Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 419. (Read 2032286 times)
despite $DJI green candle today, look at weakness in $DJT:
https://medium.com/@medialab/launching-a-digital-currency-initiative-238fc678aba2
Hopefully these guys can take the place of the BF.
Hopefully these guys can take the place of the BF.
I don't see how, they hired some head guy from the Obama admin involved with "IT technologies" who must have overseen the pillorying of Snowden and turned a blind eye to god only knows what other abuses coming out of the NSA, FISA, FBI and Dept. of Justice regarding privacy violations and 4th amendment crimes.
I'm certainly no fan of the current administration but if what 's in the release below is accurate then he doesn't seem like such a bad guy. Any specific sources you can cite regarding your thoughts?
https://newsoffice.mit.edu/2015/brian-forde-media-lab-director-digital-currency-0415
https://medium.com/@medialab/launching-a-digital-currency-initiative-238fc678aba2
Hopefully these guys can take the place of the BF.
Hopefully these guys can take the place of the BF.
I don't see how, they hired some head guy from the Obama admin involved with "IT technologies" who must have overseen the pillorying of Snowden and turned a blind eye to god only knows what other abuses coming out of the NSA, FISA, FBI and Dept. of Justice regarding privacy violations and 4th amendment crimes.
Quote
I keep talking to regulators at conferences who believe bitcoin simply must change to bring it in line with other payment systems
Quote
“Sorry to be a wet blanket. Writing a description [of Bitcoin] for general audiences is bloody hard. There’s nothing to relate it to.”
“If you don’t believe me or don’t get it, I don’t have time to try to convince you, sorry.”
“If you don’t believe me or don’t get it, I don’t have time to try to convince you, sorry.”
Stop talking to them if they don't get it.
There is no requirement to pander to your lessers.
Decent interview with Peter Todd who I always appreciate hearing from. He's always had a balanced and realistic view of things IMHO.
https://medium.com/zapchain-magazine/why-one-bitcoin-developer-thinks-cryptocurrencies-have-a-dreadful-future-93007cff1613
His comments on government intervention
I'll continue to maintain that the best defense to this is to make bitcoin as widely used worldwide directly by people as end-users with their own wallets. If everyone just holds coins or uses bitpay and coinbase, it will be much easier to push regulation into the system. If usage grows globally to be a complicated mess of direct person-to-person usages and numerous small services spread around the world, it will be very hard for a single gov to push regulation in (even for the USSA).
https://medium.com/zapchain-magazine/why-one-bitcoin-developer-thinks-cryptocurrencies-have-a-dreadful-future-93007cff1613
His comments on government intervention
Quote
I think there’s a really high chance that we see a lot more government action against bitcoin, including the core protocol.
...
I keep talking to regulators at conferences who believe bitcoin simply must change to bring it in line with other payment systems; unfortunately this means adding identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds.
...
I keep talking to regulators at conferences who believe bitcoin simply must change to bring it in line with other payment systems; unfortunately this means adding identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds.
I'll continue to maintain that the best defense to this is to make bitcoin as widely used worldwide directly by people as end-users with their own wallets. If everyone just holds coins or uses bitpay and coinbase, it will be much easier to push regulation into the system. If usage grows globally to be a complicated mess of direct person-to-person usages and numerous small services spread around the world, it will be very hard for a single gov to push regulation in (even for the USSA).
we're already seeing widespread usage outside the US. plus, i think their will be plenty of foreign sovereigns who will be more than happy to see the US try to clamp down on Bitcoin as it presents an opportunity for them to unseat the top dog. this is why China hasn't outright clamped down on it and why the UK is moving forward.
Decent interview with Peter Todd who I always appreciate hearing from. He's always had a balanced and realistic view of things IMHO.
https://medium.com/zapchain-magazine/why-one-bitcoin-developer-thinks-cryptocurrencies-have-a-dreadful-future-93007cff1613
His comments on government intervention
I'll continue to maintain that the best defense to this is to make bitcoin as widely used worldwide directly by people as end-users with their own wallets. If everyone just holds coins or uses bitpay and coinbase, it will be much easier to push regulation into the system. If usage grows globally to be a complicated mess of direct person-to-person usages and numerous small services spread around the world, it will be very hard for a single gov to push regulation in (even for the USSA).
https://medium.com/zapchain-magazine/why-one-bitcoin-developer-thinks-cryptocurrencies-have-a-dreadful-future-93007cff1613
His comments on government intervention
Quote
I think there’s a really high chance that we see a lot more government action against bitcoin, including the core protocol.
...
I keep talking to regulators at conferences who believe bitcoin simply must change to bring it in line with other payment systems; unfortunately this means adding identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds.
...
I keep talking to regulators at conferences who believe bitcoin simply must change to bring it in line with other payment systems; unfortunately this means adding identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds.
I'll continue to maintain that the best defense to this is to make bitcoin as widely used worldwide directly by people as end-users with their own wallets. If everyone just holds coins or uses bitpay and coinbase, it will be much easier to push regulation into the system. If usage grows globally to be a complicated mess of direct person-to-person usages and numerous small services spread around the world, it will be very hard for a single gov to push regulation in (even for the USSA).
https://medium.com/@medialab/launching-a-digital-currency-initiative-238fc678aba2
Hopefully these guys can take the place of the BF.
Hopefully these guys can take the place of the BF.
There's much to be learned from what's happened to Ripple. I, and others, were always warning of their centralized nature. Yet there were/are legions of supporters who wish to believe otherwise. I always got the sense that they just wanted to be a part of the next big thing. The other thing that always got to me was their incessant pandering to the Bitcoin community, here on the forums, and especially at conferences. Alas, their tech is nothing but an upgrade to the existing systems.
I would submit that the best way to support Bitcoin at this stage is to buy the coin itself. What Bitcoin needs is greater liquidity and with it will come greater stability and growth. It needs a much larger market cap to support all the companies that want to build on top of it. The merchant build out has been premature.
Once Bitcoin has established itself as a sound, reliable form of money, only then will it excel to the levels we all want it to achieve.
I would submit that the best way to support Bitcoin at this stage is to buy the coin itself. What Bitcoin needs is greater liquidity and with it will come greater stability and growth. It needs a much larger market cap to support all the companies that want to build on top of it. The merchant build out has been premature.
Once Bitcoin has established itself as a sound, reliable form of money, only then will it excel to the levels we all want it to achieve.
Do everyone allow this happen if:
Quote
BITCOIN TOP-500: 1-50
1. BTC980,000*. Satoshi Nakamoto
2. BTC400,000*. HD Moore (AHA)
3. BTC400,000*. Dustin D. Trammell (AHA)
4. BTC400,000*. Tod Beardsley (AHA)
5. BTC350,000*. "Dread Pirate Roberts" a.k.a. "DPR"
6. BTC300,000. Roger Ver
7. BTC300,000*. "knightmb"
8. BTC200,000. Mark Karpeles
8.5 BTC182,592. "Loaded"
9. BTC174,000*. FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation, USA)
10. BTC119,000. AsicMiner Management Team of 3 (names?)
11. BTC110,000. Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss
12. BTC100,000. "klaus"
13. BTC100,000. "mezzomix"
14. BTC75,000. "artforz"
15. BTC70,000. Erik Voorhees
17. BTC30,000. "nakowa"
18. BTC30,000. Mircea Popescu
19. BTC30,000. "Goat"
20. BTC25,000. Chamath Palihapitiya
21. BTC25,000. Gavin Andresen
22. BTC20,000. Max Keiser
23. BTC20,000. "Theymos"
1. BTC980,000*. Satoshi Nakamoto
2. BTC400,000*. HD Moore (AHA)
3. BTC400,000*. Dustin D. Trammell (AHA)
4. BTC400,000*. Tod Beardsley (AHA)
5. BTC350,000*. "Dread Pirate Roberts" a.k.a. "DPR"
6. BTC300,000. Roger Ver
7. BTC300,000*. "knightmb"
8. BTC200,000. Mark Karpeles
8.5 BTC182,592. "Loaded"
9. BTC174,000*. FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation, USA)
10. BTC119,000. AsicMiner Management Team of 3 (names?)
11. BTC110,000. Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss
12. BTC100,000. "klaus"
13. BTC100,000. "mezzomix"
14. BTC75,000. "artforz"
15. BTC70,000. Erik Voorhees
17. BTC30,000. "nakowa"
18. BTC30,000. Mircea Popescu
19. BTC30,000. "Goat"
20. BTC25,000. Chamath Palihapitiya
21. BTC25,000. Gavin Andresen
22. BTC20,000. Max Keiser
23. BTC20,000. "Theymos"
There's much to be learned from what's happened to Ripple. I, and others, were always warning of their centralized nature. Yet there were/are legions of supporters who wish to believe otherwise. I always got the sense that they just wanted to be a part of the next big thing. The other thing that always got to me was their incessant pandering to the Bitcoin community, here on the forums, and especially at conferences. Alas, their tech is nothing but an upgrade to the existing systems.
If bitcoin had ANY centralized actor involved, KYC & money transmitter laws would have been used to shut it down a long time ago.
The fact that bitcoin is still functioning is not due to the state allowing it to function, but a testament to how censorship resilient Satoshi designed bitcoin. Bitcoin will continue to operate with or without the state's consent. In the absence of control, their only avenue to influence bitcoin is through regulation.
There's much to be learned from what's happened to Ripple. I, and others, were always warning of their centralized nature. Yet there were/are legions of supporters who wish to believe otherwise. I always got the sense that they just wanted to be a part of the next big thing. The other thing that always got to me was their incessant pandering to the Bitcoin community, here on the forums, and especially at conferences. Alas, their tech is nothing but an upgrade to the existing systems.
I would submit that the best way to support Bitcoin at this stage is to buy the coin itself. What Bitcoin needs is greater liquidity and with it will come greater stability and growth. It needs a much larger market cap to support all the companies that want to build on top of it. The merchant build out has been premature.
Once Bitcoin has established itself as a sound, reliable form of money, only then will it excel to the levels we all want it to achieve.
I would submit that the best way to support Bitcoin at this stage is to buy the coin itself. What Bitcoin needs is greater liquidity and with it will come greater stability and growth. It needs a much larger market cap to support all the companies that want to build on top of it. The merchant build out has been premature.
Once Bitcoin has established itself as a sound, reliable form of money, only then will it excel to the levels we all want it to achieve.
It's official. Ripple has shown its true colors:
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113968/ripple-will-require-verified-user-id-to-use-its-compliant-network#
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113968/ripple-will-require-verified-user-id-to-use-its-compliant-network#
Ripple is a piece of crap system. Sold as "decentralized" and "trustless"
The moment I saw their booth at the San Jose 2013 conference I knew ripple was a business and not a free market digital decentralized trustless network.
It's official. Ripple has shown its true colors:
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113968/ripple-will-require-verified-user-id-to-use-its-compliant-network#
A Ripple tattoo would be easier.http://cointelegraph.com/news/113968/ripple-will-require-verified-user-id-to-use-its-compliant-network#
Forget tattoos, just plant a chip inside everyone. It's where we're all headed anyway.
It's official. Ripple has shown its true colors:
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113968/ripple-will-require-verified-user-id-to-use-its-compliant-network#
A Ripple tattoo would be easier. http://cointelegraph.com/news/113968/ripple-will-require-verified-user-id-to-use-its-compliant-network#
It's official. Ripple has shown its true colors:
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113968/ripple-will-require-verified-user-id-to-use-its-compliant-network#
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113968/ripple-will-require-verified-user-id-to-use-its-compliant-network#
Look at what happened to bitcoin in USA since Fed/wall st. took an interest, it died.
yes, i think they are interfering in the Bitcoin price mkt thru derivatives. but i don't think it is sustainable and they most likely will get whiplashed to the tune of millions of losses when the mkt turns up. we all should be keeping a close eye out for the first derivatives exchange (here's looking at you BFX) that does a force majeure that forces settlement in USD as opposed to BTC from the lack of available BTC needed to be covered.if their algos keep a continually falling lid on prices and price perceptions such that the market never "turns up" materially, funded by unlimited supplies of fiat only, then it is an effective social/economic attack that will inevitably sideline bitcoin as a useful currency. The exchanges that facilitate manipulative pricing algorithms on their platforms are accomplices in this attack on bitcoin and imho should be treated as such.
NB: this has nothing to do with my support for implementing 2-way pegs in the protocol.
except that shorting requires borrowing existing BTC on the exchange of which there is only a theoretically limited supply. this is where naked shorting potentially enters the picture and any exchange who allows this should be black balled and reported to the authorities for illegal practices hopefully to be shut down. but of course, getting them to do anything is another story.
and yes, i think you're allowing the bear mkt to influence your perception that Bitcoin isn't working in the US. Bitcoin cannot not work in an isolated geographical region imo. it will route around that area until it forces capitulation of affected area.
I've been through at least 3 bitcoin bear markets (maybe 4?) so I don't think it is doom colouring my perception. Coinbase and Circle are nothing more than revamped PayPals built on top of bitcoin, not sure that BitPay is that much better. End user solutions that maximise the decentralisation benefits of bitcoin's digital cash are not even on the drawing board in USA because of absolute obsequiousness towards the Almighty State dictat there.
Inviting regulation when there was an opportunity for gaining the moral high-ground through legitimate civilian disobedience against the prevalent government push towards ubiquitous financial surveillance is a major error and missed opportunity. The bankster attack dogs will gladly regulate (and fraudulently trade for profit) bitcoin to its obscurity, just like they have done with gold.
It's just a magic fun game hall of mirrors illusion/casino meant to keep the rubes playing the game and the man-on-street asleep to the underlying corrupt, inefficient dysfunctional financial/monetary system. It really is morphing into a modern version of the Soviet era command-economy with all financial control at the center; everything seems to grind along okay for quite a while but it is terribly inefficient economically, ripe for abuse at all levels and inevitably dies due to paralysing stagnation from gross misallocation of resources due to vibrant creative destruction being denied for decades.
It is again the gray hand of the State clamping down and strangling free markets to death, only this time in a slow painful manner. Look at what happened to bitcoin in USA since Fed/wall st. took an interest, it died.
It is again the gray hand of the State clamping down and strangling free markets to death, only this time in a slow painful manner. Look at what happened to bitcoin in USA since Fed/wall st. took an interest, it died.
Countries thrive when they allow creative destruction to continuously rip out inefficiencies and move forward. The modern era is largely the product of creative destruction being unleashed on the world as we tore down feudalism and build new dynamic systems that serviced the majority and not the 0.1%.
But creative destruction requires an independent, self-sufficient and capable people, who understand and have the fortitude to deal with uncertainty and the ups and yes downs of life.
American's for awhile now have chosen secure stability at the expense of creative destruction. This works for awhile, but eventually you end up with an inflexible & paralyzed system that misallocates resources more and more and where most become dependent on a centralized entity for support. At some point that static system breaks, and when it does it's never pretty.
This is what our grand-parents and their parents chose for us, they traded their inheritance of a free and open system for a safe and secure life for themselves, sacrificing us in the process.
if their algos keep a continually falling lid on prices and price perceptions such that the market never "turns up" materially, funded by unlimited supplies of fiat only, then it is an effective social/economic attack that will inevitably sideline bitcoin as a useful currency. The exchanges that facilitate manipulative pricing algorithms on their platforms are accomplices in this attack on bitcoin and imho should be treated as such.
The only thing to worry about is the spread of exchanges that do not allow users to withdraw real bitcoins on the blockchain. I haven't yet seen any of those.This is exactly right.
As long as withdrawing is possible, then any manipulation is extremely limited since a manipulator first needs to acquire bitcoins before selling. Free exchange and the ability to withdraw force exchanges to not fractionally leverage their holdings (in essence naked short) and force exchanges to be relatively honest.
If free exchange and the right to withdraw into your own wallet is ever stopped, only then can an exchange or a government manipulate prices.
Again, FDR's 1933 default was exactly this. In 1932 anyone could walk into a bank and exchange $ for gold. In 1933 this free exchange was stopped and you were no longer able to "withdraw" your gold, which dollars represented. Once the ability to withdraw was blocked, the government was free to leverage to infinity.
The corollary to this is "never leave any coin on exchanges!"
if their algos keep a continually falling lid on prices and price perceptions such that the market never "turns up" materially, funded by unlimited supplies of fiat only, then it is an effective social/economic attack that will inevitably sideline bitcoin as a useful currency. The exchanges that facilitate manipulative pricing algorithms on their platforms are accomplices in this attack on bitcoin and imho should be treated as such.
The only thing to worry about is the spread of exchanges that do not allow users to withdraw real bitcoins on the blockchain. I haven't yet seen any of those.
This is exactly right.
As long as withdrawing is possible, then any manipulation is extremely limited since a manipulator first needs to acquire bitcoins before selling. Free exchange and the ability to withdraw force exchanges to not fractionally leverage their holdings (in essence naked short) and force exchanges to be relatively honest.
If free exchange and the right to withdraw into your own wallet is ever stopped, only then can an exchange or a government manipulate prices.
Again, FDR's 1933 default was exactly this. In 1932 anyone could walk into a bank and exchange $ for gold. In 1933 this free exchange was stopped and you were no longer able to "withdraw" your gold, which dollars represented. Once the ability to withdraw was blocked, the government was free to leverage to infinity.
The vagaries of cash, or lessons in not controlling your funds:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/uncle-sam-may-have-picked-the-wrong-cash-cow/2015/04/14/227aa73c-de2e-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/uncle-sam-may-have-picked-the-wrong-cash-cow/2015/04/14/227aa73c-de2e-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html
Yep and there's this: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/investigations/2015/03/28/iowa-forfeiture-system-legal-thievery/70600856/
The country I live in disgusts me more and more every day. USSA.
Try taking my private keys Uncle Sam.
http://qntra.net/2015/04/police-send-spyware-of-lawyer-for-whistle-blower/
Quote
As always persons located in the United States are recommended to discount the possibility that "Law Enforcement" agencies are realistically constrained by the law.
but who says it is being manipulated? i think it is in fact slowly losing its exchange value to Bitcoin.
Since that's rather nicely back to the OP. I'm still not convinced you're going to be 'medium time frame' correct on that one. I believe it's much more probable that these global currency wars will escalate and both bitcoin and gold will go up as last resort stores of value. Gold is hoarded by nation states as such they are traditional and slow to change. Perhaps on a 20 year time frame, but certainly not in the next 5 years.
Jump to: