You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Digital Activism’ category.
“Bitcoin self- regulates the production of money and clearing of
transactions that have traditionally been handled by banks and
monopolistic payment systems. As an encryption-based currency, Bitcoin
enables the secure transfer of value as content through almost any
network directly from sender to receiver without counter-party risk. Its
global autonomous network disrupts the old hierarchical financial
institutions and rebels against central authority, potentially rendering
the archaic payment systems irrelevant.” ~ Nozomi Hayase
How Bitcoin Will End World Poverty – {Video} William Blair partner Brian Singer explains how Bitcoin and blockchain encryption has a greater ability to bring more of the world’s population out of poverty than anything we’ve seen in decades. Those of you with slow or dialup connections here is a TRANSCRIPT.
On the NASDAQ blog, Martin Tiller ponders whether Bitcoin could destroy the Global Banking System… Here’s a snippet:
What has the industry worried is not so much Bitcoin as the blockchain. Banks are so used to taking a cut every time money changes hands that they cannot imagine life without that particular revenue stream. Here’s a LINK to the full article. Here is a PRINTABLE version.
Draw your own conclusions? Willing to share?
See Also: ゴールドマンサックス – ビットコインは金融の未来: http://bitantenna.com/2015/03/12/goldmansachs/ …
Eric Garris, @Antiwarcom founder and director, penned the piece “Google Doubles Down: Demands Review of All Antiwar.com Content,” which states: “On Wednesday morning (3/18/15), Google AdSense suspended ad delivery to Antiwar.com demanding that we remove our 11-year-old pages that showed the abuse by U.S. soldiers of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib. We publicized this and got a bit of coverage. [See in Gawker: ‘Google Suspends Site from Ad Network for Abu Ghraib Photo.”]
Yesterday [Thursday] Google contacted us and told us that they had given in and would be restoring ad service to Antiwar.com shortly. “However, this morning [Friday] they contacted us demanding that we remove this article. “Antiwar.com has no intention of allowing Google to dictate our content. We are looking into alternate sources of advertising and will not likely be working with Google AdSense in the future.” Read the rest of this entry »
One of the articles on my blog*spot that’s gotten a lot of attention, has done so for the wrong reasons.
Folks with a “rip and read” mentality have taken my typed words out of context. In “Two Sides To Every Story,” I present text and video representing opposing sides in a conflict.
I’m just reporting the facts, and, for example, if I say someone is a “light of hope” for a group of inidividuals, that’s what I mean.
Breakdown: If I wrote “Joseph Smith has been a light of hope and a poster boy for those who fancy polygamy,” I am correct. Right? So if I write “May Golan has been a crusader, a light of hope and a voice for concerned Israelis in South Tel Aviv,” is it not the same in essence? I am naming an individual, a position and a following. That’s all. I neither condemn nor condone.
The Problem: People with agendas only see the side of a conflict they want to see.
Speaking of agendas, there’s a disqus commenter with an anti-weblog agenda.
Operating under the hat GeorgeSalt, this fellow clearly has no love for blogs or bloggers:
he left a series of acrid comments after I left a link as a counter-argument on an Atlantic article that attacks the very concept of blogging. The author is clueless as to the reality of the craft, and I was hoping to get a response from him or otherwise engage him in dialog. Doesn’t seem like he’s interested!
Dave Lucas Reports 