Topic: Bitcoin mentioned in The Financial supervisory Authority of Norway's report. - page 2. (Read 8357 times)
July 28, 2012, 09:55:32 PM
July 28, 2012, 06:11:02 PM
quote "For such a system to work, it needs a 'rich' sponsor."
one of the common first 5 minute misconceptions is that the money ought to be issues by a single authority. I don't think they get the point that the money is actually issued in a decentralized fashion. How can they - didn't exist before... (except gold digging
)
Actually though, a decentralized system has an even greater need for a rich sponsor.one of the common first 5 minute misconceptions is that the money ought to be issues by a single authority. I don't think they get the point that the money is actually issued in a decentralized fashion. How can they - didn't exist before... (except gold digging
)Say I want to create a new centralized currency, JoelBux, and I want them to be 1-to-1 to the dollar. If I issue them all myself, I sell them for $1 each. Then I offer to buy them back for $1 each. The only way someone can have a JoelBuck is if they bought it from me for $1. So when I have to buy them back, I've already got the funds to do it. I need to be rich, but I don't sponsor anything because I don't lose any money.
Now say I want to create a new decentralized currency, JoelCoin, and I want them to be 1-to-1 to the dollar. To keep the price up, I have to offer to buy JoelCoins for a dollar each. But since they're issued in a decentralized fashion, people can acquire JoelCoins without paying me any money and I might need to spend more and more money and accumulate more and more JoelCoins. As soon as I stop, JoelCoins drop in value (because there's no real JoelCoin economy) and I'm stuck with a ton of them.
Of course, if JoelCoins do take off in value and there's a thriving JoelCoin economy, I'm no longer "stuck" with a ton of them, I make a fortune.
July 28, 2012, 05:57:50 PM
The system is virtual and the american government has signalized that they want to remove this system before naive and gullible users become too involved. For such a system to work, it needs a 'rich' sponsor.
Thanks for posting... interesting.
I assume by "gullible users" they mean "people who have realised how we screw them with centrally-issued fiat".
July 28, 2012, 04:48:08 PM
quote "For such a system to work, it needs a 'rich' sponsor."
one of the common first 5 minute misconceptions is that the money ought to be issues by a single authority. I don't think they get the point that the money is actually issued in a decentralized fashion. How can they - didn't exist before... (except gold digging )
Actually though, a decentralized system has an even greater need for a rich sponsor.one of the common first 5 minute misconceptions is that the money ought to be issues by a single authority. I don't think they get the point that the money is actually issued in a decentralized fashion. How can they - didn't exist before... (except gold digging
)Say I want to create a new centralized currency, JoelBux, and I want them to be 1-to-1 to the dollar. If I issue them all myself, I sell them for $1 each. Then I offer to buy them back for $1 each. The only way someone can have a JoelBuck is if they bought it from me for $1. So when I have to buy them back, I've already got the funds to do it. I need to be rich, but I don't sponsor anything because I don't lose any money.
Now say I want to create a new decentralized currency, JoelCoin, and I want them to be 1-to-1 to the dollar. To keep the price up, I have to offer to buy JoelCoins for a dollar each. But since they're issued in a decentralized fashion, people can acquire JoelCoins without paying me any money and I might need to spend more and more money and accumulate more and more JoelCoins. As soon as I stop, JoelCoins drop in value (because there's no real JoelCoin economy) and I'm stuck with a ton of them.
Of course, if JoelCoins do take off in value and there's a thriving JoelCoin economy, I'm no longer "stuck" with a ton of them, I make a fortune.
July 28, 2012, 04:41:09 PM
quote "For such a system to work, it needs a 'rich' sponsor."
one of the common first 5 minute misconceptions is that the money ought to be issues by a single authority. I don't think they get the point that the money is actually issued in a decentralized fashion. How can they - didn't exist before... (except gold digging )
one of the common first 5 minute misconceptions is that the money ought to be issues by a single authority. I don't think they get the point that the money is actually issued in a decentralized fashion. How can they - didn't exist before... (except gold digging
) July 28, 2012, 04:36:03 PM
They honestly seem to believe that the only reason Bitcoins have a greater than miniscule value is that someone keeps buying them up at a loss.
July 28, 2012, 04:33:09 PM
Unless they employ educated IT personnel to analyze the bitcoin technology for their reports its all gonna be dangerous black magic to them. Natural reaction though.
July 28, 2012, 04:18:18 PM
It's monopoly money? That's why they're worth (almost) $9 a piece! 
July 28, 2012, 04:05:35 PM
Its monopoly money, didnt you read!?
July 28, 2012, 03:53:51 PM
Lol This is so much funny.
Maybe they should start getting to know what bitcoin is. Bitcoin is not what they think
Maybe they should start getting to know what bitcoin is. Bitcoin is not what they think
July 28, 2012, 03:20:50 PM
Quote
the american government has signalized that they want to remove this system before naive and gullible users become too involved.
This is another sign that the international diplomatic back-channels have been opened up and the order has gone out from Washington, "ban bitcoin!". All friendly countries are expected to do as they are told by Washington.
July 28, 2012, 03:06:09 PM
interesting
July 28, 2012, 02:42:32 PM
It seems they draw a bunch of random guys and assign them to write paragraph each. Burime of sorts. The first paragraph is matter of fact'ish objective description of Bitcoin, the following two paragraphs were farmed out clearly to complete idiots. "monopoly money", "rich sponsor" ffs!
July 28, 2012, 02:34:42 PM
Quote
At the moment, this system is outside governmental control, and the risk is unknown.
Uuuhh... it's outside governmental control 
Quote
The system is virtual and the american government has signalized that they want to remove this system before naive and gullible users become too involved. For such a system to work, it needs a 'rich' sponsor.
Yeah sure sure and i don't get the "rich sponsor" thing...
July 27, 2012, 12:09:36 PM
Want't sure where to post, but I'm trying the legal section, as this is not a mention in the press per se.
Source: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CGEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.finanstilsynet.no%2FGlobal%2FVenstremeny%2FRapport%2F2012%2FROS-analyse_2011.pdf&ei=rcYSUIy2BsT74QSH8oHQDA&usg=AFQjCNFf9K7smtO1c6Pmj6UON8Ge0vIQbQ&sig2=IlUJOury63p6DMZBmW5lng
The financial supervisory authority of Norwar released a Risk and Vulnerability analysis in March 2012 regarding the usage of information and communication technology in financial institutions.
Under 2.4.3 titled 'Shadow services on the internet' they wrote the following (translated manually from Norwegian to English):
Translated text:
Bitcoin is a digital curreny made in 2009. The name of the currency also refers to the "open source"-program Bitcoin that's used to send money. The maximum limit for how much Bitcoin can ever exist is 21 millions. It's therefore a static currency once all Bitcoins are distriibuted. Bitcoin is based on person to person technology (P2P), and is operating without any form of a sentralized server or middlemen. All payments are automatically verified through nodes in the P2P-network, and the system is built such that it is impossible to make more money or steal others money. This is ensured through the usage of a 'blockchain' which is stored by all the nodes in the network.
Bitcoins kan for instance be compared to "Monopoly money" where each single actor buys virtual moneyvalues called Bitcoin to do commercial transactions in a gated environment of trade. Liquidity in fiat money must always be available if the trade actors wish to exchange from Bitcoins to for instance US dollars or Euros. At the moment, this system is outside governmental control, and the risk is unknown.
The system is virtual and the american government has signalized that they want to remove this system before naive and gullible users become too involved. For such a system to work, it needs a 'rich' sponsor.
Orginal text:
My comments:
Coming from a governmental institution, we could not hope for a positive review, there's no reference where the mention about the us govt. wanting to get rid of bitcoin is written. We already know the US govt. is aware of bitcoin, heck the lead dev. visited the CIA a while ago, and the FBI leaked a memo mentioning bitcoin. So I call FUD on that one.
Still interesting they mentioned Bitcoin.
Source: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CGEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.finanstilsynet.no%2FGlobal%2FVenstremeny%2FRapport%2F2012%2FROS-analyse_2011.pdf&ei=rcYSUIy2BsT74QSH8oHQDA&usg=AFQjCNFf9K7smtO1c6Pmj6UON8Ge0vIQbQ&sig2=IlUJOury63p6DMZBmW5lng
The financial supervisory authority of Norwar released a Risk and Vulnerability analysis in March 2012 regarding the usage of information and communication technology in financial institutions.
Under 2.4.3 titled 'Shadow services on the internet' they wrote the following (translated manually from Norwegian to English):
Translated text:
Bitcoin is a digital curreny made in 2009. The name of the currency also refers to the "open source"-program Bitcoin that's used to send money. The maximum limit for how much Bitcoin can ever exist is 21 millions. It's therefore a static currency once all Bitcoins are distriibuted. Bitcoin is based on person to person technology (P2P), and is operating without any form of a sentralized server or middlemen. All payments are automatically verified through nodes in the P2P-network, and the system is built such that it is impossible to make more money or steal others money. This is ensured through the usage of a 'blockchain' which is stored by all the nodes in the network.
Bitcoins kan for instance be compared to "Monopoly money" where each single actor buys virtual moneyvalues called Bitcoin to do commercial transactions in a gated environment of trade. Liquidity in fiat money must always be available if the trade actors wish to exchange from Bitcoins to for instance US dollars or Euros. At the moment, this system is outside governmental control, and the risk is unknown.
The system is virtual and the american government has signalized that they want to remove this system before naive and gullible users become too involved. For such a system to work, it needs a 'rich' sponsor.
Orginal text:
Quote
2.4.3.1 Bitcoin
Bitcoin er en digital valuta opprettet i 2009. Navnet på valutaen refererer også til «open source»-
programmet Bitcoin som brukes for å sende penger. Maksgrensen på antall bitcoins som kan være i
omløp, er satt på 21 millioner. Det er altså en statisk valuta etter at alle bitcoins er delt ut. Bitcoin er
basert på person to person-teknologi (P2P), og opererer uten noen form for sentral server eller
mellommenn. Alle betalinger verifiseres automatisk gjennom noder i P2P-nettverket, og systemet er
bygd opp slik at man ikke kan opprette flere penger eller stjele andres. Dette sikres gjennom en
«blockchain» som lagres av alle nodene i nettverket.
Bitcoin kan gjerne sammenlignes med «Monopolpenger» hvor den enkelte aktør kjøper virtuelle
pengeverdier kalt bitcoin for å gjøre kommersielle transaksjoner i et lukket handelsmiljø. Likviditet i
«reelle» penger må alltid ligge til disposisjon dersom aktørene ønsker å veksle fra bitcoins til for
eksempel US dollar eller euro. Foreløpig foregår denne virksomheten utenfor kontroll av
myndighetene, og risikoen er ukjent.
Systemet er virtuelt og amerikanske myndigheter har signalisert at de ønsker å fjerne dette systemet før
godtroende brukere blir for mye involvert. For at et slikt system skal kunne fungere, må det ha en «rik»
sponsor.
Bitcoin er en digital valuta opprettet i 2009. Navnet på valutaen refererer også til «open source»-
programmet Bitcoin som brukes for å sende penger. Maksgrensen på antall bitcoins som kan være i
omløp, er satt på 21 millioner. Det er altså en statisk valuta etter at alle bitcoins er delt ut. Bitcoin er
basert på person to person-teknologi (P2P), og opererer uten noen form for sentral server eller
mellommenn. Alle betalinger verifiseres automatisk gjennom noder i P2P-nettverket, og systemet er
bygd opp slik at man ikke kan opprette flere penger eller stjele andres. Dette sikres gjennom en
«blockchain» som lagres av alle nodene i nettverket.
Bitcoin kan gjerne sammenlignes med «Monopolpenger» hvor den enkelte aktør kjøper virtuelle
pengeverdier kalt bitcoin for å gjøre kommersielle transaksjoner i et lukket handelsmiljø. Likviditet i
«reelle» penger må alltid ligge til disposisjon dersom aktørene ønsker å veksle fra bitcoins til for
eksempel US dollar eller euro. Foreløpig foregår denne virksomheten utenfor kontroll av
myndighetene, og risikoen er ukjent.
Systemet er virtuelt og amerikanske myndigheter har signalisert at de ønsker å fjerne dette systemet før
godtroende brukere blir for mye involvert. For at et slikt system skal kunne fungere, må det ha en «rik»
sponsor.
My comments:
Coming from a governmental institution, we could not hope for a positive review, there's no reference where the mention about the us govt. wanting to get rid of bitcoin is written. We already know the US govt. is aware of bitcoin, heck the lead dev. visited the CIA a while ago, and the FBI leaked a memo mentioning bitcoin. So I call FUD on that one.
Still interesting they mentioned Bitcoin.
Jump to: