Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 920. (Read 2032266 times)

They ignore the Black Swan...

US Military discussion on Virtual Currencies

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102033875

Bitcoin Lead Counsel, Rickards in attendance.

@JamesGRickards: Special Forces + #Bitcoin by @EamonJavers. "Bitcoin has to start talking to US intelligence" http://t.co/t7LYMrBgX0 @stacyherbert @Skoylesy

reply by Stacy Herbert

@stacyherbert: @JamesGRickards bitcoin is a public ledger, anyone can read it; big banks are where they should look @EamonJavers

Sometimes you only see what you want to see.

Looks like they suggest governments should loan, and not pay back, re Argentina. I don't think they have the full picture.

There is alot of fiat sitting around wondering where to go eur is a failed experiment so foriegn money and big players moving back into usd regardless of equities.. selling eur aud nzd buying jpy usd maybe gbp. Equities are kind of acting like gold right now so happens to rise regardless of usd especially since we havent entered euphoria where they rise regardless of earnings just like they fall regardless of crazy pe earning ratios.

I think ive already mentioned the rising rates argument isnt valid(yet) as it takes up to 8x our current rate to experience the tightening needed for a crash. Thats going by whats happened before. thats atleast 5 to 10 quarters.

Unfortunately people still consider fiat a viable form of money.  Madness of crowds i suppose.  With fiat there is no publicly verifiable blockchain.  There is no cryptographic proof of ownership.  There is no open source code to review.  You have no idea if you are being screwed or not.  We don't need people like Segarra to expose fraud with a self-regulated system like bitcoin.  We can verify for ourselves. Fiat really is a pathetic form of money.  I don't think we will have to worry about people converting to crypto, but we may have to worry about those who don't convert. 

not sure if you mean you predicted gold or stocks in 2011.  if you mean the top in gold & silver, then you were right there with me altho certainly not around here.

i still think Bitcoin disconnects with gold and heads higher but it certainly is possible to go down with it for a while.

as for stocks and the dollar, there is a fundamental inconsistency in your argument.  since most money is debt and most of the money Wall St and stock jockeys play with is leverage and margin, a rising dollar cuts into any earnings from rising stocks.  it reduces their vig.  they want the dollar to go down so that they win on both sides of the trade.  in fact, the Fed has said it explicitly wants to chase cash holdings into "productive assets" which by their definition is stocks. we even have a name for it now; financial repression.  great, look what happened in 2000 and 2008.  the avg US citizen doesn't trust this strategy anymore and your rising dollar thesis would only reinforce their dollar hoarding.  what will chase them into stocks?  who's left to fuel the stock pump?  unlimited liquidity injections from the Fed to Wall St?  but wait, QE is going to terminate by the end of the year.

the other thing worth considering is 0 interest rates.  we seem to be at the lower bound altho i wouldn't doubt they'd try to shove negative rates down our throats. rising rates would kill everything i think.

mind you, i don't see any structural evidence we're near a top in the stock mkt.  for me, it's just a matter of timing and cycles.  we're overdue depending on what cycle you use.  doesn't mean it has to happen anytime soon though.

just things worth considering.

I called for it since 2011(predicted it happened within a year at that time) so the fact that it happens more now just means its a more powerful trend... can never get the timing right... but the hunch is usually right based on macro analysis. Makes sense anyway.. the country with the biggest army is the safest economically until the whole system implodes.

Since gold broke 1700 to the downside after 19xx we've seen flashes of this correlation but now its becoming evident... i personally think it will put downside pressure on btc in the short term, but any correction should help btc.

the only thing they left out of this video was the dollar bill going in:

https://twitter.com/FascinatingVids/status/515605846357999617/photo/1

and the Bitcoin coming out.

I'm using a simple criterion: "Can it work on top of the bitcoin ?"

CoinJoin - yes
Hierarchical deterministic wallets- yes
Etherum - no ?

Exactly.

Ethereum's long term viability rests on the assumption that there is enough of these applications that servicing them will be profitable, i.e. the price that users of such applications will be willing to pay in transaction fees will be sufficient to cover the costs of operating the Ethereum network.

When was the last time you heard somebody involved with Ethereum spend any time at all explaining the long term value proposition of the Ethereum network?

uh, maybe because The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money?

In my mind, much of this boils down to Gavin's point that really the most interesting things you can do with "blockchain apps" involve some set of "Oracles", which can't be 100% decentralized... So, in light of the above cost outline, the question becomes: what *are* the applications which are worth paying millions of times more per compute cycle, which DO NOT involve an Oracle? (since presumably it's stupid to pay that much for decentralized compute when your key inputs are centralized anyways).

Schiff will recommend Bitcoin once his Bitcoin stash has a similar value to his gold stash.

This might never materialize.

I love that Xapo is really getting behind the "Bitcoin is ideal money" thesis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP0jCjyrew8

^ Watch the whole thing; it's only 5 minutes. Directly challenges both fiat and gold. Big credit to Xapo here - I don't see any other mass-market bitcoin company being so explicitly/publicly bullish on the currency itself.

interesting theory.  could be.  we'll see what happens Monday.  the pick up in volatility would suggest otherwise.

either way, bad for gold and silver.  i still think Bitcoin disconnects from the pm's and heads back up from here.

we are seeing us equities enter bubble territory as a base here as usd rises with equities... we are back to pre great recession correlation instead of usd acting as a safe haven its becoming an indication of US economic performance.

I'm satisfied that they can fix infinite loops by paying per cycle.

What's more concerning is that nobody has bothered to do many actual use case evaluations and cost/benefit analysis.

Etherum is supposed to be, fundamentally, a blockchain-based computer.

Because it's a global blockchain, the cycle times need to be somewhere on the order of minutes to ensure synchronization.

Cycle times in the minutes means a clock frequency in the millihertz range.

The processor in your smartphone operates in the gigahertz range.

That's not quite a fair comparison - each tick of the Ethereum computer can do more useful work than a single tick in an transitional CPU. How much more work? Maybe about a million times more work.

This means Ethereum is a computer with an effective clock speed in the kilohertz range. (The Intel 8086 processor released in 1976 had a minimum 5 megahertz clock speed)

Sure, it's Turing-complete, but the kinds of applications you're going to run on a computer with kilohertz-scale cycle times and access latencies measured in minutes are going to resemble the kind of programs that used to be written on punch cards more than they'll resemble Windows 8.

Oh, and how about the cost?

Let's assume there really are applications that are appropriate for the Ethereum computer. Not only are there applications, but the market demand for these applications is great enough that the transaction fees will pay for the operation of the Ethereum network (no network can pay for itself via currency printing for ever, after all).

Computations performed on the CPU in your PC only need to involve the transistors in a single chip, and are generally only performed once.

Computations performed on Ethereum need to be duplicated by CPUs all over the world and broadcast all over the globe.

Running your applications on Ethereum (absent any currency-printing subsidy) is going to be millions of times more expensive than running it on a local CPU.

Certainly there will be some applications that absolutely require what Ethereum does and will be willing to pay six orders of magnitude more than other alternatives in order to get it, but will there be enough of those applications to pay for the operation of the Ethereum network?

I don't want to spoil the revelations of "This American Life": It's far better to hear the actual sounds on the radio, as so much of the meaning of the piece is in the tones of the voices -- and, especially, in the breathtaking wussiness of the people at the Fed charged with regulating Goldman Sachs. But once you have listened to it -- as when you were faced with the newly unignorable truth of what actually happened to that NFL running back's fiancee in that elevator -- consider the following:

1. You sort of knew that the regulators were more or less controlled by the banks. Now you know.

2. The only reason you know is that one woman, Carmen Segarra, has been brave enough to fight the system. She has paid a great price to inform us all of the obvious. She has lost her job, undermined her career, and will no doubt also endure a lifetime of lawsuits and slander.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-26/the-secret-goldman-sachs-tapes

All this makes me want to weep:

    In her ruling on Wednesday, Abrams also rejected a move by Stengle for greater disclosure by the judge about her husband's relationship with Goldman Sachs. Abrams disclosed on April 3 that she had just learned that her husband, Greg Andres, a partner at Davis Polk & Wardwell, was representing Goldman in an advisory capacity.
    Stengle said at the time she would not seek Abrams' recusal, the judge said, and went ahead the next day with scheduled oral arguments on the defendants' bid to dismiss the case.
    But on April 11, Stengle made a written request for a "more complete disclosure" of Andres' relationship with Goldman, and Abrams' own working relationship with another defense lawyer.
    Abrams said that was too late, given that Segarra by then would have had a chance to "sample the temper of the court" and perhaps anticipate she would lose unless Abrams recused herself. "The timing of plaintiff's requests suggests that she is engaging in precisely the type of 'judge-shopping' the 2nd Circuit has cautioned against," Abrams wrote, referring to the federal appeals court in New York. "Such an attempt to engage in judicial game-playing strikes at the core of our legal system."

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-26/how-goldman-controls-new-york-fed-475-hours-secret-goldman-sachs-tapes-explain

yeah, i knew  it was a cheap shot when i wrote it.  was waiting for someone to call me out on it.

but still, for a system that is supposed to hold and secure all sorts of valuable assets, i know i'm not the first one to bring up the concern regarding infinite loops due to Turing completeness.