10 ms·
Some Internet Archive employees to receive some of their pay in Bitcoin in April
- furyg3 14y agoSlightly OT: Why would you ever put a QR code on a web page instead of a link? If I'm on my computer, I'm not going to pull out my phone to scan it. If I'm on my phone, how would I even scan it?
- Achshar 14y agoIts for times when you want to open a link on your phone when you are reading it on the computer. Like the Chrome to phone chrome extension.
- larelli 14y agoHere's a very funny rant about the overuse of QR codes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2rVYvylvZc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2rVYvylvZc
- jonasvp 14y agoIn general, I completely agree (though I have never seen it happen before). This is not a link, however, but a bitcoin address encoded as a QR code. I - as do many others - have a Bitcoin wallet application with some change on my phone. Having the QR code here makes it easier to contribute something.
- dave1010uk 14y agoBitcoin addresses can be URIs: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/URI_Scheme https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/URI_Scheme
- larelli 14y agoI found the title of this post to be misleading or at least stressing its point. The article says "Some Internet Archive employees have elected to receive some of their pay in Bitcoin in April." so it's not all employees, not all of their pay and not all of the time, as I expected from the headline.
- samwilliams 14y agoI totally agree. This should really be changed. Giving employees the option to take pay in bitcoins is a completely different issue to mandating it, as the title seems to imply.
- lucb1e 14y agoAnd then when the title is changed, we give admins hell for changing titles. But you're right.
- dylangs1030 14y agoThanks for clarifying this. I agree. I went into the article thinking it would be a compulsory change to bitcoin, not one employees could choose. That changes it to being somewhat cutting edge instead of tyrannical.
- tlarkworthy 14y agoYay no taxes, the end of civilization.
- AndrewDucker 14y agoThey'll still have to pay taxes. The same way that if they paid them in computer parts they'd have to pay taxes on the value of those.
- dmix 14y agoOr the beginning of a new one based on volunteerism and non-aggression. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle
- RivieraKid 14y agoDoes non-aggression principle mean, that society can't have any enforceable rules, like taxes? If so, NAP is not a good idea.
- dmix 14y agoThere will be enforceable rules against any type of aggression. Coercion of private property would be considered immoral and an act of violence. So social programs would be voluntary. ala non-profit organizations such as Kiva that utilize technology, the internet and volunteerism (instead of highly bureaucratic systems with no quality control) to affect social change. Of course this is all an extremely radical thought experiment. But it seems to be the coming side-effect of technology.
- RivieraKid 14y agoThis almost certainly won't work for many reasons: 1. People would donate radically less money than they pay via taxes today. That would result in even higher inequality. 2. Rich people would be more powerful, because for example, they would be able to make their own army (tanks, nuclear weapons, etc.). 3. No regulation of private sector (banks, food companies, ...) is not good for the society as a whole. 4. Etc.
- HyprMusic 14y agoInteresting to know how the tax on these bitcoins would work. Would this count as a taxable perk? If so, would that count as the government counting their existence and value?
- RobAley 14y agoI can't talk for the IA, but in the UK the situation is absolutely yes, they would be taxed. Any payment of any kind, or any benefit in kind, is taxable (and the tax paid in cash, not bitcoins!), apart from a few specified exemptions.
- celticninja 14y agothey would be taxable, how they would be taxed though is an entirely differnt question. Would they be considered the same as being paid you usual wages and therefore taxed as income? Or taxed like gold, i.e.not taxed until you sell? or perhaps like a stock, a capital gains tax is charged so you pay for any gain they have made since you reeived them? Willing to bet that HMRC has not even considerd it yet.
- travisp 14y agoIn the US, if you are paid in gold, it's still taxed as income. Then you are taxed when you sell the gold on capital gains on the difference between the market value when you received it and when you sold it. There's no loophole that allows avoiding paying income tax just because you are paid differently.
- brown9-2 14y agoI imagine they would be taxed the same as any American paid wages in a non-US currency (i.e. Americans working overseas). This wouldn't be a groundbreaking situation.
- travisp 14y agoI think the taxes would be fairly easy to figure out, no different than if you paid in gold or beanie babies or Euros. It doesn't really give bitcoins any special status or legitimacy for the IRS to do this.
- islon 14y agoI'd prefer to be payed in candy, at least I could eat the candy.
- OGinparadise 14y ago"Internet Archive Employees to be Paid in Bitcoins" It's all fun and games until you work 4-5 years, and maybe you can get a couple of pizzas with your savings. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=137.0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=137.0
- scotty79 14y agoDoes the time flow back for you?
- OGinparadise 14y agothose that forget history...