV/AIDS prevention and care medications suck as Truvada like Halloween candy. Bowls full of these PrEP pills should be put about in places so that anyone in need can come knocking and grabbing without charge and without worry. This is the happy-go-lucky approach to sexuality and it needs to be the same for prevention threats. At worse it will bring about some vocal screams and monstrous agreements to do more.

Drugs like Truvada, when used in any way, shape or manner close to the ways directed, are so effective at suppressing the virus that latches on to the human immune system that it is basically a full and undisputed cure. A recent article on TheConversation.com notes that the biggest issues regarding the drug are connected to costs and who pays for the meds ... NOT the efficacy of the drugs themselves. PrEP fixes those who are sick and stops the progression to a disease state for those infected -- at rates that are so close to 100% it is ridiculous. And where the percentages are lower the obvious answers are cultural and community-based.

I say this knowing of the consequences. The likely results will include overuse of the pills. It could possibly lead to a global evolutionary adjustment so that the ingredients become less successful eventually. And surely, it would unleash a sexual revolution where people are basically forced to confront safe and unsafe issues head on. Which, to me, is a great thing.

The fact is that learning -- I’m mostly speaking culturally in this context -- is a painful and expensive process. But we cannot overlook that reality, no matter whether we get there with guarded steps for some or by inundating the entire populous with what might be too much of a great thing. In the early drug availability efforts, when HIV/AIDS was at its horrible worst, we tried slow and steady approaches. The cost was horrific for the deprived and vulnerable. The issue being: the cost and who paid ... as well as whether the drugs worked.

We have eliminated one of those considerations. In the PrEP iteration, we don’t have to accept that; plus, we have an added benefit: science innovation isn’t stopping. New generations of medications and helpful monitoring technologies will ... are emerging quickly. This will mean Truvada et al. will depart and better options will takeover anyway -- very likely before biophysical reactions occur from the excessive availability of Truvada.

Add to this the fact that other types of modern technologies that capture and display images of what is really happening to people across the planet and it will become impossible for medical caregivers to keep good drugs away from those in need, even if they have to get them by creating unsafe, criminal, and oppression-heavy underground market and supply alternatives. This helps no one and could send us off on other deeply disturbing tangents.

Placing the meds in locations where they can be taken as needed (in conjunction with a immersive media and community empowerment campaign) will solve the most direct issue and allow us to see what happens as the illness is rapidly chased away.

Halloween is supposed to be scary. And candy is bad. But together the social experience works. It seems only fair that we extend the same sense of unity to other domains where a few monsters might scare some sense into our cultural fears.

Obama Momma Initiative (#EngenderedLivesMatter)

OMG! the timing is perfect for an OMI! If nothing else, it will give the CGIers something more to dry about. Like it or not folks, #EngenderedLivesMatter … in a girl and boy kind of way!

With a woman as Commandress-In-Chief and a nation fed up with the condescending attitudes of old, tired, fearful, and angry men (particularly those with my pale persuasion), there could hardly be a better chance for outgoing President Obama -- likely the best American leader for the coming reality -- to move ahead rather dramatically by forcing our great nation to come face-to-mirror with our gender avoidance tendencies.

The Clinton Global Initiative (CGI)(paired with 66 member Global Coalition, which their work likely helped inspire) charted an undeniable course for a much different, unified multinational look at the world that is shaped much less by machismo militarism. Which lays the foundation for another broad-based effort to give voice to the women (and girls, hopefully with men and boys as allies!). A perfect place to position an OMI, Obama Momma Initiative, that we could all so admire!

Ironic, wouldn’t it be? An OMI would put President Black Man (hand-in-hand with his magnificent FLOTUS Black Woman wife) very aggressively alongside our nation’s first President Woman! An outstanding arrangement that could readily marry the progressive ideals of the past with the coming eight years of global gender realignment!  

It might just be me, but the entire idea of an OMI would be very true to the original concept behind the 1980s Take Our Daughters To Work Day event a few years ago -- though I would hope it might go further towards what I recommended back then.

Taking women and girls out to do the work is a perfect invitation to invite the men and boys home! The world needs a collaborative effort to do more than just recognize the power and empowerment potential of the women and girls of the planet. It also needs to facilitate a better future when the men and boys get why #EngenderedLivesMatter … a fantastic OMG moment for a well-tailored OMI!

Don't Killer Our Robots

Dallas went where technology has not gone before: towards making cyber abilities a tool of security reactiveness. Explosively destructive reactiveness.

The apparent mastermind of the Dallas police slaughter was brought to an end by having a remote detonation device (C4 from new reports) advance, trap, then explode proximate to him, taking his craziness out of public danger.

Law enforcement, faced with an untenable reality wrapped around today’s gun-heavy culture -- literally surrounded themselves by an armed and frightened, poorly regulated public militia of bad ideas! -- showed it could do what it does well -- turn technology into a killing machine. And who can argue with their result?

The bad guy had a gun, an assault weapon that gun advocates openly praise -- one able to fire scores of projectiles per minute; you know, something every squirrel hunter desperately needs! -- knew how to use it, and had isolated himself in a position where there was no way out.

So they did what they could: turned our robots into a killing machine.

This article in the light of morning following the Dallas Blue massacre captured the significance of this decision well. David A. Graham posted in The Atlantic a short piece entitled “The Dallas Shooting and the Advent of Killer Police Robots.” The piece says, with a seeming sense of pride, that "While many police forces have adopted robots—or, more accurately, remote-controlled devices—for uses like bomb detonation or delivery of non-lethal force like tear gas, using one to kill a suspect is at least highly unusual and quite possibly unprecedented."

Possibly, but this was not a tactic pulled out of the blue. It was a natural continuation of a trend that seems to favor using technology for law enforcement benefits over other viable options. And why not? Technology on many levels has been shown to be useful for numerous tactical advantages for the “good” guys, and there will undoubtedly be a hue and cry for more.

Where the danger with this lies centers on the imbalance caused by such a visualization -- namely, that cyber options are best considered to support or reinforce killing opportunities. But this is itself such an injustice. The real benefits of digital advancements lie in the fact that we can plug them into numerous positive and peacefully empowering efforts and strategies and make them work for the betterment of society … not just as another means to the end of an unfortunately set of circumstances; circumstances setup, one can argue, by global military over-reliance on weapons of massive assault potential to begin with.

Technology is well prepared to become part of the EMPOWERING heart of hyper-modern community policing methods, should we opt not to clothe it otherwise before we figure this out.

It is possible that good and engaging technology can quickly become a disarming police resource far more powerful than any type of guns, any militarization of weapons, or the entire notion that cops must be explosive representatives of front-line authoritarian control forces.

From communication platforms to decentralized connectivity and deep levels of participatory interactivity, cyber linking abilities may be able to redesign policing in ways that stop criminality before it organizes -- even in the minds of the crazy -- at the same time that it shines the light of honesty on well-doing and wrong-doing law officers who wrap themselves in the clothing of power.

SMART -- meaning technologically grounded -- community-policing strategies paired with smart and controllable guns will, in combination, add up to seeing technology as a friend of cultural ease - not just as a tool against ugly force.

I’ve previously elsewhere - and firmly believe now - that blockchain-based approaches offer many avenues to virtual empowerment (way more than financial or banking models). One such path could and should include making assault-style weapons monitorable and controllable. IMHO, there ought be no assault-capable guns on the streets of a just America that can discharge bullets at ridiculous RPMs (rounds per minute); at least not without there being equipment that can “see” these weapons through the eyes of public cyber guardians. In this day and age, neither cops nor bad folk should have dumb guns.

And the way to do this is by building the next generation of community policing around updated technology aspects that look well at technologies. This is not only doable, I envision that it may be feasible that it will make routine police positions such that they would no longer need to carry guns -- and when the soldiers of democracy don’t think guns are cool, the enemies of it will not either.

Robots will become increasingly sophisticated law enforcement intervention instruments quite quickly. As a society, however, it is up to us to make sure that this choice does not require making robots explosive devices for extreme actions. Technology is smarter than that, and we ought to be too.

IoT4Gs - A Special Place in Acronym Hell for Assault Guns

The Coming Internet of Things All For GUNS!

I like it when I have an inspiration of creativity, particularly at someone else’s expense! I mean, that’s what Twitter and the Social Media Zoo are all about, no?

Had the chance to ruffle some feathers on Twitter last night, poking the worried and armed about the path of the future for guns. I’m convinced -- even as a person who cares little for and knows little about guns -- that Smart Tech is going to deliver the death shot to Dumb Guns and ultimately disable the antics and tactics of organizations like the NRA, which I lovingly refer to by its actual efforts, the National Ridiculous Ass.

And by technology I’m thinking mainly of the rise of the Internet of Things … of EVERY and I mean EVERYTHING … and the damage these advancements will inflict on those who think guns are somehow exempt from progress. They clearly know little about node-based blockchain potentials.

As I’ve sought to explain routinely, why do folks believe that when my toaster will speak to my e-toothbrush that will then communicate with my refrigerator to alert the farmers who produce healthier food to send it to my grocer who can have it remotely delivered to my home … that when this happens … like in a year or two … guns are going to be left out in the old-fashioned wilderness all by themselves?

Because gunners take confidence in such self-deception. Because groups like the NRA have convinced them of this. Because they believe the Second Amendment has anything to do with their personal ownership of guns.  

Because those who fight for guns at any cost -- even the cost of 100 lives per day -- have such extreme separatist identities that they refuse to join the here and now. Instead, they prefer to be left alone with dangerous boy toys with SPM capacities that serve no humanitarian purpose.

Bad people are not coming to get most of us … or if they are, it will be through software and hardware. Smart Guns (over Dumb Guns) anticipate and adjust the odds … actually in favor of good gun users.  

Which is why I believe that there truly is a special place in the hell of twisted reasoning for such thinking. And it will only take a slight modification of the IoT acronym to play the appropriate changes out. An IoT4Gs … an Internet of Things for Guns … will serve to distinguish for most people that this special place deserves special consideration. Once so accepted, specialized and targeted changes can follow.

The emergence of blockchain and related connectivity processes and lifestyles (which I write about on another site, http://MyImpactView.wordpress.com) is perfectly armed for this assault on Dumb Guns. And that assault with the purpose of regaining control and management of guns is happening quickly. Which is why I suggest we get ready to play out the process in ways that work well with true and actual social and community interests.

There is something called Stuxnet, which is a form of malware … software and programming designed to infiltrate and disable machines and such as they operate. The time is nearing when this same OFFENSIVE capability will find a place in assault weapon oversight … which is why it deserves a classification of its own.

Iot4Gs works for me.

Hacking Hillary's Digital Comfort

We seem to want to punish candidates for being comfortable in their digital suits. 

Nearly all of us want, actually demand technology that gives us the best of access and convenience without the worries of having that comfort hacked apart (or open). But when politicos accept a similar desire -- when they show that they are comfortable and confident in their abilities -- some decide that they must stab that integrity.

This is likely Hillary Clinton's issue in regards to her email discomforts. She exemplifies comfort in her skills, including those that make her try to address criticisms when she ought not. 

There does not appear to be any element of what she did (or didn't do) regarding her email decisions that cannot be explained away as her simply shrugging with a sense of ordinariness concerning her digital tasks. She has likely accepted certain patterns of behavior as forms of efficiency -- behaviors that her staff at the State Department offices would normally seek to understand and adapt to. 

Most folks who depend on modern comm systems don't react with extremism -- and definitely not paranoia -- to the routine use of computerized techniques to move their work forward. And it seems we should want this for leaders in jobs that have massively complex schedules. Such a pattern fits what she said about setting up systems at the State Department. Her actions can be understood perfectly like this and carry no burden of bureaucratic deception, nor, of course, of any kind of criminal intent - other than the crime of caring about doing her work with digital speed. 

NOTE: The decision announced by the FBI on July 5, 2016, affirms the lack of criminality, but draws what appear to be undue inferences from her otherwise routine activities. If details are released, we can better judge me perspective. 

Hillary could easily have been doing what was necessary to do her job based on the level of comfort she has developed. Having others spend time worrying about this - and screaming chicken-little alerts - made any and all decisions she made seem exaggerated, thus causing her to overreact defensively to the whole idea of sophisticated technological advances by the State Department. Which was something that a recognized former Secretary, namely Colin Powell, expressly sought to counter. Hell, he even cashed in his top-notch, unimpeachable credentials when he was in office to force more reasoned reliance on technology. She could have known that from him and thus been sensitive.

Powell was SoS from the years 2001 through 2005. Have your social media and email skills and comfort evolved since then? Do you accept that you can carry on your professional work using such methods without grand thoughts of the vulnerabilities of the apps you use? 

The chances are that your skills have improved and that you work on systems without freaking out about them. The same is very probably true for Hillary as she took her position there 5 or more years later. Hacking during that time was nowhere near as prevolent as it is now. Unfortunately, an unforgiving few have turned their personal levels of tech craziness against others, and thus made her actions look sinister. 

Coulda Shoulda Woulda elements of her team and her decisions been better? Sure, I guess. Maybe by introducing deeper layers of distrust that undercut the comfort we want to value in the use of technology. The tech and security experts need be more responsible for this going forward, not backwards second guessing otherwise reasonable routines.

Hillary deserves being noticed for her comfort, even if comfort stil requires more learning.