It wasn’t your idea? lol…So, the guy is is trying to force his way into your flat and it was only out of concern for other tenants like the guy you were hiding behind, otherwise you would have handled the matter yourself and not called the police? Is that seriously what you are now claiming?.. 
just unbelievable…
Lol… they were only there because you called them and why was the Judo guy “guarding” you then? Seriously folks…is it just me?
At what point did I ever say there was some legal or moral superiority of a smart contract? Seriously dude where did that come from? I think smart contracts would work quite effectively and efficiently but you’re welcome to go your own way and use something else if you so please and I won’t think any worse of you.
[quote=“Artiscience, post:39, topic:4755”]
Collectively you as an idividual cannot own anything - codification is anything but safeguarding and without contract enforcement a contract is anything but a piece of paper or a file in a database.
[/quote] I as an individual am not a collective. If I interact with someone and they agree with me then we can form law together. A smart contract is not like a regular contract where it requires a third party to enforce it. A smart contract is self enforcing and is set of programming code that WILL NOT FUNCTION other than how it has been programmed. How do you propose you would renege on a smart contract? Either you have fullfilled the terms of the contract or you haven’t.
Deciding for you? I have stated intent and my perception and my reactions. You don’t have a CHOICE as to allow me to decide if I’m defending myself or attacking since that’s entirely MY choice. Now you could question whether I’m being honest about it or you could make a decision about what your own actions and reactions will be but you have no choice whatsoever about whether I’m attacking or defending because that is entirely my choice and based on my perception and intent.
But more to the point if you don’t consent to it then don’t consent to it, don’t agree to such a legal contract with me, or anyone proposing such a contract.
Yeah pretty much. Probably would have brushed the whole thing off, kept the door locked and called it a night.
Because some people actually care about their friends and want to make sure they don’t come to harm. I know it’s a radical concept for you, actually caring about people instead of being entitled to hand outs in exchange for the obligation of taxation but some of us actually do form actual friendships and have real concern for each other’s well being.
OK, heard enough of this tripe now…I’ll leave you to others.
Oh…right…I must have mistaken you. So how again did you become lawful owner of your cosy piece of self-sustaining land?
A smart contract cannot enforce material relations, period. You need a social system of law enforcement. By stating that smart contracts suffice you assume that social relations will just move along, but there is no reason why they should. Humans are free because they are not self-enforcing.
Yep, it´s your choice. And it´s most likely the choice of the majority not to agree onto your club law and lock you up since your confession to shoot whoever you like whenever you think is right is disturbing our social order.
Well, if you don´t consent then I guess it is you who should leave a society that you cannot agree upon. But we already had that…yadda yadda…I cannot leave the city, I am forced to stay in this mean world where I have to call the police when someone threatens me and my neighbors…
I too have had an idea myself for over a year now - starting with just about every pseudo-scientific idea and related nonsense being posted continuously to this…the best that can be said is that there’s clearly no intention to actually debate or discuss properly…not in my view anyway.
We’re going to need more popcorn… 
I think deep down you really really do crave approval from somebody, anybody…
I suspect you are an American (dunno, I just get a few wee hints)
In that case do the proper American thing and go see your shrink…
They might not help much, but you can tell everyone about it to try to gain sympathy, cred, something, anything …
Round these parts, we have a sayin’, pardner…
“Your’re wired to the moon, ya rocket.”
Presumably I bought it (or possibly was given it by who knows) the previous owner of that cosy bit of land.
And once the ownership of said land has been verified then it shouldn’t be too hard for one to employ police, private security or use one’s own means to defend one’s claim.
Well if they didn’t agree to the contract in the first place one wouldn’t have legal precident now would they? Moreover legal precident or no you have to consider the tactical situation. Think Occupy Wall Street for a moment you’ve got protesters vs Swat Teams. Both THINK they’re in the right and justified in their actions. OWS have numbers but less tech. The police have tear gas, riot shields and let’s face it guns but are less in number. Now we all know how that all played out. My point being whether one develops a political movement or not one does have to reckon with military force. It is not smart to challenge the status quo social order out right with use of force when you’ve only got two guys vs a thousand or a million. Now if you can adapt whatever system you’re using and get more people to agree with you then you can marshal more force, both political, economical and tactical. But until then it’s smarter to just submit to the law of the land until you’ve gained enough political power.
Nope! Insert another quarter and try again.
Right. The most valuable key in this project is jury nullification. People need to opt out without repercussion. In statist society, you can’t even opt out. If you try, there will be a lot of complications in the way to prevent you to opt out. And they should have protection from the collectives who wants to enslave people who wants to opt out.
Preciously, now you’re getting the big picture here. I firstly love this forum layout, and would love to fork the code, and build in a way that it fits for bitlaw. Everything would remain the same with mixture of subreddits, and craiglist. When the community is created, it provides a new private subforum. Any person who has the shareholder can access the forum. It should also be open for the public. I was thinking have the sub forum open to the public, but every thread either has two choices, shareholders private thread or public thread.
Then it would also include company/community crowd sourcing platform inside of that subforum. Anybody could create a thread, and build a crowd source on the thread. Much like kickstarter.
As for the relationship / business / social network goes, what I provided above covers it.
I need figure out how to implement forum inside of safenet. And how it is stored.
Edited: Perfect timing!
Edited:
Inside of safenet, it will have html. I am unsure how it would look like. This is just a idea.
bitlaw/communities/meme_church/forums/
bitlaw/company/searent/contracts
bitlaw/contacts/insert your individuals or group of circle here
bitlaw/openstreetmaps/
Aha, and what made the “previous owner” a rightful owner? Why should anyone care that you gave him money?
Oh, police? Really? Tell me, who is “for one”?
Ahhhh, I understand , so in the end it´s not about contracts at all. 
Thank you for confirming.
Actually, I don´t believe you´ve ever been involved in civil disobedience - otherwise you´d know that there is a difference between civil disobedience and war and that the vast majority of protestors in OWS had ANY interest to change the democratic system, but change a policy. You´re instrumentalizing the movement for your personal interest. I think you have far bigger issues than being poor.
Lol, let me summarize: you disagree with the current political system and instead of mobilizing the majority, you prefer to wait until you can marshall force the unwilling population with weapons. Wait, that reminds me of something… ah I remember! The Hitler coup of 1923.
Why should I care if anyone else cares? He was the rightful owner under whatever legal system he was using, he could prove right of ownership. If he could not he would have had his land seized from him or not have been able to buy it in the first place and thus not been able to sell it to me. What makes you the rightful owner of your property save that under the current system you have proved right of ownership? If you tried to sell your property in another country again you’d have to prove right of ownership according to their laws would you not? If you want to import or export goods you need to respect the laws of the country you are importing or exporting to or from because otherwise they will not allow you to cross the border. Same principle applies. If you are buying property from someone under a different legal code you need to respect their laws while still abiding your own. If you don’t then yes it means war more or less, a use of violence and force ensues to enforce one set of laws or another, or both.
Whoever is claiming ownership of the land. If it was a statist I’d assume it would probably be police. If it was an anarchist it would probably be a private security force of some kind. But the two options aren’t mutually exclusive.
“Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.”
Theodore Roosevelt
No really? You don’t say? Wow you figured out I actually want to go out and change the world. Seriously? You must be a genius! And here I was just blogging about it and post it everywhere but you finally cottoned on.
There are many kinds of power. Social, economic, militant, diplomatic, technological, and one can marshal any of them or combination thereof to make one’s will manifest. And why do you think I’d use militant might against an unwilling populace? The whole purpose of this BitLaw program is to find like minded individuals so that one doesn’t HAVE to use militant might but instead can combine social and economic might, and then combine those two to generate political power. Yes get enough people and resources together and you’ll have a sizable amount of tactical power but that’s hardly marshaling a force against an unwilling populace. Also as a statist you’re hardly one to talk about marshalling militant force against an unwilling populace since all of the state’s funds come from coercion.
Food for thought.
Happybeing and contributors are working on safepress.
I did some more research on discourse, and impressed with the incredible features it offers. I’ll admit that safenetwork forum is the first discourse experience I used. I never heard of it before!
Wordpress also includes discourse comments. And those comments would link to the user selected discourse community.
I may potentially combine discourse bitlaw communities / companies and safepress. That would be really nice system to build a social and economic network.
While a forum is good for discussion I don’t think it should be the only feature of the app, or even the central one. I also think there should be a mindmapping tool to link things like laws, philosophies, groups, economics and so on based perhaps on tags that could be attached to such things. I didn’t even know the word “Libertarian” existed until a few years ago or even hear about or start exploring anarchism until a few years before that but one could easily know what one BELIEVES even if one doesn’t automatically know the vocabulary for it. It would also be a good way of linking groups together to form alliances. Say you are a REALLY small ideological group but you have a lot in common with a larger and very similar group. Forming a coalition could be politically beneficial and using the mind map tool could be useful to search such groups out.
Also having tools for asset creation, law creation and modification, tools for setting the privacy levels of your declared philosophical declarations and so forth.
Sweet, you totally read my mind. The different method was using headers, and magnet links. Headers would hold basic meta data info that is publish to the world. It includes magnet links. You download the archive of that said magnet link. With the implementation of zeronet. This would be resilient, and hard to break. Everybody who joins the community have to consume the data on their own personal computer. Every post is reduplicated to every personal computer who opt in by using a flood algorithm, similar to what usenet uses. Then I thought about IPFS. This would be even more viable strategy. That was three months ago. Then I got hardwired on ethereum, then didn’t like it within a month. I am still concerned in the past year about the blockchain storage.
I will tweak this idea to more current date especially with more knowledge about safenet. A coin contains a link to the datastructure. In the datastructure, it firstly read the .blaw extention tool. The .blaw format is the same as toml. This time it is bitlaw.toml. And have Cargo client(forked to bitlaw client) to read it. Or maybe should I go with more random, no collusion name, cola9824790284096924641.blaw, and have that publish to the bitlaw public datastructure?
Before it needs to access to the rest of the datastructure, it needs verification that you agree to the contract of this community. The first contract would usually be reader type, with limited features. It is like when you access to pron sites, are you 21 and over? In this sense, it would be, you are restricted to public data.
And second contract would be writer type, with posting. You fully agree to the terms and willing participate the community. You then would able to see private data of said community.
In the .blaw format:
[SeaCommunity_SanFrancisco]
Hashtag = “cola9824790284096924641”
Owner = “AccountID”
version = “0.0.3”
sig = " "
[dependencies.steasteading_terms]
source = “bitlaw/term/steasteading_terms”
I think .blaw should be immutable data once the foundation of space is created.
If we go with the second option…
[cola9824790284096924641]
ID = "SeaCommunity_SanFrancisco "
Owner = “AccountID”
version = “0.0.3”
sig = " "
[dependencies.steasteading_terms]
source = “bitlaw/term/steasteading_terms”
In the hashtag title of the .bitlaw , the first four letters determine which category it belongs to;
philosophy (phil)
arts (arts),
musical (musi),
Business(busi),
Cola (Cola),
Contract(Cont)
And so forth.
The hash title would be easily searchable with using a client that given a model by exactly what you said. Bitlaw Repository. Inside of this foundation of the bitlaw repository public datastructure;
A forum for bitlaw itself (datastructure within datastructure)
List of categories (collected the hashtag in . bitlaw)
Forming a coalition could be politically beneficial and using the mind map tool could be useful to search such groups out.
Ah yes. You should read this, COLA. (Community of Legal Agreements.) Some rather call it CLAN(Coalition legal agreements and Normatives). That is exactly what I intend to do.
This brings up the next segment of mindmaps. I was using mindmap as idea with openstreetmaps. And use that to identify local or world colas. Perhaps by using .blaw would also be useful to pass data onto openstreetmaps API?
But how do we get every contracts, publish into openstreetmaps?
Opt-in model?
Okay dude I’m glad you understand the technical background of all this and everything but quite frankly I don’t and you haven’t really been explaining terms that much just giving a few snippets of code (and again not defining terms). What is toml? How is .bitlaw defined? What are the advantages and disadvantages of obsfucating the purpose of functions in the code?
Why? What type? Please give better examples. I think if we are to have an “airlock” so to speak it should be more like “This is what BitLaw is and how it works . Do you agree to these terms and this system?”
Personally I’m not that fond of openstreetmaps as it seems lacking in features and comparitively more difficult to navigate than google maps.
Yeah… I just visited openstreetmap.org my whole town isn’t even on their map… at all. I mean we’re talking a town of 80k people not even showing up. I’m sorry but I don’t think we should use openstreetmap.org as a backbone for this unless you want a side project for mapping and cartography as well to fill in the gaps. NOW if you forked openstreet map and combined it with a good mapping program, something easy to use, it might be good for mapping where things were but you’d still need to combine that with something like google maps or another more fleshed out mapping system or set of maps to actually find anything.
Lol, it´s getting funnier and funnier. So you received ownership by complying to a social code, which is kinda strange, since you emphasised over and over again that you don´t need approval by anyone else. Then again, it´s not so strange, because you seem to be unable to see that your whole argumentation is based on the acceptance of superiority of a social code. From what you said I expected this social code to be a decentralized contract, but it´s even worse: you comply to the “rule of government” in your terms. Contradictive argumentation, my ass.
Ah, finally, I think you are slowly getting it. Owning land DOES NOT EXIST in a social context. You may think the real world is like your fancy OS on which a file clearly belongs to a person or doesn´t, but it´s different in a world with, you know, people, living beings. One can THINK to own land and ACT this way, build a house, plant a tree, etc. You can also CLAIM to own land when another person comes and complains that you are in fact using his*her land. However, as long as you don´t agree with competitors about ownership, there is none. Ownership is a legal, thus relational category. As soon as there are limited ressources of interest, there can be win-lose situations. People can solve them with club law, which turns out to be dangerous if you are weak - that´s why people gather and form communities to codify and enforce certain behaviour. Actually that´s exactly what you propose, you just don´t realise that your idea does not differ from any other form of governance, only that your ideals rule the world not the ones of the majority.
Next funny thing:
[quote=“Blindsite2k, post:52, topic:4755”]
“Artiscience: Oh, police? Really? Tell me, who is “for one”?”
Whoever is claiming ownership of the land. If it was a statist I’d assume it would probably be police. If it was an anarchist it would probably be a private security force of some kind.[/quote]
Uhm…ok, let´s substitute “for one” with police or private security force:
“And once the ownership of said land has been verified then it shouldn’t be too hard for [the police or the private security force] to employ police, private security or use one’s own means to defend one’s claim.”
Ya, that rather sounds senseless. I tell you who “for one” is. It´s you. You want to have your private police. Go ahead! Your proposal is again in any way different to the current system, only that you want a different government without asking other people if they want.
ehem…ya…sorry, you mistook me, actually I just figured you should go and seek a doctor. 99% of OWS were there for political change, not for anarchy. If you don´t believe it, have a look at the polls.
Well, maybe…because you said so?
You don´t see the difference between finding consensus within a community and chip away at a system, mobilizing silently and “get more people so you can use force” against the rest (that´s what you don´t write, a rhetoric that is called Ellipsis), do you? I didn´t expect that honestly. Either you totally misunderstood the idea of democracy or you are a fascist who cares shit about the interest of his fellow citizens. Somehow I think both is the case.
I heard enough, there is no more reason to argue. From what I read your problems are far below the surface of this discussion. I hope you get along well.
Short, very basic question: are you aware that a map is not the real world? Are you aware how this affects your decentralised proposal?
When you build a new library in rust-lang, you build a simple file name Cargo.toml. Inside of that file has link to dependencies, and version control selections. I could fork the cargo, and build it for contracts, communities, companies dependencies. All of the .toml format would be uploaded to the bitlaw public repository. When looking for new communities, companies, you could look through the public repository as you would in cargo website to look for new rust libraries.
Instead of being programmable contracts like ethereum, why not make it more simpler, and easy to parse. In this case, toml.
But how does one imprint contract signature? Maybe by holding the community asset means you agree to the contract? Perhaps have an asset that would link to community data structure; signatures. Each asset contains unique ID, right? It could be use as a signature for proof. Those signatures could possibility changed by selling /giving the asset to someone else.
As for the openstreetmaps, it is the only option on the table. It is a collaboration map tool. So anybody is free to contribute to the project, and make it better. I won’t use google maps. Even though it is far superior but it is a NSAmap. The reason why I want to add openstreetmaps is because the more users that uses it, and realize the error like you suggested, they would contribute to it, and potentially get safecoins for Get data. Or would they have to pay for PUT data into the digital world?
What would you suggest then? I’ll think of something new today.
Designing map is still on going process, and never changing process. Google maps is closely identical to real world, thanks to satellites.
It is still decentralized, just not anonymous. But, it is doable to be anonymous. I am giving a lot of options on the table so that every one of us could live the way we want regardless of political ideologies.