Payment Addresses - Bitcoin Glossary

Behind Ripple’s Regulation Call: ‘Do Not Paint Us With a Broad Brush’

Behind Ripple’s Regulation Call: ‘Do Not Paint Us With a Broad Brush’
Ripple, whose business is built on providing financial institutions with an infrastructure to facilitate international payments and currency trades, has always been a more likely ally to governments and regulators than most other major blockchain projects and cryptocurrencies. Seeking to enhance rather than disrupt the operations of the legacy financial industry, the company has been long stressing the importance of a clear-cut policy framework for the banks to fully reap the fruits of blockchain-powered innovation.
The regulatory pushback against Libra, Facebook’s recently announced cryptocurrency, has apparently spurred Ripple’s determination to publicly take an even more pro-market-regulation stance. Late July saw the company’s leadership publish an open letter to the United StatesCongress (which also appeared as a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal), urging lawmakers to differentiate between the industry players and “not paint us with a broad brush,” but to promote regulation that recognizes fundamental differences between various actors in the space. In taking this potentially controversial step, what message did the creators of Ripple, Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen, want to convey?

The image of “The Other”

As noted in the letter, Ripple deploys blockchain-based innovations “in partnership with regulated financial institutions to enable the world to move money across borders” — a mission that is vastly different from the principles that informed Bitcoin’s original, subversive ideology. Some crypto purists even deny XRP the right to be called a true cryptocurrency on the grounds of the degree of the system’s centralization, as well as the fact that Ripple, the company, maintains control over a large share of XRP tokens.
Related: SWIFT Vs. Ripple — The Importance of Speed in Cross-Border Payments
While this debate is impossible to be definitively resolved absent a universal delineation of what a “true” cryptocurrency is, it is hard to argue that the way XRP is structured sets it apart from most other top coins, such as BTC or Ether (ETH), which operate on permissionless ledgers. This is perhaps the major fundamental difference that the letter emphasizes, the distinction between XRP and other high-cap digital assets.
However, there is more to it, since it is worth keeping in mind that the company Ripple, which issued the letter, is not synonymous with the XRP cryptocurrency. Ripple offers banks and other financial organizations products, whose main function is to decrease the costs of cross-border transfers; some of these solutions make use of XRP token, while others do not.
Clearly, the authors of the letter urge Congress not to lump them together with some other corporate entities that operate in — or are seeking to move into — the domain of payments traditionally served by institutional actors. Both the timing of the message and the passage about how “digital currencies have the opportunity to complement existing currencies like the U.S. dollar — not replace them” make it apparent that the jab is aimed at Libra, which President Donald Trump considers a threat to the dollar.

Compliance across the board

As Ripple stands to benefit from a coherent and uniform set of rules governing international transactions, the fintech firm has long been vocal about its support of regulatory certainty across jurisdictions of its operation. The statement on Ripple’s website proclaims that the company is committed to building “a regulatory framework for global payments that is predictable, clear, consistent, and pro-competition.” The company touts having obtained a digital asset-specific charter, called a BitLicense, from New York’s Department of Financial Services — the first instance of getting such an approval for an institutional use case.
Ripple also has a record of declarations supportive of heightened regulation of the blockchain industry akin to the recent letter. In 2018, Ryan Zagone, director of regulatory relations at the firm, addressed the United Kingdom’s government with a call to put an end to the Wild West of cryptocurrencies by instituting rules of the game that would mitigate risks without hindering innovation. Similarly to the letter penned by Garlinghouse and Larsen, Zagone’s appeal drew a comparison between the current state of the blockchain sector and the early years of the internet.
These statements were not merely lip service to appease the regulators. Shortly after the international Financial Action Task Force issued guidelines that introduced more stringent Know Your Customer requirements for cryptocurrency-related businesses, Ripple entered partnership with the startup Coinfirm, which specializes in compliance and is reportedly set to furnish the new client with a range of Anti-Money Laundering (AML) information.
Other reports allude that Ripple could be privy to potentially far-reaching discussions with international regulators, including the International Monetary Fund, in which the guardians of the global financial order discuss ways to integrate blockchain technology into the workings of traditional institutions.
Such positioning looks logical for a company with a global focus, whose role is better defined as facilitator rather than disruptor. Apparently, Ripple’s ideal regulatory scenario looks very different from that of the majority of other companies that make use of cryptocurrencies. The company’s preferred arrangement would likely entail a uniform set of global cross-border payments regulations, complemented by stringent AML policies to limit the public networks’ capacity to facilitate such exchanges pseudonymously.

XRP vs. Libra: Is a collision inevitable?

Ripple’s position as a pro-regulation mediator between global regulators and the crypto industry has been unchallenged for a while, as other major blockchain systems simply lacked both centralized agency and the need to closely interact with legacy financial institutions by design. The game changed when Facebook upended the space with the announcement of Libra — a global payments system with a potential billion-user reach and enough clout to tailor global regulatory frameworks to its own needs by directly appealing to national governments.
It is not just the status of the regulators’ darling, though, that was threatened by the prospect of Facebook’s megaproject materializing. While it may look like Ripple and Libra specialize in separate segments of the remittance market — the former concentrating on interbank payments and the latter primarily concerned with transfers between individuals — some recent developments point to the tendency toward convergence of the two. Perhaps the most indicative of all is the recently announced partnership between Ripple and the global payments network MoneyGram, illustrating the company’s interest in the retail remittances domain.
As Libra’s initial momentum got bogged down in lawmakers’ suspicious hostility, Ripple’s leadership evidently seized upon an opportunity to counterattack. Speaking on Bloomberg TV on the same day that the open letter to Congress was published, Ripple’s CEO, Garlinghouse, offeredample criticism of Facebook’s “arrogant” approach to cryptocurrencies, again siding with the traditional financial system and supporting President Trump’s assertions of the dollar’s superiority over any other would-be global currency.
Along with his remarks on Libra, Garlinghouse also took time to denigrate public blockchain systems such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, which are allegedly beholden to the disproportionate influence of Chinese miners — the kind of fearmongering that is ostensibly designed to impress a certain strain of U.S. policymakers.

Between the lines

Ultimately, is Ripple’s pro-regulation crusade just another manifestation of the company’s longstanding public view or was it an outburst triggered by the imminent threat from the Libra side? It is likely both: a response to tectonic shifts in the crypto landscape evoked by Facebook’s ascendance to the scene and a vocal reminder to the authorities that the company’s behavior has always been different from that of the so called “irresponsible actors.” Lindsay Danas Cohen, chief operating officer and general counsel at digital assets platform Velocity Markets, sees Ripple’s recent actions as a manifestation of regulatory goodwill. He told Cointelegraph:
“Similar to other industries, such as financial services, regulatory compliance in the blockchain and digital asset space requires commitment. Crucial to this commitment is ensuring that ‘regulatory compliance’ is a pillar of any company in the space and that such compliance is built into a company’s DNA. […] We believe it is crucial to work with lawmakers and regulators in the U.S. to ensure that we bring world-class emerging technology to the forefront while also developing a proper regulatory framework to address related risks.”
Michael Poutre, managing partner of blockchain platform Terraform Capital, told Cointelegaph that the calculus behind the open letter has much more to do with the emergent competition rather than with Ripple’s penchant for regulation:
“Libra is a direct competitor, and a superior one. If Libra gains traction, Ripple will fall to the ranks of an 'also ran'. The letter they authored goes against virtually everything Ripple was started for. They are attempting to kill Libra in the crib, so it can't grow up to kill them. The letter has the appearance of being disingenuous, and it lauds the institutions Ripple was created to subvert.”
Poutre also believes that Ripple has been caught up in a difficult situation whereby it is having to side with a lesser evil:
“Libra is a better solution — but has a lot of work to be done for it to work and go live. Ripple is speaking from both sides of its mouth by stating that governments have historically handled this well as are needed going forward. They don't believe that for a minute, but the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Ripple hates regulation, but needs the regulators this last time to try and kill a superior product. And you know what, it may work. Congress loves to be told how smart they are.”
Whether it is one or the other, at the very least, the letter to Congress contributes to our ability to map the crypto space and Ripple’s place in it. In an industry in which ideology plays a considerable role, the company that owns more than half of all XRP ever to be issued has confidently put its stakes on the incumbent financial system. Even if the regulators won’t notice the move, the crypto community certainly will.
submitted by Rajladumor1 to omgfin [link] [comments]

What is Bitjell? What is Jellcoin?

Definition of Jell
(of jelly or a similar substance) set or become firmer. "the stew is jelling" synonyms: set, stiffen, solidify, thicken, harden;
(of a project or idea) take a definite shape; begin to work well. "everything seemed to jell for the magazine" synonyms: take shape, fall into place, come together, take form, work out;
(of people) relate well to one another. "it's gratifying seeing everybody jelling"
What is Bitjell?
Here's the concept in a nutshell. Bitcoin demonstrated a fantastic, successful model, creating a currency through the "synergies of self interest". By providing incentives to early adopters, Bitcoin "bootstrapped" itself into a currency worth about ten billion dollars in five years.
Many people have tried to duplicate this success by creating so-called "alt-coins". This is not yet another attempt at an alt-coin.
Instead, this is an attempt to create the same "synergies of self interest", by emulating the Bitcoin coin distribution model, but instead of creating a currency, creating a company.
If there were no regulatory issues, I would have set up Bitjell to issue stock. 21 Million shares, 50 shares every ten minutes, following the same model as Bitcoin. Set out a plan for the company, and as people around the world perform work, their work is rewarded with company shares, bitcoins, cash, titles, etc.
Unfortunately, the regulatory environment makes this difficult. In order to issue company shares legally in some countries (including the US) beyond the founders, there are tons of rules to follow to be legally compliant. We'd have to take shareholder names and federal ID / social security numbers, file paperwork with the government, etc. Despite many Bitcoiner's general resistance to any legal compliance, Bitjell will strive to be legally compliant. But initially, we are not asking for names and ID's - just a bitcoin address. Privacy of participants will be maintained as long as possible.
This means that any activities on Bitjell by early participants are at your own risk, and are not under any formal promise to receive ownership, voting rights, etc. It will be this way until the legal framework is in place. This is a disclaimer like "void where prohibited", because without the legal framework in place (such as a corporation issuing shares), Bitjell (or this author) can't promise anything or make any offer to sell or exchange a security.
However, the plan - plan, not promise (for legal reasons!) - is to distribute what we are calling "Jellcoins" to early participants. The rate of distribution is intended to match the production schedule of Bitcoins, generally 50 coins every ten minutes on average. We will use the actual early distribution of Bitcoins as our model - the dates and times of the blocks can be found on For the record, the Bitjell Genesis block was "mined" (published) on the 5th anniversary of Bitcoin, and we will try to follow the Bitcoin mining schedule with a five year lag.
This means that Blocks 1-14 will be "mined" on 1/9. Note there was no "pre-mining". The 50 coins from the Genesis block are "owned by the collective" (i.e. analogous to company-owned shares).
So Jellcoins are somewhat analogous to shares in a company, if Bitjell were legally allowed to offer that. Note that Bitjell is not legally allowed to offer that, but someday, maybe, if possible, after the legal framework is in place, it's very possible (and planned) to make an offer to convert these to company shares at zero cost to the coin-holder. Unfortunately, this may require giving up some privacy (to register your shares). So you can expect this process to be less than 100%, as some coin-holders may not be reachable, some may opt not to convert coins to shares, etc. But we expect, and plan for, this process to be entirely at the discretion of the coin-holder, at no cost to them. (Plans sometimes change, and no promises can be made without encountering legal difficulties. But that's the plan as of Genesis day!)
The mission of Bitjell is to create a billion dollar company - a company with a billion dollars worth of value. It's that simple.
But what is Bitjell? Is it a company? Well, no, not yet. The plan is to follow regulatory steps and to be 100% compliant with the law, and found a company and grow it to a billion dollars of value, sharing ownership with people around the world. But it just makes no sense to do that at this point, until we have momentum and participants. So Bitjell is best thought of as an "interest group" or "club" which plans to start a business, but hasn't yet.
And Jellcoins ... what are they? Are they a currency? With FinCEN regulations and limitations regarding issuing currencies, the answer is definitely not! It is not a currency. It's not a tradeable commodity. It is not something that is for sale. It is modeled after "company shares", where the limit of the number of shares is 21 Million. But we can't call it company shares until the legal framework is in place.
So again, void where prohibited, regulated, licensed, or taxed. But Jellcoins are a tracking mechanism of your interest and participation in the Bitjell project.
Proof of Work function
Every alt-coin has some sort of Proof of Work function. Jellcoin is a little different. The "work" that will be performed is real stuff. Not numerical hashing. Instead, it will be contributions to the project.
If there were no regulatory environment, this would be simple. You perform work for the company, and you get rewarded in shares of company stock. That's the ultimate vision of Bitjell. Unfortunately, the regulatory environment makes this exceedingly difficult. SEC rules, labor laws, minimum wage laws, etc., of multiple jurisdictions around the world all get in the way of the ideal "virtual billion-dollar-startup".
In light of the regulations, until the proper corporate legal structure is in place to make everything legal in all appropriate jurisdictions, any "work" must not be work in the "minimum wage" sense of the word. (The term "work" is used, as it's a common term in crypto-currency - "proof of work") Any work performed must be done on a voluntary basis or a learning basis (Bitjell won't charge you for training, and you don't charge for work performed). You must not perform any "work" that is beyond a hobbyist contribution or a learning session, or otherwise cross over the legal requirements for "minimum wage" laws or any other laws for your jurisdiction. Again, the "void where prohibited, regulated, licensed or taxed" policy comes into play, until the appropriate legal framework is in place.
So How Will This Work?
Companies that will be worth a billion dollars in five years spring up about every month. We want to create one of those. ...out of nothing. We want to crowd-source the creation of a company, through "synergies of self-interest". We want to reward early adopters, so they recruit the very best people. We want people to contribute to figure out a way to create a company that sells real products or services to people, and generates real income, such that the total value of the company is greater than a Billion dollars. We want to follow in Bitcoin's footsteps, and reach that in under five years.
This means that we need to utilize the learnings of other successful organizations. Although we envision creating a non-traditional company, it should probably organize in a traditional manner: Corporate leaders and management, selected by a board of directors, who are voted on by the shareholders. Management sets the direction, individuals perform the work, and people get rewarded. Once the legal framework is in place, ideally, shares of the company will flow to workers every ten minutes. The greater the contribution toward the corporate goals, the greater the reward. Ideally, someday, this odd way to launch a company evolves into a real company like any other organization with which you are familiar.
Initially, Jellcoins, but ultimately corporate shares are one potential reward for participants. Other potential rewards are: Cash (Salary, Bonuses, payments for outsourced work), Titles, Responsibilities. This is no different from a traditional company. We believe that some people who see the vision will participate greatly, if they can earn a title of the "first CIO of what became a billion dollar company", for example. or "co-founder of what became a billion dollar company".
Further, there is little risk. Since participation can be pseudonymous, people can participate, receive a title (which can be verified on the "blockchain"), and then if Bitjell creates a billion dollar company, then they can prove their contribution by digitally signing something showing that it was their "address" that was associated with the title.
What will it take to make a billion dollar company?
I believe all it takes is some smart people with the right ideas, executing well, and maybe some start-up capital. I have some start-up capital. (I will be signing a message to prove that I have 1000 BTC as potential start-up capital for this project. I envision that being debt financing, not equity financing, although as mentioned before, no legal corporate entity is in place at this time, so some of these decisions will be made at a later date.)
What this doesn't mean is that you get a stake of 1000 BTC simply by participating. The 1000 BTC is a potential line of credit for a company that doesn't yet exist; nothing more at this point.
I have some ideas as to directions for the corporation as well, although I'm sure more heads are better than one when it comes to running this company successfully.
Hopefully this gives some idea of what I have in mind. Post any questions, and I'll try to address them.
submitted by BJ-1 to bitjell [link] [comments]

My Friendly Chat with an Apple Support Representative about Apple's Lack of Support for Bitcoin Wallets

This is my recent chat session with an Apple support representative. I've removed my actual name and case number from the chat record. It is otherwise unchanged.
TL;DR - Apple support appears not to have much of a clue when it comes to what Bitcoin even is, but the support representative at least appeared interested and promised to forward the feedback along. (Whether or not that happens or even matters is open for debate.)
Apple Support: Thanks for contacting AppleCare chat support. My name is Jamie. Please give me a moment to look over your information. Hey, _____ ! ! how are you doing today ?
Me: Hi Jamie, doing great thanks.
Apple Support: I would first like to thank you for using where we are here day and night for you! Please know your case number is: _________ for reference. Good! Glad to hear you are doing well! From what I can see here in the pre-chat notes you provided, it looks like you have some questions about your iPhone 5, is this correct?
Me: Yes, correct. I have been a very satisfied iphone owner for many years, upgrading regularly.
Apple Support: Well you are definitely in the right place, What's going on exactly?
Me: The problem is that Apple has banned all Bitcoin wallet apps even if they are well-known, secure, and trusted by the community The issue is causing me to consider switching to Android, which is very open and welcoming to the Bitcoin community.
Apple Support: I can definitely understand your position,its sounds like you are a far of the Bitcoin wallet. I love to customize my phone to my liking, and it would drive me mad if I couldn’t. I will be more than happy to go on some feedback options with you. **are a fan Please excuse my typing error ! Me and my keyboards autocorrect have a love-hate relationship.
Me: I have an internal "auto-correct" for the auto-correct feature, so no worries there.
Apple Support: Well, at least you know I’m a human !! Just to make sure I have a full understanding, may I has you some questions about the Bitcoin wallet app ?
Me: Sure, what would you like to know?
Apple Support: I must say that I am not familiar with it, it sounds like a application that holds information lil your credit cards. Can you tell me a little more about it ? My apologies if my assumption about the function is way off base, feel free to laugh at me.
Me: There are hundreds of Bitcoin wallet apps. Bitcoin is an open source protocol, sort of like HTTP or email. The Bitcoin wallet holds bitcoin, which can be used to purchase things from over 60,000 merchants including,, etc. Hard to summarize everything here, but I would encourage you to do some research on the topic. It is certainly fascinating and you will find it intellectually enlightening.
Apple Support: Oh I see ! I will definitely research this, I love to shop so you have certainly peeked my interest. The link to submit feedback about our products is Feedback . I can tell that we have made tons of changes based on customer feedback.
I also want to submit feedback through your case as well. Now I did a quick search in our app store and I see a version of Bitcoin, What is missing from what we offer ? I want to make sure that I address this correctly for you.
Me: Thank you for the link. I will definitely provide some direct feedback to Apple because if they don't soften their policy toward Bitcoin wallets, I'm afraid they will begin to lose life-long supporters and customers. Yes, the appstore does have Bitcoin related apps, but Bitcoin wallets are banned.
Apple Support: I can assure that you will be herd. With a technology world that changes everyday, I agree that we should allow some room to adapt. I understand, we are lacking the entire wallet portion.
Me: I'm glad to hear you feel that way! Now if we can only persuade others within Apple to feel the same way as we do!
Apple Support: I have been with apple so I have seen tons of changes made that are a direct result of what our customers ask for. I know this is frustrating for you, I encourage you to give us time. That along with the direct feedback that both you and I will submit I am sure you will be pleasantly surprised.
Me: Sounds good. Thank you for taking the time to consider my request. I have hopes that Apple can change the unfriendly Bitcoin policy and look toward innovation and the future, which is truly what Apple has done from the beginning. In fact, in my mind, Apple is nearly synonymous with innovation. That is why their position against innovation in this one case is so perplexing to me and many others.
Apple Support: I can see exactly what you are talking about , after doing a search online I can see tons of articles about Bitcoin. Thank you for allowing me to address this for you, Apple appreciates your loyalty through the times.
Me: Thanks again. And happy researching on the topic of Bitcoin. I promise you, you will not get bored!
Apple Support: This is super cool ! Thank you ! Again my name is Jamie, i appreciate your time.
Glad I could assist you in some way and I hope you have enjoy the rest of your day. If there's nothing else feel free to choose the end chat button in the bottom part of the window. If you do not end the session in 45 seconds, I will end it.
Any suggestions about our policies and/or feedback about our procedures, website, or chat disconnect issues can be directed to
Me: Cheers, good bye!
submitted by Always_Question to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Distributed Sub-Networks: Unbounded Distributed Scaling of the Bitcoin Network Without Any Forks

I believe I have discovered a method to scale the Bitcoin network without the need to update the Bitcoin core code. Neither a hard fork nor a soft fork should be necessary. This can be achieved by securely distributing the ownership of a single multisignature Bitcoin wallet. The distributed ownership would be managed by a sub-network using a new blockchain which could provide any functionality its users desire, thus allowing for unlimited scaling and feature adoption. The proof mechanism to enforce the sub-network would not be limited to ASIC-compatible proof of work. Furthermore, any sub-network would be able to make use of innovative current and future blockchain technologies without the need to create a separate token (a.k.a. altcoin). For example, if a network would like to offer smart-contract functionality and code execution (e.g. Ethereum), anonymity (e.g. Monero), or any other utility, then it can enforce all of these protocols with authentic Bitcoin, so as to not dilute the crypto space with the creation of new, “alternative” coins and the value addition of these features can be fully recognized by Bitcoin. This can be achieved by distributing the ownership of a single Bitcoin multisignature wallet existing on the Bitcoin core network. The wallet can be used as a system of account in a scalable sub-network in a manner that guarantees the accounts held in the sub-network are tied directly to coins in the official Bitcoin Core network.
There is a clear division in the Bitcoin community regarding the implementation of a network hard fork. It appears the two most prevalent sides of the argument are:
If it wishes to grow into something much bigger than it is today, then perhaps the Bitcoin community should come to a consensus in order to move forward and robustly defend against the significant external threats looming over it. These threats include:
Properties of the sub-chain:
All wallets on the sub-chain include two IDs and one private key. The IDs are: an address for the sub-chain and a corresponding address on the super-chain. Of course the private key will be used to sign transactions on the sub-chain.
All nodes on the sub-chain will simultaneously observe the super-chain and the sub-chain.
A multisignature wallet will be created on the super-chain with each portion of ownership controlled by a mining node on the sub-chain.
The sub-chain will include two different types of blocks. We will refer to the sets containing the different types of blocks as:
Blocks_A and Blocks_B will be mined independently from each other on the sub-chain.
Blocks_A blocks will contain a header to notify the network they belong to the Blocks_A set, and likewise for Blocks_B blocks.
Blocks_A blocks and Blocks_B blocks can be of arbitrary and differing sizes and can be appended to the sub-chain in an arbitrary order.
Mining On The Sub-Chain
Proof of Work (or any other proof mechanism) will be applied to Blocks_A blocks independently from Blocks_B blocks.
Nodes will earn transaction fees on the sub-chain when they solve a block belonging to Blocks_A.
Nodes will earn transaction fees on the sub-chain when they solve a block belonging to Blocks_B.
The sub-chain will contain X mining nodes and only N of those nodes, where N < X, (and in this case N = 9) will be able to control one of the private keys of the multi-sig wallet on the super-chain over the period between any two given Blocks_A blocks being solved on the sub-chain.
These 9 nodes will be chosen through some sort of consensus mechanism by the X nodes on the sub-chain. This can be determined by hashrate magnitude, largest stake, democratic election by node votes, etc.
The nodes that are allowed to be one of the 9 nodes managing the keys of the multisig wallet on the super-chain will be re-evaluated every time a Blocks_A block is solved on the sub-chain and subsequently applied to the super-chain. This will be accomplished by taking all transactions from the Blocks_A block, executing them on the super-chain along with a final transaction containing the entire surplus of the multisig wallet into a new multisig wallet created and controlled by the 9 new nodes chosen by the sub-chain.
The obvious risk here is that 5 of the 9 nodes can collude and run away (back to the super-chain) with the full amount of funds accounted for in the sub-chain. This threat should be possible to mitigate in various ways that create a risk for any of the 9 nodes to behave improperly.
Security can start by the rest of the network making a best effort to pick reputable nodes during every re-election of the 9. Nodes with an established reputation and the ability to earn transaction fees simply for relaying transactions, should be earning a reward that outweighs the risk of attempting to steal. Lastly, a smart-contract could be executed on the sub-chain that requires the 9 key-holders to stake a relatively significant amount before they are granted 1/9 access to a multisig wallet controlling all of the sub-chain’s funds. If any four or fewer of the 9 key-holders act maliciously while five or more do not, then the honest nodes will gain the stakes of all the malicious actors. This could foster an environment of distrust among the 9 key-holders leading them to worry if thief partners may actually be trying to betray them for financial gain.
Note: I believe SegWit will support up to 20-of-20 multisig wallets. It would provide far more security if we use 11-of-20 compared to if we use 5-of-9. In fact, the security of this pattern should scale exponentially as M and N increase.
Also worth considering is the use of a larger value of M relative to N such as 6-of-9, 7-of-9,... but if M gets too close to N, it decreases the number of nodes that need to collude to put the multisig wallet funds in a permanent deadlock. Of course there would be no financial benefit to this on the sub-chain or on the super-chain, but external enemies of Bitcoin might be willing to attempt this.
Moving Bitcoin Into The Sub-Chain
A user who wishes to move BTC into the sub-chain from the super-chain will first create a wallet on the sub-chain, then notify the sub-chain of an upcoming transaction that he will give to the multisig wallet on the super-chain, then AFTER confirmation on the sub-chain, the user will send funds on the super-chain to the multisig wallet. (The order here is important, so that an eavesdropper does not create the corresponding sub-chain wallet for the true user after the true user has already spent the coins on the super-chain.)
Final Points To Note
An issue some members of the Bitcoin community have with increasing block size is that it eventually leads to the exclusion of smaller miners who cannot store the entire blockchain history on their nodes. Sub-networks could possibly be configured to clear themselves out by moving all funds back into the super-chain and then restarting tabula rasa (i.e. with an empty blockchain).
A solution to bandwidth constraints of small miners could be introduced without the need for a hard fork on the super-chain if future blockchain developments solve the bandwidth issue.
Any number of these sub-chains can be created if various factions of the Bitcoin community want their own custom functionality.
This pattern requires super-chain users to trust the sub-chain network before entering it, but requires no trust or cooperation between the sub-chain and super-chain networks. The one attack super-chain miners can inflict on sub-chain transactions coming back to the super-chain is to exclude all transactions involving the multisig wallet. This can be rendered simply as an inconvenience, however, if miners on the sub-chain dual mine on the super-chain and eventually validate a block themselves.
submitted by Michael_John_C to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

What if I told you it was possible to fix the government with 3 constitutional amendments…

Would you just laugh and move on to the next link? Or, would you have the courage to consider an evolutionary form of reorganizing... would you, after reading them, be willing to vote for these amendments if I prove they fix everything you don’t like about government?
If you’re still reading this…thank you for being brave(or curious)enough to consider that such a solution is possible. I respectfully challenge each of you to read and discuss the merits of these foundational changes to the Constitution and amendments. For, the only proper way to find the right solution for this country is to grow it, from the minds and hearts of we the People. The Constitution was and is, after all, created in this very way! I have affectionately named this solution… The Rediscovery Doctrine and it begins with a new Amendment eleven.
Because, that which created all of existence, intended for all which it created to exist, and to exist as the creator intended, the foundation of any law which may be recognized by the people, shall so respect the intent of the creator. That to live in peace and balance with all that has been created, is fundamental in securing a free and prosperous future for our kind. We must recognize the obvious existence of two forces, good and evil, which, like Mother Nature, have great influence over and above our control. Thus, we must also recognize in law, the balance of these forces such that all shall be free from the control of any force other than one’s own will. It then follows that the only way for all people to be free, is for all people to understand freedom, and then agree that all are equally entitled to such.
*SECTION 1:That all beings of the Homo sapiens species shall be considered in law to have always been, and forever be, included in the original People class of this Constitution. And, that any laws contrary to such are unconstitutional actions executed under color of law.
*SECTION 2:That any and all laws throughout the history of the world which rely upon any discrimination – including, but not limited to religion, race, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, etc. – shall be considered in law to have always been, and forever be, recognized by the People of the united states of America as unlawful actions executed under color of law.
*SECTION 3:As is the obvious intent of the founders of this union, the right to work is an element of the pursuit of happiness; therefore, the fruits of one’s labor are untaxable. The people may be subcontracted to perform elements of commerce, but so long as no element of the individual’s work is being additionally subcontracted, such individual’s actions fall within their right to work.
*SECTION 1:That the Iroquois Great Law of Peace shall forever have held legal standing and precedence in its nature and intent relative to its obvious influence on the creation of this Constitution.
*SECTION 2:That all amendments after the Bill of Rights, and previous to the passing of this Amendment, shall be considered in law to have always been, and forever be, null and void; as, they are counter-intuitive to the natural law upon which this Constitution was founded.
*SECTION 3:That all People have the right to live among a society, without any obligation to act in any capacity of personage; and, that the status of being a “person” within the meaning of any law, must be proven with full findings of the facts and conclusions of law, prior enforcement.
AMENDMENT 11 INTENT: The first change I have suggested is to the preamble, because we must repair the government, not destroy it. In pursuit of that, the most important repair needed in my mind, is the resurrection of natural law as the foundation of our government. There is much debate in America these days, as to whether this is a nation whose laws are based on Christianity… it is not! It was intended to be based off of natural law, and given that Christianity also has tenants of natural law, a psychological usurpation has occurred. The framers chose to use three terms to define the natural force from which our rights are derived. They are “Laws of Nature”, “Nature’s God”, and “Creator”. These words were intentionally capitalized, meaning they are definable titles. None of which, include any reference to a specific religion in their historical application. By reestablishing the clear intent that this nation is based on natural law, we can protect all rights equally, and acknowledge the duty of our race to live in balance with the earth… and, with each other.
Article two starts by addressing class. The result of including all of our kind within the People class, is that it creates equality for all and negates the necessity for most ‘civil rights’ laws; thereby, cleaning up the legal system substantially. It further causes courts to equally protect creator endowed rights for all, while regulating corporate persons using statutory law. By nullifying any precedence in law which is based on any form of discrimination, as defined in the amendment, we can eliminate inequality in law. We then further refuse to recognize any such past law as having precedence today, thus negating things such as the Discovery Doctrine and Papal Bulls. I included this because in order to finally make right, what was wrong, we cannot continue to recognize any such laws as ever having been valid in this country... just as we can never recognize that the world has ever been flat, though it was once declared to be so by law.
The effect of this necessitates a new and open treaty between the People of the united states of America, and the sovereign First Nations of this land. As it stands, the only rights America ever had for the lease, sale, or regulation of this land, resulted from the now defunct Discovery Doctrine. Additionally, given that few, if any, Americans actually hold the patent to land they purchased, they must accept the reality that private land ownership is an illusion. As such, returning the patents to the First Nations to hold in trust–in perpetuity for the benefit of the People–will have no effective change as to one’s status of land ownership. This is not to say that the First Nations would have a plenary ability to make all land use decisions; however, laws of the united states of America must recognize the de jure rights of ultimate authority in this respect.
Next, I clarify the nature of the right to work. Though it is already strongly established in case law as a natural right under the pursuit of happiness clause in the Declaration of Independence, it is currently a very convoluted issue. Adding it to the Constitution will clearly define the ability to participate in commerce without loss of natural rights. It should be inferred that any mechanism which should be necessary to prosperity and pursuit of happiness in our society, should also become a protected right of the People.
Article three begins by clarifying Constitutional legal precedence. Though the sources that give legal precedence to our founding documents can find their roots in countries across the globe, what could be arguably considered the most important contributor is the Iroquois Great Law of Peace. Evidence of which can be found in the supporting documentation of Congressional Resolution 331 of 1988, including a side by side comparison showing the structural replication of the Great Law, within the Constitution. Just as the Magna Carta has legal precedence in law today, in respect to the intent of the Framers when including rights derived thereof, so too shall our courts look to the contributions of the Great Law of Peace when interpreting the intent of our Framers. (Congress, 1988)
Here is a basic overview of why amendments eleven through twenty-seven are not only irrelevant, but dangerous; thus, they must be considered to have never held precedence in law. By striking the eleventh we forever preserve the position of the People at the top of the hierarchy of sovereignty. By striking the twelfth, seventeenth, twentieth, twenty-fourth, and twenty-sixth amendments, we protect the People from obscurities being used to subvert the power of the People’s vote. Also, we have restructured the voting process to be within the absolute control of the People, eliminating any relevance of these amendments. By striking the thirteenth, fifteenth, and nineteenth, we remove laws which have become unnecessary as a result of including all of our kind in the People class. By striking the fourteenth, we remove the ultimate mechanism upon which, a complete usurpation of the People’s rights was constructed. This amendment is unnecessary for the protection of the People’s rights, as its original intent was to create a new subject class for freed slaves, so as to maintain the legal superiority of the white man. By striking the sixteenth, eighteenth, and twenty-first, we remove laws that have become unnecessary, as they apply to and are dependent upon the existence of the fourteenth amendment. By striking the twenty-third amendment, we eliminate a law which is no longer necessary, because People who live within the boundaries of the District of Columbia, as detailed in the Residence Act of 1790, maintain voting rights within their respective states.
Additionally, by eliminating all earlier amendments, which follow the tenth, we also eliminate the IRS. This will repeal the current taxing system, as it is the same one that allowed for the fruits of our labor to be taxed under color of law. In its original form, the tax structure is such that corporate profits are solely liable for the tax burden; and, the Peoples participation as consumers in the economy effectively causes them to ‘pay taxes’. This further results in a far more efficient taxing system, and protects the People’s rights from being taxed in the future. By eliminating the previous eleventh Amendment, we stop it from ever again being misconstrued in law. This singular misconstruction was one of the key foundations upon which the power of the People was subverted and usurped. A law review by Randy E. Barnett – titled The people or the state? Chisholm V. Georgia and Popular Sovereignty (Barnett, 2007)–explains the original hierarchy of sovereignty, and the ill-fated effect of the misinterpretation of the previous eleventh amendment. (SupremeCourt, CHISHOLM v. STATE OF GA, 1793., 2 U.S. 419) The original intent of the previous eleventh amendment allowed the states to claim sovereign immunity against claims brought by citizens of another state. However, we must ask ourselves… should a group of sovereign People, simply because they are greater in number, be able to avoid the consequences of breaching a contract or violating a right of one of the People? This amendment was later construed by the supreme court in such a way that it became the foundation, which allowed for the fourteenth amendment to usurp the rights of all People. By converting people into ‘persons’ they became recognized in law as legally created entities, entitled only to the privileges granted by the sovereign authority. The U.S. Citizen is a class of its own, separate from the People class. The Privileges and Immunities granted to U.S. Citizens specifically do not include the rights protected under the first ten amendments. (SupremeCourt, Twining v. New Jersey, 211 US 78, 98-99, 1908). In law, the court cannot recognize you if you are not a “Person”. In criminal matters, when you sign the paper saying you understand your constitutional rights, you are saying that you are a U.S. Citizen and tacitly agree that the Bill of Rights are not protections which you can claim in this venue.
Finally, I address the issue of personage. The blanket application of this term, to all People, was orchestrated through the creation of the fourteenth amendment U.S. Citizen… which is by definition a “person”. The U.S. Citizen never existed prior to the creation of this Amendment. Also in law, man and person are not exactly synonymous terms. Person is employed in jurisprudence in opposition to the word man (homo), and considers only the state of the man, or the part he plays in society, without considering the individual. (Browne, 1873) In the context of the current law, we are considered a person as a U.S. Citizen, and the privileges granted by the 14th Amendment specifically exclude the rights protected under the Bill of Rights. So, when we exercise our right to go get food from a store, and walk along a sidewalk, we are considered in law to be a ‘natural person’. This refers to Homo sapiens acting in the capacity of a ‘person’, which is always defined in law as a ‘Corporation’ or other ‘legal entity’.
For example, if the police decide to use the wording of a law as an excuse to harass you and subvert what should be your protected rights, they do so because they do not legally recognize those rights, as you are a person and not a People. This singular legal trick, which made minorities and women believe they had protected rights, ultimately became the mechanism by which everyone’s rights were exchanged for the privileges of personage. By bringing all of our kind within the People class, and clearly defining their right not to be considered a person in law, except by contract, all rights will be restored to the People of this land by default. In addition, with the repeal of the eleventh Amendment, which restores Chisholm v. Georgia’s legal precedence of the hierarchy of sovereignty, we will instantly regain ultimate control as a People, over all government and corporations.
*SECTION 1:For the purpose of ensuring true representation of the People, within the united states of America, this constitution shall secure the following truths in law in regard to the People’s right to vote: *I.That the right of the People to vote is a natural right, and therefore it may not be regulated or taxed. *II.That the minimum age upon which one is recognized by law to be competent to engage in contracts, shall be the minimum age upon which one shall be recognized as having the right to vote. *III.All elements of the election process shall be fully controlled by popular vote of the People. *IV.All positions in government, by which appointment is determined by election, shall be decided solely by popular vote of the people. *V.All votes of the People shall be hand counted.
*SECTION 2:Each elected position of the united states of America, and within each individual State, shall consist of three equal elected officials, as follows: *I.Two People of different gender, as representatives for the united states of America; and, *II.One People as a representative of the several independent and sovereign indigenous nations of this land.
*SECTION 3:All elected officials shall execute only the will of the People, within the bounds of the constitution, without consideration of any other interest, including but not limited to, parties, factions, corporations, foreign nations, etc.
*SECTION 4:The People have the right to petition to hold a special vote at any time, in order to remove any agent of their government; vacate any action of government; or compel any government agent to perform an action. Such a vote shall require a sixty percent majority of the voting populace to pass, and may not be overturned, except by another vote of a sixty percent majority of the voting populace.
*SECTION 5:Any law, which creates term limits, is void.
*SECTION 6:All judicial positions of all jurisdictions within the united states of America, shall be determined by popular vote of the People.
*SECTION 7:Only tax revenue may be used for promoting elections. Any resource donated or otherwise designated for the purposes of promoting elections, candidates, or the likes thereof, shall be distributed equally within the specific class to which such resources have been designated. Any other form of influence in the election process, resulting from an exchange which may be regulated by law, shall be considered to be treason against the People of the united states.
ARTICLE 2:PROSPERITY AND WELFARE The following truths shall be recognized as essential elements of the prosperity and welfare of this nation:
*SECTION 1:That we the People, are dependent upon maintaining balance within the ecosystem provided by the creator, for the purposes of sustaining all life.
*SECTION 2:That the good health of this nation is essential to maintain security, prosperity, and provide for the general welfare of the People. It is therefore evident that universal healthcare must be provided to all People, without prejudice.
*SECTION 3:That all knowledge comes from the creator, and therefore can only be discovered by the People; therefore,
*I.The right to use of any knowledge by the people or any person shall not be restricted, except as is necessary to secure the rights of the People.
*II.For the protection of discoveries used for commercial purposes, any rights to such discoveries protected under law, shall be guaranteed a royalty for such use, as prescribed by law.
*III.Because discoveries strengthen the economy and defense of this nation, access to formal education and all public knowledge shall be made available to the People. As such, and because truth is essential to preventing the corruption and usurpation of individual sovereign rights, a full accounting of the facts in history shall be forever made available to the People.
*SECTION 4:Whereas, history has shown that poverty serves only to weaken a nation, and to guarantee a stable economy for all future generations, the following truths shall be recognized as essential elements of maintaining the prosperity of this nation:
*I.There shall be established an open source digital treasury.
*II.All assets and intellectual property of the united states of America shall be considered to be “money”, which shall be reflected within the open source digital treasury.
*III.All People shall be entitled to a “Tax Royalty”, which shall be unalienable, and derived from a percentage of all taxes collected, as defined by the People of each taxing authority in or within the united states of America. * a.Only People whom shall have voted in at least sixty percent of elections, from which taxing authority their royalty is derived, shall have the right to claim Tax Royalties. * b.Until such a time as the aforementioned Tax Royalty model is implemented, each taxing authority shall provide an equal percentage of their revenue, in order to provide a combined total dividend equivalent to one ounce of gold, to which all voting age People shall be entitled.
*IV.Basic housing shall be made available for the entire population.
*V.The right of the People, to live off the land, cultivate agriculture, or raise livestock, shall not be restricted or interfered with by government policy, except as dictated by land use rights.
*SECTION 5:No People or person may profit from performing any function of government.
*SECTION 6:No corporation, partnership, or other legal entity may perform the functions of government.
AMENDMENT 12 INTENT: I begin with a comprehensive election correction. It has come to be that the vote of the People has been usurped through color of law, and by financial interests not of the People. This has occurred, because the right to vote is not secured and protected for any group of citizens in this country.>“In Minor v Happersett, 21 Wall. 178,22 L. ed. 627, We decided that the Constitution of the US has not conferred the right to suffrage upon anyone, and that the united states have no voters of their own creation in the states… From this it appears that the right of suffrage is not a necessary attribute of national citizenship, but that exemption from discrimination in the exercise of that right on account of race, etc., is. The right to vote in the states comes from the states, but the right of exemption from the prohibited discrimination comes from the United States. The first has not been granted or secured by the Constitution of the United States, but the last has been. The fifteenth amendment is therefore a limitation upon the powers of the states in the execution of their otherwise unlimited right to prescribe the qualification of voters in their own elections…”< (Company, 1915) It’s illogical to deduce that the state, which could not exist without the People having voted it into existence, could have the authority to dictate the nature of that which created it. Therefore, it becomes necessary to establish the sovereign right to vote, as a creator endowed right.
Equating the voting age, with the age at which contracts become binding, we ensure equal representation is never denied to anyone based upon age. If one can be held amenable to a contract, one has the right to vote in the system which regulates that contract. Furthermore, the power of our vote is restored by eliminating any ‘middle man’ in the entire voting process. That is to say, popular vote will decide all elements of who runs for office, where voting occurs, who is appointed, etc. Combined with a hand counting process, we ensure that who we want to perform certain functions of government, remains fully within the purview of the People.
Regardless of race or religion, one commonality of discrimination occurs among most colonized nations, and that is regarding women as having fewer rights based on gender. The importance of balance between men and women in power was the cornerstone to success for the Great Law of Peace. Given that the population is approximately half men and half women, ensuring that each elected position has one of each, is the best way to maintain equality in government. By further allowing for Native representation within the government, we ensure their ability to take part in decisions which effect their rights and security, while maintaining U.S. jurisdiction over military, police, commerce, etc.
Allowing for the People to petition for a special vote to remove any government agent or vacate any government action, guarantees that if and when corruption flares up… we can put it out immediately. In conjunction with having three People for each elected position, removing laws which create term limits will allow for the People best suited for the job, to continue making America a better place. By causing all judges to be appointed by election of the People, we protect the People and persons from court decisions being persuaded by the interests of a small group.
To protect us from ever again allowing interests, other than that of the People, from influencing governmental policy, we must ensure equality within the elections process. The only way to do that is to recognize that such erosion of this core principle will ultimately result in Treason against the People. Thus, we must ensure that only the taxing agency, of any given election, may be authorized to provide the resources for this process. This guarantees that equal distribution of resources will be provided throughout all elections, and to all willing candidates.
Article two begins by addressing prosperity and welfare. Recognizing the essential elements of both, are necessary to our society, just as was the Bill of Rights when they were written. This is not because they are not already obvious, but rather to clarify for the government, its resulting obligations. Never before has it been more obvious that we as a People, need to come together to once again create balance within our ecosystem. There is no question that we as a species are dependent upon such balance. And further, to make such a claim that it is our right to do whatever we want on this planet, so long as we maintain the necessary power to do so, is absurd on its face. It is equivalent to saying that we have the right to exterminate life which we are dependent upon, and which the creator intended to exist. Clearly, we have neither the moral right, nor the land use rights to live in such a selfish, short sighted manner.
It is evident that a universal health care system can operate efficiently. And, without such a system, we cannot maintain the good health of this nation, which is essential to our security and innovation. Physical and mental well-being obviously increases one’s capacity to gain knowledge, and the opposite, when extrapolated, would result in a less educated populous. An efficient, free healthcare system is an investment in the economic stability of this nation.
No one can claim to have created any knowledge, unless they claim to have created all of existence. Knowledge is instead a result of exploration of nature, and therefore no one may claim exclusive ownership thereof. This truth creates a conflict with current patent laws, which have caused innovation to become stifled by financial interests. This occurs through a patent system, which keeps the People from being able to implement important discoveries, such as lifesaving technologies. Furthermore, by allowing for financial incentive under the current system, powerful corporations can use their resources to lock up knowledge and sue others for discovering and implementing the same knowledge. Further, we create a pool of knowledge from upon which everybody can draw, and the original inventors are provided a guarantee to the fruits of their labor.
It is apparent that when People lack knowledge, their security and ability to create, succumb to the jeopardy of evil interests whom possess more knowledge. Therefore, we must once again become the beacon of knowledge among the world. Let it be known to all, the full truth of history. For, if we hide the truth and rewrite history, then we cannot protect ourselves from the elaborate schemes of evil. We must not only fully examine truth and knowledge but also make it equally accessible to all of our People. Access to knowledge shall be provided to the people without regard to socio economic status, as this is an investment in the future productivity of this nation.
Still, there is one more mechanism that must be put into place to ensure poverty is forever eradicated. And, so that no financial interest of any size shall ever have the power to gridlock our economy and recreate poverty, we must implement the People’s Tax Royalty. This mechanism equates to profit sharing for the People, and it creates great incentive for everyone to participate in our economy and voting process. By guaranteeing everybody who votes at least sixty percent of the time, a percentage of the profits taxed, they become motivated to actively run their own government efficiently. The more tax surplus created by an efficient government, the more wealth the People individually gain. If they overregulate the corporations, they also serve to stifle their own economy. It follows then, that the more money the People get from their efficient regulation, the more money goes back into the economy.
With the economy in full control of the People, we must then protect ourselves from international bankers attempting to create any future, fiat money systems. By moving to a Bitcoin like digital currency backed by all the combined assets of this country, we will have a transparent banking system backed and operated by and for the People. No other interest may then ever again usurp our economy or rights, through such entities as a Federal Reserve or World Bank. All loans are by the People, and all interests are paid to the People. Banks are intended to secure money, thereby allowing for the free exchange thereof, so there is no need for a middle man to loan us our own money.
If private investors want to loan money to an individual or business, then that is the prerogative of those parties. This is a fundamental function of a healthy economy that allows for businesses and People to prosper. However, if the same investors wish to loan the government money, then we must examine why we would again allow ourselves to become dependent upon interests, which serve to gain at the expense of the People. In a loan of necessity, the gain of one… is the loss of another. Should a financial entity have such a surplus of wealth, as to be able to offer a loan to the People, why then would we not raise the funds by increasing taxes on those same entities. For, the privilege to gain powerful wealth in our economy, is not only granted by the People, but also necessitates the financial obligation of such entities, towards all infrastructure needed to facilitate that privilege. In addition, if such a loan is offered by a foreign interest, then we must closely examine the true intent of that ‘offer’. When an entity has that much power, and the will of the People necessitates the need for resources, then the People can simply increase tariffs on imports from the nations where such interests are based. Through these mechanisms, any revenue which would have been obtained at a loss through a loan, shall now be attained through the mutually beneficial, symbiotic relationship between People and corporate entities. This will create a self-sustaining, stable economy that benefits all humanity.
There is no question that we have the capacity as a nation to eliminate hunger and homelessness. Furthermore, eliminating homelessness reduces public health concerns, and allows for those less fortunate to prosper and participate productively in society. It has been proven many times over, that housing the homeless costs the tax payers less than leaving them homeless. There already exists enough housing inventory to provide shelter to all of the People. We the People have a right to use homes for shelter, over the right of private interests to leave such homes vacant for purposes of making profit. By default of this combination of amendments, laws created to restrict agricultural growth, for the purposes of maintaining higher food and resource prices, are nullified. It also allows for such resources to remain accessible to the People. These types of land use decisions will generally remain exclusive to the First Nations, upon whom it will be incumbent to regulate our ecosystem back to good health. By establishing this mechanism, we will find that food and housing can be very affordable for all.
It has become clear that the ability to profit from the functions of government, will always allow for corruption and greed. Therefore, it becomes necessary to eliminate the potential for this abuse altogether. This is accomplished by restricting the ability of corporations, partnerships, and other legal entities from performing the functions of government. Wherein, we eliminate the potential loopholes that allow a person to profit from the functions of government, without directly performing them. Some examples of this are prisons for profit, privatized education, privatized military agencies, privatized public defense and prosecution, etc.
*SECTION 1:For the purposes of protecting all of the People on this land, investigation and prosecution of corruption within government, shall be of the highest priority for the executive branch.
*SECTION 2:All penalties under law, which have been imposed on People for such actions which would otherwise be lawful under the common law, shall be immediately vacated and expunged. All People who have been penalized by law, for actions which would otherwise be unlawful under the common law, shall be immediately entitled to review and appeal of such penalties. In such an instance, all jurisdiction and penalties of law shall remain in effect for these individuals, until such a time that their case shall have been fully reviewed under the correct structure of law.
*SECTION 1:Whereas ones actions may have been executed under color of law, and in violation of rights or in breach of a contractual obligation, full immunity shall be granted for any People or person who shall enter into the P.R.O.M.P.T. Compact.
*I.PROTECTION * a.All parties to this compact, are exempt from prosecution for any violation of rights or breach of contract committed under color of law. * b.Personal protection from retribution for participating in this compact, shall be provided as prescribed by law to be necessary.
*II.RESTITUTION * a.Determination of community service, asset forfeiture, or any other form of restitution, shall be within the plenary control of the presiding court.
*III.OBLIGATIONS * a.All parties shall cooperate with full transparency and honesty during any investigation of unlawful actions. * b.All parties shall remain compliant with the provisions of the P.R.O.M.P.T. compact, until such time as they are relieved of such obligation, as prescribed by law.
*IV.MONITORING * a.As to the extent and period of time which any party to this compact shall be monitored, shall be within the plenary control of the presiding court.
*V.PROVISIONS * a.Any violation of the provisions of this compact, shall result in the loss of immunity from prosecution and the removal of all protections granted.
*VI.TREATMENT * a.All parties found to have committed violations of rights or breach of contracts under color of law, shall be subject to mental health evaluation; and, the presiding court shall have plenary control in deciding conditions of treatment necessary to ensure the protection of others from such actions in the future.
For the purposes of maintaining honesty and integrity within all levels of government, and to ensure the interests and rights of the People are never threatened or usurped… no other priority shall rise above investigation and prosecution of corruption within government.
Given that these collective amendments have reestablished the common law, all non-commercial ‘crimes’ are nullified by the fact, that such crimes were prosecuted under statutory law. Statutory law is established for the purposes of regulating commerce and government. The common law is the establishment of the collective consensus of the law of the land throughout history, for the exclusive purpose of securing our rights against trespass. In an instance where an individual was in possession of ‘illegal drugs’ for personal use, they would have committed no crime under the common law. By retroactively negating recognition of unjust laws, we nullify any prosecutorial action taken against such an individual.
Some would argue that the State has the right to outlaw drugs because of the overall negative effect on the welfare of the nation. However, that notion comes from the current structure of our government. Under common law, an individual’s right to use a drug can only be regulated if that particular individual’s drug use, contributed to their criminal behavior. From the perspective of common law, you cannot extrapolate the actions of a few to justify the restriction of the rights of the many. Because drug use is common among all cultures, it has foundation to be considered an individual right within common law. In comparison, this concept cannot be extrapolated to establish that the government has no right to regulate one’s ability to develop weapons of mass destruction, just because they have not committed a crime. In this regard we the People clearly have the right to regulate the extent to which we may bear arms, insofar as it becomes a threat to our own security. It is essentially a balance that works well when the People’s vote, ultimately determines such thresholds. Far too often, determination of such decisions is left to a small group of ‘representatives’, who simply by their sheer number, cannot possess the capacity to make such a profound and fundamental decision for the People as a whole.
Next, we explore the P.R.O.M.P.T. compact’s intent. It is vital to understand the importance of immunity under the P.R.O.M.P.T. Compact, and rise above anger and the desire for revenge against those who committed crimes under color of law. Some examples of such crimes would be torture, illegal war, corporate involvement in our financial crisis, police violence, etc. This can be a hard pill to swallow, but is absolutely necessary in order for all other elements of these amendments to come to fruition. This is because, with the cooperation of those who committed these acts, we will finally know all the inner workings of the most erosive system of corruption in the history of this nation. This will allow us to protect ourselves from such corruption in the future. We will have all rights to seize assets, and monitor these People as prescribed by law, but we must offer protection in order to gain cooperation.
It is also important to understand that evil is the source of corruption and it is above the capacity mankind to remove this force from nature. From there, we must understand that such a man as George W. Bush, for example, has probably never possessed the capacity or environment to participate in any other behavior but evil. These types of People have no choice but to be collusive in evil behavior, and under our current structure, prosecution of one would open the door to the same for all alike. However, this would literally result in a complete governmental and financial collapse, due to the vast amount of corruption which currently exists. In truth, these types of People are actually the most oppressed of us all, hence the severely deviant behavior. We therefore, must consider their circumstances and offer treatment and reprieve. Such deep seeded corruption within an individual is a result of addiction to power. We must treat this addiction! Just like one cannot quit cold turkey, as a heavily addicted alcohol or heroin user, the same goes for addiction to power. We must nurture these People back to good mental health, and provide them with the opportunity to gain forgiveness for their trespasses.
Works Cited Barnett, R. E. (2007).The People of the State?:Chisholm v.Georgia and Popular Sovereignty.([email protected], Ed.)Georgetown University Law Center,32.
Browne, W. H. (1873).Law of Trade-Marks.In W. H. Browne,A Treatise on the Law of Trade-marks and Analogous Subjects (pp. 194-195).
Company, L. C.-o.(1915).Karemv.United States;Circut Court of Appeals.In B. A. Rich (Ed.),The Lawyers Reports Annotated,Volumes 61-62, pp.440-441.Rochester,NY: Lawyers' Co-operative Publishing Company.
Congress,U.(1988).100th Congress 2nd Session.Retrieved Feb 10,2015,from
SupremeCourt. (1793., 2 U.S. 419).CHISHOLM v.STATE OF GA.Retrieved Feb 15,2015, from Findlaw for legal professionals:
Twining v.New Jersey,211 US 78,98-99,211 U.S.78(US Supreme Court Nov 9,1908).
submitted by TruthSeekersNation to TrueAskReddit [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Basics (Part 1) - What is Bitcoin Mining? - YouTube What is Bitcoin? - YouTube Bitcoin Cryptocurrency for Beginners 💰 - YouTube Bitcoins Erklärung: In nur 12 Min. Bitcoin verstehen ...

Definition. A Bitcoin payment address comprising a hashed script, allowing the spender to create a standard pubkey script that Pays To Script Hash (P2SH). The script can be almost any valid pubkey script. Synonyms. P2SH address. P2SH output. Not To Be Confused With. P2PK output (an output paying a public key directly) bitcoin definition: 1. a type of cryptocurrency (= a digital currency produced by a public network rather than any…. Learn more. Definition. An output in a transaction which returns satoshis to the spender, thus preventing too much of the input value from going to transaction fees. Synonyms. Change address. Change output. Not To Be Confused With. Address reuse; Links. Change address — Developer Guide. Change — Bitcoin Wiki. Why does Bitcoin Core use separate change ... Definition. A Bitcoin payment address comprising a hashed public key, allowing the spender to create a standard pubkey script that Pays To PubKey Hash (P2PKH). Synonyms. P2PKH address. P2PKH output. Not To Be Confused With. P2PK output (an output paying a public key directly) Definition of in the dictionary. Meaning of What does mean? Information and translations of in the most comprehensive dictionary definitions resource on the web.

[index] [29428] [6151] [35] [47631] [12512] [25752] [11310] [1121] [26073] [30346]

Bitcoin Basics (Part 1) - "Explained For Beginners" - YouTube

For more information: and What is Bitcoin Mining? Have you ever wondered how Bitcoin is generated? T... A Bitcoin address is akin to a bank account in which you can make deposits, but without providing access to the all important private keys that are required to spend its contents. That is where ... Get our free Bitcoin course here - This Bitcoin basics video series will explain Bitcoin for beginners. You'll lear... Bitcoin für Anfänger einfach erklärt! [auf Deutsch] Bitcoin-Börse (erhalte 10€ in BTC) *📱 Sicheres Bitcoin-Wallet... Thanks to Away for sponsoring this video! Go to and use promo code techquickie to get $20 off your next order! Bitcoin...