Joel Richard

I've used this one: Penzu which is both web site based and android based. Has a free option but it sounds like you will want the features that come at a price. edit: Sorry, I didn't realize you didn't want cloud based apps. I had similar concerns and have used an app that encrypts the information before sending to the cloud but is not a convenient at all. Lastpass has a notes section that I have used in the past but very feature poor. sorry I couldn't be of better use. I would have deleted my post if I was able to find the delete button.

I agree with your points. In my opinion, being sympathetic is not a flaw. My conversation with this friend is not yet finished. I only speak to him a few times a year these days and to expect a radical change overnight is unfair. I appreciate your comments and the details of your journey and I will keep them in mind the next time I speak to him.

I've recently had a friend confess to me that he cannot bare the pain of letting himself acknowldge the extent to which the state is the cause of everything going wrong in the world. He literally told me he has too much of a hard time keeping it (life) together as it is which is in my view an exercise of truth avoidance. Of course I told him that the destination is worth the pain of the journey but he was adamant that he must not embark on the journey. I feel for him because he has not had a particularly easy life. He told me that he has other friends that in moments of deep discussion admitted the same. Of course this will not affect me about speaking my views but I thought it was interesting information and wanted to share. Who knows how many of our greatest enemies are barely hanging on to sanity and live in the pain of this avoidance.

I don't think so. She is much more open to my opinions than my father is. I certainly never intended to tell them I was an Atheist. It was in the heat of the moment but I'm happy I did it. I still respect their belief in God since the religion they taught me was open to reason and ignored most of the stupid stuff. I however did not excuse their belief in statism and that in my eyes this makes them guilty of a great crime and it hurts me to know it.

I was having one of my monthly visits with my parents and siblings and as has become the norm I was having political discussions with my Father. He started voicing concerns over my beliefs in Anarchism. He is not the best communicator so I eventually came to think he was telling me to shut up about my Anarchism or go away. I was distressed to learn this and over the weekend once the discussion came up again it took a turn for the worse and I was packing my things to leave forever. It was pretty dramatic and unusual for any sort of family gathering of ours. Only my crying mother made be stay and resolve the issue and my father and I managed to fix our differences while greatly improving the honesty between us. Thinking about this brings me to tears everytime. My family has always been so dawm stoic about things so feelings never get discussed or heard of. I just can't wait until all my relationships are done being violently transformed by my transition into Anachism and Atheism. It got pretty rough but I made it and am happier for it. I just wanted to share this with those who have or will have gone through this. Not all families intolerant. Joel

Some people are entirely content being part of a corrupt system as long as they think they are getting a good deal. Those are not the people we want as early Anarchist's. They don't have what it takes to join a movement this early in the game. I only thought of religion because it does tend to emphasize community. There are definately other ways to do this but I really believe that what we learn about freedom is of the same magnitude of importance as the origin of the life the universe and everything. These topics are what religion tries to address only with made up shit.

This looks promising. http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/05/shocard-is-a-digital-identity-card-on-the-blockchain/

I would proposed a more community based approach. Say in a major city a coin would be the currency of the community with zero privacy between members. Members can file automated disputes in the decentralized system which would require either personal face to face resolution or a minimum number of members to validate or invalidate the claim. The only punishment this system needs to use is removal of a person from the system. People would have the ability to remove bad actors or DRO's that behave poorly through decentralized economic austracism with some fairness built into it. There would have to be obvious incentives to use it and this would not be simple but I think very possible. There is always the risk of speculators driving up the price irrationally like has happened to bitcoin. This is argueably the most effective attack against decentralized currencies. Making an obvious bubble out of bitcoin is what set it back for about 10 years. As different communities build these types of organisations, trust will be easily shared between cities then the world. But fundamentally has to be tied to openess and easy identification of all participants. This would all be decentralized so no single participant could be targetted and have much effect on the ecosystem.

I have an idea I want to run by the community. It's rough so forgive me please. I am working on polishing it for better presentation but would like some peer review of it now if possible. I'm currently working on an idea that might allow DROs to take shape in today's world. It involves the use of blockchain technology to build a completely decentralized eBay like world market that people choose to enter by agreeing to the terms and behavioral guidelines. The advantage of using the system for transactions are reputation and protection. An ID number is assigned permanently in the system and effectively tied to a real person and ID#s are managed by popular concensus in a decentralized manner but require a personal acceptance into the system (almost clan like). Through the blockchain, member behavior is public. All transactions are subject to eBay like purchase complaint resolution. Proof of any interactions will be obvious and public. Also the fairness of the transaction will be subject to ratings and even the freezing of an ID# until sufficient number of people agree to concur, in the system, that the dispute had been resolved. Once we establish that system, the DROs will have to work within that ecosystem and risk losing participation in a valuable market if they behave poorly. You could literally have blockchain legal complaints resolution. Once a crime is committed an ID#/person can immediately report it. This is where a DRO steps in. Anyone can offer to resolve disputes and act as a third party. Obviously, not every DRO will even appeal to you in any way but you end up at least with your neighbors stepping up and saying "yeah man, I got your back. Let's make a DRO and make a few bucks helping people in our neighborhood." But that last example is how it would start. Through trial and error this market will decide what kind of DROs you actually really need versus what you used to think we needed. All of this would begin operations under state rule. But through such a system's growth, government would become less and less relevant. The details of what happens after that should become more obvious after the passage of time but I expect us to achieve a model that can evolve and compete with other such models in a free blockchain decentralized market. It would be important to have a decentralized dispute resolution within the system that cannot be perfect but would allow to remove incentives to ban ID#s from the system for trivial reasons. Perhaps for every complaint will require 10 ID#s/people to vouch for you that the dispute has been resolved etc. . still working on that part. In short, it would require a real interaction with your local community to gain traction and the value of the people operating within a given ecosystem would drive up the trade value of its currency. In effect, the community itself would act as a DRO. I also envision a Linkedin style profile that is permanent within an ecosystem or within all ecosystems that will follow you for your entire life and is not profitable to fake. Anyway, I'm trying to find holes in the idea so I would love it if you would think about it and let me know where you see it failing or how to improve it. Show less

It took me a long time to reach this conclusion and I felt that Richard Dawkins was being cruel in his attacks on the religious. Now I'm less certain. But he is pretty relentless.

lol. I love this analogy. I'll think about it.

Still though, if truth happens to be a shared belief why can't a shared belief be true? It has to go both ways doesn't it? I'm not concerned about being labelled as dogma. I think that will happen no matter what we do. Logic can only be effictively communicated to someone who follows the same 1st principles you do, otherwise disagreement is innevitable. I would focus primarily on the NAP and UPB. The main goal would be to increase the number of people that will have the tools to see the gun in the room. It's the first step.

I found all of Stefan's books to be the deal maker for me. Read them all. Don't waste too much time in limbo, it will hurt you.

Yes, I think it is helpful to label it in this way. Not all people are able to use logic to take them to the rightful conclusion that is UPB. They need help. I don't think we want to appeal to scientists or philosophers. We want to spread philosophy to the masses so that they can achieve true virtue. It is in its essence what religion has tried to do except it was predicated on lies. I'm simply suggesting we do the same pursuit using the truth. The reason religion is suitable for UPB is to facilitate the path of learning. In order to learn freedom, at some point you need to make the leap of faith that freedom is the answer. Without the leap of faith, you will find uncertainty and make no progress. You will hide in fear of the unknown, constantly making up excuses about how an Anarchy would not work. The more I learn about the benefits of freedom the closer I come to eliminating the need for "faith" and the more it becomes a certainty. It's a very spiritual journey. I think the term religion is useful for those who are making the transformation from statism to realism.

At the heart of my question is that I'm starting to believe UPB and the freedom movement is the key to everything we need to know about life the universe and everything. I don't expect much disagreement on this view but it ties in strongly with my previous personal quest with god before my faith started to erode. I spent ten years in guilt ridden doubt. I think if there was a strong public voice of hope without a God we could really help a lot of people. The feeling of true virtue is one that is elusive in religion but as an Atheist it feels real. So much so that I think we have something to give that is too important to depend on the internet alone. I would call it a religion because it primarily would focus on personal anarchy. Therefore, has many similarities to religion. A guide to live life in virtue like religions claim to do. It wouldn't hurt to bring the issue of freedom on an equal footing in terms of importance as that of a hypothetical God. Worshipping freedom... Would that be going to far? I don't know.