Governments control everything.... they are slowly trying to block crypto too.
The Internet in 20 years will suck even more (they don't really like free speech even if they claim they do).
Edit: Since HN doesn't allow me to reply to the child comment because "I'm posting too quickly", here is the reply to CharlesW.
Stealing is already illegal.... I like how they don't know how to use current laws and flood us with new ones to make their job easier... The truth is that they think that Crypto-currencies are a threat to USD and are trying to stop them. The least they could do is destroy one law every time they add one.
His reply was "CharlesW 40 minutes ago | parent | next [–]
> Governments control everything.... they are slowly trying to block crypto too.
I'm always amazed that anyone thought cryptocurrencies would somehow be the one form of currency that wouldn't be regulated.
It's clear that crypto can't self-regulate, and continues to actively hurt lots of people. As of July, $1.9 billion in crypto has been "stolen" — up 60% from a year ago¹, in quotes because we know a good percentage of these were inside jobs."
> Governments control everything.... they are slowly trying to block crypto too.
I'm always amazed that anyone thought cryptocurrencies would somehow be the one form of currency that wouldn't be regulated.
It's clear that crypto can't self-regulate, and continues to actively hurt lots of people. As of July, $1.9 billion in crypto has been "stolen" — up 60% from a year ago¹, in quotes because we know a good percentage of these were inside jobs.
>I'm always amazed that anyone thought cryptocurrencies would somehow be the one form of currency that wouldn't be regulated.
Right. Me too. If a government bans it, like USA or Australia or whatever, then that's that. Sure you can still use it, but you can also not stop for stop signs or you can sell meth or you can not pay income taxes. And maybe never get caught. But if you DO get caught....
You're technically correct, but I think that's a different definition of the word "cult" from the colloquial, and from what is being used above. Wikipedia's definition describes a cult as "unusual," "socially deviant," and "novel." I don't think Christianity fits that description in America.
ususual: a tenth of the world's population, but probably a third of the US population.
socially deviant: a matter of opinion.
novel: I've got books that are older.
> With traditions of Pentecostalism already developed in the 18th century out of Protestant evangelicalism, the beginning of the charismatic movement in historic Christian Churches came in 1960 at St. Mark's Episcopal Church in Van Nuys, California. Dennis Bennett, the church's Rector, felt the Holy Spirit within him and announced the event to his Anglican church.
> The charismatic movement reached Lutherans and Presbyterians in 1962. Among Roman Catholics, it spread around 1967. Methodists became involved in the charismatic movement in the 1970s.
> Some nondenominational evangelical churches decided to follow this movement and take distance from their Pentecostal conventions. Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa, California is one of the first evangelical neo-charismatic churches started in 1965. In the United Kingdom, Jesus Army, founded in 1969, is an example of the impact outside of the United States. The spread of the charismatic movement outside of the US was also encouraged by Bennett, who traveled to Vancouver to minister there. Many other congregations were established in the rest of the world. Modern churches internationally have embraced the charismatic movement or adapted their own practices to incorporate it. In the United Kingdom, the house church movement has grown to include charismatic practices. Hillsong Church in Australia is another example of a Pentecostal church that incorporates the charismatic movement. The neo-charismatic movement, also known as the third-wave, has also spread widely since 1970; these churches often reject the charismatic or Pentecostal label but accept the general practice of accepting gifts of the Spirit.
> Some scholars attribute the quick and successful spread of charismatic Christianity to its successful use of mass media platforms, but also to the physical experience of religion that it provides, which creates a personal connection to spiritual mediation for believers.
I don't know how to not be underhanded if mentioning that it applies to 1/3 of Americans in the second line of my comment is somehow sneaky, but thanks for ignoring 90% of the comment entirely. My grandfather has hats older than charismatic Christianity.
