If we can have Bit Coin, why can't we have our own non centralized online government?

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Here's a crazy idea..

Don't like your country? dream of moving to an island with a bunch of like minded fellows to start over, well you can't. Not unless you happen to be rich which leaves most of us out.

But what if we could move to the island in spirit, say through an online global internet based Nation.. or Nations.. We have Bit Coin and other international internet currencies, so whats to stop people from forming new non centralized cyber governments?

I think the idea is interesting and may have merit. The details would have to be fleshed out of course and our respective governments wouldn't like it.. heck it may even be illegal in some way.. and we would all be living in two different landscape ideologies, one physical and one cyber with interactions of both carrying into the other. Still it could be a way to rally like minded people together.




posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link   
They cant control your money or the form its in, but they wont give up the government seats!!!

That would be FAR too much power to the people.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 04:44 PM
link   
E-democracy




E-democracy (a combination of the words electronic and democracy) incorporates 21st century information and communications technology to promote democracy



Central e-Government




The e-Governance Academy (eGA) is a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society



Evaluating the E-democracy Dream: A Case Study on Estonia




— This paper lays the groundwork for a comprehensive typology in uncovering the factors influencing the degree of shift to wards e-democracy


These could be helpful readin man, some countries are trying it, Icelands pretty much going that way too really. Micro footprint, efficient semi passive administrations.

Varying degress of acutal liberties of course.

Ideologicaly some sort of Jeffersonian democracy cant have total anarchy surely.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Here in Canada, there is the Online Party of Canada which debates online over issues and allows participants a say. The ultimate goal is to vote on issues, not personalities/parties chosen for us. They are working towards becoming a real political voice, but I'm not sure where its at these days. Worth it for Canadians to check out.

This seems the natural thing to do rather than vote for some political celebrity with a huge corporate backing.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
It's not a crazy idea, nor is it an original idea by you (this sounds mean, I am not trying to sound like an ass, but I don't know how to say it differently), even if you came at it via your own brainstorming.

The good news is that others are already working on new voting protocols based on bitcoin-like technology.

More good news is that it's an idea whose time has probably come, since many people such as yourself are thinking such ways.

Type "bitcoin voting" into Google to read many diff. links covering similar technology/thinking.

Bitcoin-like tech is going to revolutionize a number of things in the coming years. I think voting might be a ways off, unless they can easily solve some of the inherent challenges (like enforcing one vote per person with no corrupt registration entities along the registration chain of trust). Also, imo, the people with the most influence in the world right now don't want to make things easier for everyone to vote. They would rather make it a pain in the ass/not disrupt the status quo, since it already favors them. Just my opinion.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Bellor

Cool links.. Thanks. I'll check them out.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: igloo

Your essentialy forming a digital co-operative, seems like the sanest thing to do given that people realise thats how good technology actualy is now.

I demanded that instead of spending the islands money on doomsday weapons It is agreed small solar charged UAV's deliver all my daily hydro vegetables to my window every morning for free.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Here is the situation as I understand it: a monetary system only has "worth" if the people perceive some value in it. Take the gold standard for instance. People had a lot of faith in paper currency because they knew it was backed by gold. The money was perceived to have some value other than the government saying it has a value.

With Bitcoin things are a bit different, and personally I see the currency declining in the future, although many think it is just getting started and will take off. Mining Bitcoins today is much harder than it was previously, and what I think is going to happen is that much of the wealth will stop flowing. Your everyday person is not going to ever use such a currency, because there is still much risk involved, a single bitcoin is expensive, and they are not all that easy to come by...at least not like a dollar in US currency, a single unit of monetary value.

Even though we are off the gold standard and the FED just prints money, people still have faith that the government knows what it is doing, even though the government is not really who is printing the money in the US, lol. A bit ironic in a small way.
But the main reason people have faith in the US dollar is because it still has a lot of purchasing power.

Going back to Bitcoin, basically it was just some guy inventing a currency. What occurred was that 21 million coins was set as a cap, and coins started being given to people who were solving problems using their computer power to help the Bitcoin network. So they were "awarded" in a sense. Their only real value comes from the fact that there are people who are willing to assume they have value, and treat them as valuable.

So theoretically a new currency could come out, and if everyone started using it, it could work. But without that widespread faith the system cannot succeed. I suppose it could still work amongst those willing to use it, but that would be a hassle, because you couldn't deal exclusively in that currency, and would have to supplement it with another currency. Theoretically money could be printed and given away to make everyone wealthy, and if the people still thought it has a certain value, it would be used. But the problem with something like that comes from the fact that if everyone were rich, nobody would work, lol. Economics can be quite complicated sometimes, and sometimes quite easy and intuitive. I am not an expert by any means, as I have a hard time with even some of the basic concepts myself.

But it seems like common sense once you realize that anything can be used as money if the people have a certain degree of faith in it. The main problem that would be faced in creating a non-government regulated currency would be that unless it is backed by gold or something else to give it value, people won't use it on a large scale. Another problem is the fact that someone still has to control the system. This is sort of a problem in any democracy because authority must be delegated to other people, and one can never be certain what that person will do.

So a non-government regulated system can still end up being monopolized, because no matter how good your intentions, the people cannot actually control what is going on. This has happened with the Federal Reserve in the US. Those who seek power will ultimately become leaders of the institution, and things will not work like they were supposed to. That is another problem in democracy in general...often times those who seek power are the very people that you don't want in power, although you don't realize it because these people put a smile on their face and pretend to care about you. Often times they don't.

And these same people will come to control any standardized system, and to be honest I do not know if safeguards could ever be put into place to prevent such a gradual takeover. Think about all the revolutions that have ever occurred in the name of freedom, when they've actually succeeded. For a time things seem alright, but eventually the same problems will crop up due to corruption. It is an inevitable fact, and the only way to prevent such a thing that I can think of would be to create ironclad regulations that are NOT subject to change of any kind. But then you end up with a system that cannot grow and progress. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but that is how I see things. There would be upsides too, but I don't see a new system replacing the old without something significantly different about the system.
edit on 4/26/14 by JiggyPotamus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I only mention Bit Coin because it has set a precedent for taking something that is normally controlled via each country (Money) and creating an international cyber version. Bit Coin is in a way a model of how other things that pertain to an online government could be created online. The people of said internet nation would not necessarily be using Bit Coin as their currency.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnPhoenix

They kind of do that with MMOs and a few innovative online communities (that work like MMOs).

I think you really just want to play Eve Online.

But I agree; it would be a cool experiment to do something like that but with your idea as a central focus.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: igloo
Here in Canada, there is the Online Party of Canada which debates online over issues and allows participants a say. The ultimate goal is to vote on issues, not personalities/parties chosen for us. They are working towards becoming a real political voice, but I'm not sure where its at these days. Worth it for Canadians to check out.

This seems the natural thing to do rather than vote for some political celebrity with a huge corporate backing.


I've often thought that, if I ever ran for president, I would run on a similar platform. I would convert the White House website into a huge political voting site where people (who are registered to do so) can go on and vote for things. I would base every single one of my decisions on those results. And if there was a result of 90% or more on an issue, I would use an executive order to make it happen.

"Representative" democracy is obsolete with the current information age and my platform would be an effort to dismantle it.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Along these lines, I came across this neat article about Dual Citizenship for Americans.

It appears that if an American citizen did apply for citizenship in an online nation and was granted citizenship, they would be able to keep their American citizenship without having to renounce it.


Q: Is dual citizenship legal? Can I become a citizen of another country without losing my U.S. citizenship? And don't people have to renounce their citizenship when they become U.S. citizens?

A: Dual nationality is legal. People who become U.S. citizens don't automatically forfeit their previous citizenship. And U.S. citizens can keep their citizenship when becoming citizens of another country.

John Roska is a lawyer with Land of Lincoln Legal Assistance Foundation


www.news-gazette.com...

That's the short answer. Check the link above for a much longer in-depth answer.
edit on 26-4-2014 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnPhoenix

You have overlooked one prime fact about governments. They all want a goodly share of your wealth.

And I figure that an internet government would email a shovel for you to fix the pot holes in the street outside your house.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun

I would not partake in a new online government that taxes it's people. No need to anyway because cyberspace has no potholes.

The purpose of this government would not be to re-create or move the US government (or your local governments) into an online place. This government as an entity will not conduct affairs that effect your physical location directly. If the citizens of said cyber nation had a cement truck and offered to repave my pothole until my physical city can get to it, then I'd say these citizens were an asset to the cyber nation and understood it's purpose.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun

Nah man thats a crazy police state, you dont want police state shenanigans, the state cant presume on my labour, may aswell have work camps where the vast majority of the people have to get into these metal cages and take themselves to this giant secure concrete bunker and are forced to spend most of there waking life toiling away!.

Madness!
edit on 26-4-2014 by Bellor because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnPhoenix

I actually have honestly considered starting my own country...it is indeed possible from what I read but Idk how feasible.

Basically there are some islands that are not that expensive...under 100k....you could even branch out and make large floating areas to attach to it. The problem is a lot of these islands look like one small hurricane or tsunami would wipe it out.

You could just make a commune...get some solar panels and have people that take boats back to the mainland...for supplies. This could work if you had a group of retired people or who had some income to invest or support the island. If it was successful you could then seek to break away from the government you bought it from and then declare yourself your own country to the UN. It actually has been done but not many take it serious.

If there is anyone interested in actually doing this let me know....I think a group of about 10 people could get the project going..

Ive even considered making the national language Esperanto since there is no country that has it as the national language yet there are some die hard fans of it...its easy to learn and become fluent in a very short period of time and we could raise more funding as wed be the only country to have Esperanto as our official language.

Wed also have to find a host country totally cool with it...and these are islands are pretty small so I think it wouldnt be a problem. We could even make defense pacts with the host country hahaha...lets do it! WE can also make Bitcoin our international currency when dealing with other countries...or even make our own.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmicexplorer

If you make it there I wish you the best.

I'm an avid fisherman. as much as i'd love to live on an island I think it would be a logistics nightmare if you had to import a lot of stuff... plus the storms.. I'm from New Orleans and had my share of killer hurricanes.

I looked up Esperanto because I had never heard of it. Thanks.. I might learn that, that's pretty awesome - a recent man made language that some people even learn from birth! (seems like it's Latin based?)



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnPhoenix

You would need to do this.


Seaweed farming

automate it as much as possible.



posted on Apr, 28 2014 @ 02:58 PM
link   
I've thought about this in the past, but decided that it probably wouldn't work. What would an online government do anyway? Pass laws for the internet? Govern the web? Most people would oppose an online version of Big Brother even if it was done in good faith because, as what usually happens over time, all the wrong people find their way into these positions of power.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: JiggyPotamus
Here is the situation as I understand it: a monetary system only has "worth" if the people perceive some value in it. Take the gold standard for instance. People had a lot of faith in paper currency because they knew it was backed by gold. The money was perceived to have some value other than the government saying it has a value.

With Bitcoin things are a bit different, and personally I see the currency declining in the future, although many think it is just getting started and will take off. Mining Bitcoins today is much harder than it was previously, and what I think is going to happen is that much of the wealth will stop flowing. Your everyday person is not going to ever use such a currency, because there is still much risk involved, a single bitcoin is expensive, and they are not all that easy to come by...at least not like a dollar in US currency, a single unit of monetary value.

Even though we are off the gold standard and the FED just prints money, people still have faith that the government knows what it is doing, even though the government is not really who is printing the money in the US, lol. A bit ironic in a small way.
But the main reason people have faith in the US dollar is because it still has a lot of purchasing power.

Going back to Bitcoin, basically it was just some guy inventing a currency. What occurred was that 21 million coins was set as a cap, and coins started being given to people who were solving problems using their computer power to help the Bitcoin network. So they were "awarded" in a sense. Their only real value comes from the fact that there are people who are willing to assume they have value, and treat them as valuable.

So theoretically a new currency could come out, and if everyone started using it, it could work. But without that widespread faith the system cannot succeed. I suppose it could still work amongst those willing to use it, but that would be a hassle, because you couldn't deal exclusively in that currency, and would have to supplement it with another currency. Theoretically money could be printed and given away to make everyone wealthy, and if the people still thought it has a certain value, it would be used. But the problem with something like that comes from the fact that if everyone were rich, nobody would work, lol. Economics can be quite complicated sometimes, and sometimes quite easy and intuitive. I am not an expert by any means, as I have a hard time with even some of the basic concepts myself.

But it seems like common sense once you realize that anything can be used as money if the people have a certain degree of faith in it. The main problem that would be faced in creating a non-government regulated currency would be that unless it is backed by gold or something else to give it value, people won't use it on a large scale. Another problem is the fact that someone still has to control the system. This is sort of a problem in any democracy because authority must be delegated to other people, and one can never be certain what that person will do.

So a non-government regulated system can still end up being monopolized, because no matter how good your intentions, the people cannot actually control what is going on. This has happened with the Federal Reserve in the US. Those who seek power will ultimately become leaders of the institution, and things will not work like they were supposed to. That is another problem in democracy in general...often times those who seek power are the very people that you don't want in power, although you don't realize it because these people put a smile on their face and pretend to care about you. Often times they don't.

And these same people will come to control any standardized system, and to be honest I do not know if safeguards could ever be put into place to prevent such a gradual takeover. Think about all the revolutions that have ever occurred in the name of freedom, when they've actually succeeded. For a time things seem alright, but eventually the same problems will crop up due to corruption. It is an inevitable fact, and the only way to prevent such a thing that I can think of would be to create ironclad regulations that are NOT subject to change of any kind. But then you end up with a system that cannot grow and progress. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but that is how I see things. There would be upsides too, but I don't see a new system replacing the old without something significantly different about the system.


Cryptocurrency in general is an amazing step forward for us, it is a tool for us! The value comes from the usability and the freedom and privacy that it offers people... You say people have no faith in digital currencies yet state Bitcoin is expensive... why is it expensive? Because there is demand!

As the people of greece if they trust the nations currency! With Bitcoin you become the banker! You can even become the money creator... But remember, there is not only Bitcoin now, there are 200-300 different coins out there now. I am actually involved with one of them called Netcoin.

Is it volatile? Sure it is, but people like that because you can make money inbetween those periods of volatility. As acceptence grows (as it is) stability will come because the coins will be spread out between more people.

Personally I think cryptocurrencies are the most exciting tool to come along since the internet! I use it over fiat currency anyday of the week. And it's money I printed! I created! No better feeling than that.

As for mining, Bitcoin is hard but price reflects that and also there are various coins you can mine, you are not restricted to only Bitcoin.
edit on 29-4-2014 by Meee32 because: (no reason given)


EDIT: Iceland has it's own coin now, I was thinking you could make an ATScoin lmao. Very easy to do nowadays, I can make that happen lol.

edit on 29-4-2014 by Meee32 because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join