Quote from: jbreher on March 29, 2017, 06:49:14 AM

Quote from: iamnotback on March 29, 2017, 06:09:43 AM

Is OpenShare a good name considering socialism is collapsing?

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/taxes/marxist-socialism-now-relabeled-as-the-sharing-economy/

Sorry. MA misunderstands the term 'sharing economy'. Look at his examples: accommodation sharing (e.g., AirBnB), ride sharing (e.g., Uber), music and video streaming (e.g., Spotify), online staffing (e.g., Fiverr), and peer/crowd funding (e.g., Kickstarter). None of these are namby-pamby unrenumerated sharing -- they are all strictly for-profit industries. Their common denominator is that they disintermediate gatekeepers to these industries -- hotel chains, taxi companies, record companies, employers, wall street, respectively -- by creating venues where producers and consumers can find each other (with reputation attached) through an inexpensive interface.

Looks like Canada is just trying to tax this direct income. While I'll pass on a discussion on the legitimacy of income tax in general at this juncture, if they have a legitimate power to tax traditional employment income, why would they not have a legitimate power to charge direct producer-to-consumer income?

You're correct. Thanks. I didn't click his link (so sleepy & rushed). I had heard of the sharing economy, but hadn't heard of a government using it to refer to a new totalitarianism, but apparently you are correct that the Canadian govt just wants to tax the sharing economy. Armstrong is mistakenly thinking the sharing economy is something the Canadian govt invented as a form of communism.

Nevertheless I am thinking the sharing economy might not be the best possible connotation and association to the generality of what we want to do with blockchains. And the sharing economy could end up being associated with communistic leanings as the global socialism heads into the cataclysmic abyss I estimate is ahead of us over the next decade or so. We're not just enabling sharing, but we are also enabling open coordination. We are providing the open database on a blockchain with the scalability to handle the Internet volume.

So with that in mind I registered a new alternative domain name (only cost me $5):

bitnet.cash

There was a wallet named Bitnet.io but it was bought out by Uphold and has been renamed or folded into Upload Merchant Services. So perhaps that domain name is even for sale.

The domains bitnet.net and bitnet.org are also for sale for several $1000s (for later).

So any preferences from any of you all between Openshare and Bitnet? I'd appreciate feedback asap as I am trying to get a forum going asap.

Bitnet is shorter and more well associated with Bitcoin branding. Note the recent pump of Bitcoin+ (Plus). And the 'bit' is for the database and the 'net' is for the Internet cloud aspect of it.

If we choose Bitnet, then we can make the token bits instead of shares. (I'm leaning towards Bitnet)