Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 1168. (Read 2032266 times)

translation:  in aggregate, Bitcoin participants won't be able to afford validation; thus they will ignore it.

The authorities in charge of deciding which coins get tainted... whose crime is worthy of a taint... what is considered a crime and in which jurisdiction (if I buy pot with bitcoins in Amsterdam and then the coins are sent to the US for an unrelated purchase or transfer, will they get tainted, thus screwing the innocent person who received them? If current government behavior is any indication - yes.)

Sooo many issues with tainting. The people who are like "Oh, taint wouldn't be so bad... those libertardian anarchist bitcoin culters need to lighten up, it might actually be good, you know, to stop terrorism, money laundering, theft" I want to see the looks on their faces after a taint program is actually attempted and we see the many instances of error, corruption, and outright fraud, as well as the general confusion resultant from trying to implement the laws of single multiple jurisdictions upon a global currency... I imagine it will be the same as the looks on Obama voters' faces as they slowly realize what he is actually doing in office... I'm not overdramatacizing, these are legitimate issues which the pro-tainters haven't even begun to address. Which countries' laws are we talking about here? Will taiwanese businesses be prevented from accepting coins which have been used to break Taiwanese laws, but what if they are sent to Kazakhstan or the US? Will the governments of those countries have a treaty with Taiwan that specifies adding taint to those coins that have broken laws in other countries that are not on the books in the US? Or what about if a Colorado citizen receives coins for pot in a store (legal by Colorado law) but then sends those coins to a relative in Florida - then the coins are tainted after the relative receives them. Then does the relative need to pay $500 for an appeals process for a coin transfer that was worth $400? The red tape will be hilarious.

Perhaps one will need to hire a lawyer or pay a large fee to appeal fraudulent taint? Then there is an unrealistic burden on low-income folks with lower transfer amounts. If I make $1000 a month and I receive a $200 transfer from a relative which happens to be tainted because of some jurisdictional technicality, I can't afford the $100 appeals fee! No I'm sure all of this will go smoothly without any problems or corruption ;-)

15% drop is nothing new. Price of gold was always artificial in some way. It was global agreement to put price on this rather useless metal. When we look on growth of bitcoin transactions, meta currencies might have to do something about it

I don't see that as a problem.

For one thing, being tainted with a piece of dust would make one's otherwise clean coins 0.000001% tainted (for example.)  For all intents and purpose they are still pure...line 99.999 gold to bring things OT

For two, it ought to be possible to selectively gather transactions and spend highly tainted inputs in a special spend with a little software development and thus clean up a wallet.  I'd envision services who would buy tainted BTC for a discount and strip out the clean stuff and sell the dirty stuff to whoever would buy it.  In fact the tainting authority themselves might go ahead and remove taint if the coins are submitted to them.  For a fee of course.  Coin Validation will be a hugely lucrative business for those who can get a government charter, and will give such businesses immense power in the ecosystem.

Keep in mind that spreading taint is easy.  Someone who's coins are "tainted" can send dust to hundreds or thousands of random wallets.  It would be hard for the average consumer after that to spend but exclude the taint if not impossible.

Nice analogy ... 

I cant wait to see them try AML/KYC with zerocoin ... gonna be best helping of go fuck yourself this century to date.

Brings back an old memory:

  https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.295024


I don't see the exchanges as being as much of a problem as the retailers who are in a position to be pressured to honor tainting.  I do expect that even relatively small  loss of function of tainted coins (e.g., not usable at TigerDirect) will have a significant negative impact on the values that these dirty coins can command.  That will have a significant impact on the exchanges without the authorities even bothering to lift a finger.

It is true that the exchanges are a place to pin individual identities to specific addresses though.  Once tainting is in place, however, I've little doubt that most people will self-register (if the alternative is to see one's coins tainted.)  I certainly will.

The main question in my mind is what would be the impact on clean coins and what kinds of timings are we looking at for these impacts.  I could imagine clean coins being in some demand for a time.  Hope so because I'll make a relatively big move if it happens.

Unlike many participants in this forum I do not expect a sharp and immediate collapse of Bitcoin if/when tainting is rolled in.  Tainting may seem like an anathema to many of us, but to probably a majority of folks on the street it will probably be seen as a good thing.  Thwarting crime, terrorism, etc.  With a little of the Bitcoin Foundation marketing magic it will be even more the case.

It's funny watching gov grasping at trying to define new revolutionary tech by applying old metrics.  It's like trying to tax email by making people buy a stamp for every email.  Good luck with that.  LOL

Anyone notice how quiet this thread got while gold was rising?




Regarding subsequent discussion, at times I fear the noose may be Bitcoin.

A handful of power players is all that's needed to realize the impossibility of controlling Bitcoin, and that the best course of action is therefore to own the lion's share. Silk Road and Gox confiscations measure up to this nicely.

With more being shunted through major exchanges, coloring coins for legal purposes is a foregone conclusion -- we can't be so naive as to think it is an issue of whether it will happen.

As for bank-supported exchanges, there is the strong desire to remain as gatekeepers by leveraging Bitcoin while trading meatspace interactions. In other words: track everything.

Multisig, blind transactions, DEXes, etc. These things cannot come soon enough.


Try Counterparty

well, there you have it:

Japan lays down the Bitcoin law: Treat it like gold

if the Japanese say so, then it is.

And here I thought I might be the only person in the world thinking this... 

Oops. If you end up escrowing the bet then that's awesome as well. I love a good bet like this.

I'd be willing to be an escrow for this bet. Let me know.

I love "price will hit X on Y date" bets.

 

Still think that *at best* litecoin moves more-or-less in lockstep with bitcoin.

The reality for litecoin is that it's no longer a novelty, and there was never any innovation. There's ultimate value in alts that are viable experiments in different ways to do things (PoS, Turing-complete scripting, etc). I think long-run, newer alts are going to eat into litecoin more than anything else.

To be honest, I think Doge has more viability long-run than litecoin (as an interesting experiment in viral marketing).

I misinterpreted your statement. I thought you were saying LTC is *going to* appreciate 300% in the *next* 3 months, not that your trading in/out of ltc/silver over the past 3 months has produced a 300% ROI. Gotchya...

I wasn't interested in Gold or Silver before I've seen this thread.

Is Huobi adding Ltc soon?

I have a feeling we are approaching "peak alt coins."

Hello,
Where do you trade crypto <-> gold / silver ?