Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 487.

rpietila

donator

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1036

Quote from: grendel25 on February 20, 2015, 09:52:10 PM

if the bacteria method of gold production is industrialized then gold prices will stabilize greatly...it won't be as volatile and shouldn't really be as costly.

Volatility will increase when uncertainty is introduced.

The current volatility of the price of gold is man-made, it serves the interests of the money-masters. And: it's not the price of gold that is measured; gold is the yardstick to measure the value of everything else, especially the CB/fiat/financial assets. It's not about the value of a yellow metal, since the metal has little to no value, it's about the fact of having a "way to call the bluff of the financial system", and that we have not only with gold, but in Bitcoin as well now.

If the stocks:flows ratio becomes uncertain with the technological advances, we will have natural market volatility on top of the manipulation.

explorer

legendary

Activity: 2016

Merit: 1259

Quote from: grendel25 on February 20, 2015, 09:52:10 PM

And gold will collapse even more now that scientists have been able to produce gold by using bacteria. bitcoin is far more relevant and useful as a currency. Gold is still valuable but if the bacteria method of gold production is industrialized then gold prices will stabilize greatly...it won't be as volatile and shouldn't really be as costly.

Depends on the efficiency of the bacteria patent enforcer.

grendel25

legendary

Activity: 2296

Merit: 1031

And gold will collapse even more now that scientists have been able to produce gold by using bacteria. bitcoin is far more relevant and useful as a currency. Gold is still valuable but if the bacteria method of gold production is industrialized then gold prices will stabilize greatly...it won't be as volatile and shouldn't really be as costly.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: molecular on February 20, 2015, 06:37:47 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 20, 2015, 06:24:08 PM

Quote from: molecular on February 19, 2015, 05:31:44 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 19, 2015, 04:21:56 PM

molecular:

can the Trezor ppl see our balances and tx's while the Trezor is logged into myTrezor.com?

yes, unfortunately. At least they're not using your xpub key to transfer addresses to watch, so they don't know your future keys (except the 5 or so per account they scan ahead).

That's my biggest criticism with myTrezor and it's why I switched to electrum as soon as the development code had trezor working. It's not perfect with electrum, either, but better (I don't know exactly what, but they do some stuff to increase privacy towards server operators).

I went to the hassle of running my own electrum server (public, of course, so I can hide in the masses when broadcasting transactions). Feel free to use it (electrum.0x0000.de), I'm not logging anything or looking at the traffic in any way.

How could they overlook such an obvious privacy violation when designing the wallet? It should be a local client that broadcasts tx's out to the network.

The broadcast isn't the only privacy problem inherent to the client/server thin wallet design, watching for incoming money another one.

They didn't overlook it, they accepted it for lack of a good solution.

I have no problem with running a full node with s local client to maintain privac. That should've been an option.

Erdogan

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1005

Quote from: molecular on February 20, 2015, 06:37:47 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 20, 2015, 06:24:08 PM

Quote from: molecular on February 19, 2015, 05:31:44 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 19, 2015, 04:21:56 PM

molecular:

can the Trezor ppl see our balances and tx's while the Trezor is logged into myTrezor.com?

yes, unfortunately. At least they're not using your xpub key to transfer addresses to watch, so they don't know your future keys (except the 5 or so per account they scan ahead).

That's my biggest criticism with myTrezor and it's why I switched to electrum as soon as the development code had trezor working. It's not perfect with electrum, either, but better (I don't know exactly what, but they do some stuff to increase privacy towards server operators).

I went to the hassle of running my own electrum server (public, of course, so I can hide in the masses when broadcasting transactions). Feel free to use it (electrum.0x0000.de), I'm not logging anything or looking at the traffic in any way.

How could they overlook such an obvious privacy violation when designing the wallet? It should be a local client that broadcasts tx's out to the network.

The broadcast isn't the only privacy problem inherent to the client/server thin wallet design, watching for incoming money another one.

They didn't overlook it, they accepted it for lack of a good solution.

It seems the trezor compatibility has been slower than expected for most wallets. I look forward to Armory/Trezor compatibility. It seems they have to change their HD wallet to the standard BIP32 wallet first, which is probably more work/risk than implementing the trezor support. In Armory, it would resemble the existing off line signing, the change is just to use USB communication in stead of the current file based communication. EDIT: Maybe more, not an expert.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 20, 2015, 06:24:08 PM

Quote from: molecular on February 19, 2015, 05:31:44 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 19, 2015, 04:21:56 PM

molecular:

can the Trezor ppl see our balances and tx's while the Trezor is logged into myTrezor.com?

yes, unfortunately. At least they're not using your xpub key to transfer addresses to watch, so they don't know your future keys (except the 5 or so per account they scan ahead).

That's my biggest criticism with myTrezor and it's why I switched to electrum as soon as the development code had trezor working. It's not perfect with electrum, either, but better (I don't know exactly what, but they do some stuff to increase privacy towards server operators).

I went to the hassle of running my own electrum server (public, of course, so I can hide in the masses when broadcasting transactions). Feel free to use it (electrum.0x0000.de), I'm not logging anything or looking at the traffic in any way.

How could they overlook such an obvious privacy violation when designing the wallet? It should be a local client that broadcasts tx's out to the network.

The broadcast isn't the only privacy problem inherent to the client/server thin wallet design, watching for incoming money another one.

They didn't overlook it, they accepted it for lack of a good solution.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: molecular on February 19, 2015, 05:31:44 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 19, 2015, 04:21:56 PM

molecular:

can the Trezor ppl see our balances and tx's while the Trezor is logged into myTrezor.com?

yes, unfortunately. At least they're not using your xpub key to transfer addresses to watch, so they don't know your future keys (except the 5 or so per account they scan ahead).

That's my biggest criticism with myTrezor and it's why I switched to electrum as soon as the development code had trezor working. It's not perfect with electrum, either, but better (I don't know exactly what, but they do some stuff to increase privacy towards server operators).

I went to the hassle of running my own electrum server (public, of course, so I can hide in the masses when broadcasting transactions). Feel free to use it (electrum.0x0000.de), I'm not logging anything or looking at the traffic in any way.

How could they overlook such an obvious privacy violation when designing the wallet? It should be a local client that broadcasts tx's out to the network.

Erdogan

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1005

The current public image of bitcoin:

The ISIS angle
The money laundering angle
The trust us, we can break anything on the net angle
The illegal trade angle
The regulation angle
The danger dealing with strangers angle

This is just the MSM revving up their engine. They still don't know what is going to hit them, but they sense it is something dangerous.

Anyway, don't lose faith, this is only growing pains for bitcoin. The internet had it, computer cryptography had it, the video cassette had it, even the postcard had it.

msin

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1004

Quote from: okthen on February 20, 2015, 12:04:44 PM

Quote from: msin on February 20, 2015, 11:11:21 AM

http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/engelbarts-law.html

A quite good summary, but I loled at "would cause a disruptive ripple effect in society".
My brain is like "Ripple, nooooo!" Grin

Ha, yeah, I cringe every time someone mentions the word "Ripple"

smoothie

legendary

Activity: 2492

Merit: 1491

LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 19, 2015, 03:02:55 PM

Quote from: HeliKopterBen on February 19, 2015, 02:38:51 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 19, 2015, 12:24:25 PM

Quote from: NotHatinJustTrollin on February 19, 2015, 11:40:37 AM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 19, 2015, 11:17:22 AM

Quote from: NotHatinJustTrollin on February 19, 2015, 09:45:10 AM

Quote from: L0uis on February 19, 2015, 09:01:38 AM

http://newsbtc.com/2015/02/19/independent-investigators-find-fresh-details-mt-gox/

Interesting:

"Another interesting fact that caught Wizsec’s eyes was the Willy’s static nature during the Japanese sleeping hours. The Mt. Gox bot was supposed to be automatic, but as it turns out there was hardly any trading activity. This speculation multiplied the belief that the bot was actually being controlled manually — probably by Mark Karpeles."

http://hackingdistributed.com/2014/05/27/mtgox-willy-markus/

I follow this guy on twitter and I admire him, but the article doesn't make much sense:

"For a pump and dump, there has to be a quick pump (buy action) to generate mass momentum, followed by a dump.
In this case, there was no quick pump; the buy orders were deliberately smeared across a very long time period. And there was no dump until the very end stage.
It's as simple as that. No fast pump, no dump, therefore not a pump and dump."

^^^What? This is false. A pump&dump doesn't have to be executed quickly to be a pump&dump, unless we are talking half a year to a year. The $1200 pump lasted two to three months. 2-3 months is a small time frame for a pump of that magnitude.

Large buys like those WILL have a BIG impact on the price, whether made in smaller chunks or not (impossible to buy that quantity of coins in a few market buys, literally impossible).

Also, is the author completely ignoring the fact that one of the mtgox bots (markus I believe) was buying with FAKE FIAT (amounts of money mtgox didn't actually have)? He didn't mention that.
Markus bought a gigantic quantity of BTC basically for free and Emin argues that that doesn't indicate any fraudulent activity?

you don't know it was FAKE FIAT.

gox could've been buying on behalf of a large whale. plus, volumes on Chinese exchanges were large at the time.

What about all the bots shorting the market now with FAKE BITCOIN.

I don't really believe in market manipulation on a wide scale, especially since we have a publicly verifiable blockchain, but it could be happening.

yes, it could be. i'm suspicious of BitFinex. an audit of them would be worthwhile.

i'd love for naked shorts to be caught with their pants down, if it is occurring, and watch them scramble for a bailout in fiat.

Bolded for emphasis. Cheesy

hdbuck

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1002

Quote from: rocks on February 20, 2015, 01:28:44 PM

Quote from: justusranvier on February 20, 2015, 12:25:03 PM

Quote from: rocks on February 19, 2015, 06:51:54 PM

Did you guys see the Lenovo blow up today, this is on the order of Sony's rootkit fiasco.

Lenovo PCs ship with man-in-the-middle adware that breaks HTTPS connections
http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/02/lenovo-pcs-ship-with-man-in-the-middle-adware-that-breaks-https-connections/

At least with Lenovo I can choose not to deal with them. However when it comes to money I have to deal with FED dollars and banks like HSBC. Oh wait, no I don't Wink

It will be interesting to see if the US tech industry survives, or if this is the beginning of the end.

There's some pretty strong poison in that well, and surely we've only seen the tip of the iceberg so far.

Lenovo is a Chinese company, Sony a Japanese company..... (Yes Lenovo's PC came from IBM, but that was years ago and the transfer was complete a while ago.)

If anything this is reinforcing "buy american" in people's minds.

or it could just very well be that the average Joe/Lee actually dgaf..

rocks

legendary

Activity: 1153

Merit: 1000

Quote from: justusranvier on February 20, 2015, 12:25:03 PM

Quote from: rocks on February 19, 2015, 06:51:54 PM

Did you guys see the Lenovo blow up today, this is on the order of Sony's rootkit fiasco.

Lenovo PCs ship with man-in-the-middle adware that breaks HTTPS connections
http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/02/lenovo-pcs-ship-with-man-in-the-middle-adware-that-breaks-https-connections/

At least with Lenovo I can choose not to deal with them. However when it comes to money I have to deal with FED dollars and banks like HSBC. Oh wait, no I don't Wink

It will be interesting to see if the US tech industry survives, or if this is the beginning of the end.

There's some pretty strong poison in that well, and surely we've only seen the tip of the iceberg so far.

Lenovo is a Chinese company, Sony a Japanese company..... (Yes Lenovo's PC came from IBM, but that was years ago and the transfer was complete a while ago.)

If anything this is reinforcing "buy american" in people's minds.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: rocks on February 19, 2015, 06:51:54 PM

Did you guys see the Lenovo blow up today, this is on the order of Sony's rootkit fiasco.

Lenovo PCs ship with man-in-the-middle adware that breaks HTTPS connections
http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/02/lenovo-pcs-ship-with-man-in-the-middle-adware-that-breaks-https-connections/

At least with Lenovo I can choose not to deal with them. However when it comes to money I have to deal with FED dollars and banks like HSBC. Oh wait, no I don't Wink

It will be interesting to see if the US tech industry survives, or if this is the beginning of the end.

There's some pretty strong poison in that well, and surely we've only seen the tip of the iceberg so far.

okthen

hero member

Activity: 490

Merit: 500

Quote from: msin on February 20, 2015, 11:11:21 AM

http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/engelbarts-law.html

A quite good summary, but I loled at "would cause a disruptive ripple effect in society".
My brain is like "Ripple, nooooo!" Grin

Adrian-x

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

Quote from: picolo on February 20, 2015, 04:20:52 AM

Quote from: Wekkel on February 20, 2015, 04:08:25 AM

Still, it is not an invalid point. How will a large institution safeguard an enormous pile of Bitcoin value If all depends on a private key. Pointing this out as a negative will start the thinking about a positive: a solution.

It needs some more infrastructure, that's all.

I think you can secure it well dividing the bitcoins in a few addresses and using cold storage, bank safe, multi sig signature.
Nothing is 100% safe; big banks were just robbed 300 millions last week.

Unlike Gox they write it off and carry on with there fractional reserves.

The point discussed is valid, it reminded me of Dos in the 80's I used computer programs and learned the system OS so I could optimize my operating efficiency, while computers are a lot faster they are only marginally more efficient for the tasks I use.

The problem being they have been dumbed down so I don't need to know how to optimize the core OS. In reality my computer is so smart at being dumb I just have to adapt.

I hope Bitcoin's fate isn't the same as the command prompt in computing.

msin

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1004

http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/engelbarts-law.html

uki

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1000

cryptojunk bag holder

Quote from: Wekkel on February 20, 2015, 09:22:38 AM

People do not necessarily have to change (I am still not using Linux, but my Internet content is served for 80% or more by Linux servers). The average person only needs a solution that works.

Execution, baby.

Now, tell that your grandmother/grandfather.

Bagatell

hero member

Activity: 722

Merit: 500

Quote from: Wekkel on February 20, 2015, 09:22:38 AM

People do not necessarily have to change (I am still not using Linux, but my Internet content is served for 80% or more by Linux servers). The average person only needs a solution that works.

Execution, baby.

A lot of people are, whether they know it or not.

Quote

Research company Canalys estimated in the second quarter of 2009 that Android had a 2.8% share of worldwide smartphone shipments.[209] By the fourth quarter of 2010 this had grown to 33% of the market, becoming the top-selling smartphone platform,[210] overtaking Symbian.[211] By the third quarter of 2011 Gartner estimated that more than half (52.5%) of the smartphone sales belonged to Android.[212] By the third quarter of 2012 Android had a 75% share of the global smartphone market according to the research firm IDC.[213]

In July 2011, Google said that 550,000 new Android devices were being activated every day,[214] up from 400,000 per day in May,[215] and more than 100 million devices had been activated[216] with 4.4% growth per week.[214] In September 2012, 500 million devices had been activated with 1.3 million activations per day.[217][218] In May 2013, at Google I/O, Sundar Pichai announced that 900 million Android devices had been activated.[219]

Wekkel

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 1538

yes

People do not necessarily have to change (I am still not using Linux, but my Internet content is served for 80% or more by Linux servers). The average person only needs a solution that works.

Execution, baby.

NotLambchop

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 254

Quote from: ErisDiscordia on February 20, 2015, 04:03:33 AM

...
"Something which forces people to turn on their brains, learn a new skill and take responsibility for some part of their lives? How is that a bad thing?"

"Using your brain" means finding simpler, quicker, "smarter" way to do things.
Learning the most complicated, convoluted & hilariously error-prone way of reaching the same ends is just plain stupid.*

*Unless you're Rube Goldberg.

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 487. (Read 2032286 times)