Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion - page 165. (Read 647176 times)

Lol, the Zionists have you hoodwinked as designed. Carry on.

Double-down on your silver bet please. Most of us “crypto shills” here will be laughing our heads off later. You’re only a 25 bagger (2500% relative loss) behind already.

Trump’s cabinet are lying about Fort Knox? And btw, there’s more gold supposed to be stored at the NY Fed, than Fort Knox, and Germany recently completed repatriation of their gold from the NY Fed.


Somehow you didn’t get from my comments the intended meaning that the Zionists want you to stack precious metals. It’s a trap. You’re apparently experiencing cognitive dissonance while reading my shocking posts.


My analysis is like 3D chess. You’re still stuck in one dimensional (one degree-of-freedom) analysis.


No, I’m just trying to simplify which excerpts are relevant to respond to as tersely as possible, so I can leave this discussion with minimum additional verbiage. I’ve already made my arguments clear enough. Debate is complete.

You’re entirely free to think what ever you want, and lose your relative wealth. Enjoy. I have no desire to carry the debate forward or ever restart it with you again. Go ahead and spread your views and ridicule mine as you wish. I tried my best to help you with edification. I did my part.

IMO, you’ve been so mind programmed by the goldbug propaganda lies, that you’re incapable of escaping the cognitive dissonance.

This is a false equivalence argument claiming that since central banks hold large amounts of metals, it must be a scam that's detrimental to a normal human using them.  This is probably your worst argument ever.  The fact central banks hold them is due to the free market already sorting out what is and isn't useful over the course of thousands of years.  They were forced by nature to use them themselves because it's the best option.
They did not make the choice.


Random tidbits of plans are floated by people such as Jim Rickards and FOA because a large percent of the wealthy power brokers ALL have to be on the same page about what asset class is revalued as the new peg.  If China revalues one asset to defuse the debt bubble, while the US revalues another, and Russia a different one, it doesn't work.  For things like international trade to continue to function, they all have to do the same one (the noble metals).  If each nation on earth did a different one, it would require a Soviet iron curtain to maintain because other nations would instantly destroy it with arb.

It's already a given that the peg will be gold.  The only question is the silver ratio, such as:  Will they attempt, say, $10,000 gold and silver at the cost of production peg (something like 64:1 ratio)?  Will they attempt to do it based on past mining ratios of what's actually coming out of the earth (15:1)?  Will they do it based on current mining ratios coming out of the earth (9:1)?  Or will they only revalue gold and then everyone just dumps the comparatively overvalued gold until the undervalued assets spike and silver goes to something like 15:1 ratio anyway?

It appears the US doesn't actually have much if any gold in Ft Knox, and will mostly be depending on silver revaluation due to JP Morgan acquiring a large amount for the US govt.  Since the London banks, the Chinese, and the Russians actually do store large amounts of silver bars, contrary to popular opinion, they probably don't have a huge problem with silver seeing a high ratio anyway.  Since silver can already hit 30:1 ratio even within their rigged system, I see silver going to a 30:1 ratio or lower compared to gold regardless of whether silver is artificially pegged or it's free market price is allowed to be discovered.



There is where you show your true colors as a crypto shill that doesn't care about things like logic and facts.  First you claim people should not use metals because central banks have them and you should do the opposite of what the banks do because it's good for humanity or some other jibberish.  In the next paragraph you claim you should allow the bankers to herd you wherever they want and it doesn't matter what's good or bad for humans, you should just do whatever the banks want and if they don't want you to use metals, you should go along with that.  

You cannot take both positions at the same time.  This is 100% illogical shilling.  You're arguing both pro-statist and anti-statist for the same point.  This means you do not actually have a position at all.  You also pretend it's not possible for a monetary Schelling point to exist that bankers and normal humans are both pulled to (metals).  You ignore this fact because you know no Schelling point exists for cryptocurrency at all.  There's no way to force everyone into the same coin without some tyrannical police state mandating it.  Cryptocurrency is designed to die by infinite diffusion when there's no upper bound or overhead preventing coins that can be made and endless incentive to create new ones (unlike metals).  

Supporting crypto is therefore pro-statist because the state mandating which one you're forced to use will be the only thing bringing order to chaos.

To avoid a long-detailed reply which repeats what I’ve written dozens of times before, presumably I know a lot more about anonymity technology and decentralized ledger technology in general than you or Theymos likely ever will. There’s no practical, provably reliable anonymity which the national security agencies can’t break (due to meta data, out-of-band issues, etc).

But that’s besides the point. The banksters have never been able to control where a leaf falls on your lawn for example, yet that doesn’t prevent their control of central banking and usury from affording them vast control over our institutions from behind the curtain. They have to manage the continual evolution of technology and their power.

I could debate/discuss you with you further, but it would be a waste of my scarce time. You have a lot of reading to do. AnonyMint’s archives are 20,000+ posts. I’ll talk to you in a few months after you read it all and caught up.

And your presumably layman’s understanding of computer programming and large systems programming would cause you to believe that a smart individual in their garage could conceive+design+vet the economics, game theory, and code for Bitcoin while also managing all communication about Bitcoin. And an expert such as myself sighs.

Okay guys. I’m not going to load this damn forum for a while. Have fun with the thread. Can’t make a point and leave without having to defend old points over and over and over again. Understandable.

This just doesn't make sense to me. Who is They. If They are elites that's controlling the human population, making bitcoin just don't make sense because they can't control it fully, and from bitcoin so many other coins have been created that's even more private and secure. I think you're assuming too much here. I believe bitcoin was created by someone that was sick of the corrupted financial system, and wants to great something that can free people from it.

@CoinCube, you and I had a long discussion (actually a proof-of-work technological edification from me, which you apparently refuse to absorb/accept even though you’re an applied math graduate) about why Bitcoin must be centralized into an oligarchy.


I don’t know why you continue to hang on to those religious nutcases when their points are invalidated by that technological argument. (As you know, I long ago debated both of them and my most recent response to @traincarswreck).

I disagree with this part of your analysis. We are of course speculating about information that is not known but I would like to present an alternative possibility that highlights both what fiat may evolve into as well as the oppositional role bitcoin could play once this evolution takes place.

@r0ach, I corrected your disingenuous lapse of not linking from your recent blog to the prior discussion here which you quoted from in your blog. That’s quite barbaric (as in uncivilized) of you to attack “Anonymint” as a “crypto shill” while quoting him, then not linking to his prior counter arguments in the context of the quote you cited.

The generative essence of your inapplicable rebuttal is that there’s nothing else that can serve as an agreeable monetary asset for resetting the global monetary system, that would avert an otherwise total chaotic collapse into a Dark Age. Even if that were true (and I even stated that possibility in my prior rebuttal to you), as I pointed out (in my prior rebuttal to you) this would have no bearing on our individual decision to choose gold or silver as hedges against the collapse of the current monetary system:


I had already explained in this thread, that the government has now the increasing power to make sure that during any such monetary reset that they can make it impossible for private investors of (significant quantities of) precious metals to achieve any hedge whatsoever. I had even alluded to this problem back in 2010 (after I had heard that USA Treasury officials stated they would “burn the fingertips of goldbugs up to their armpits”). What the heck do you think the Zionist false flag 9/11 which enabled the Patriot Act, KYC, AML, and the terrorism magic bullet against private wealth was all about? They know damn well they’re taking us to a global monetary reset and they’re funding/encouraging/facilitating the goldbug propaganda (e.g. FOFOA) so that tinfoil hat wearers such as yourself will be trapped at the end game with an asset that will be confiscated if you want to redeem it or buried in the ground forever (until nobody cares about gold anymore ever again any way, so it’s useless to pass it on to your heirs). I hope you love fondling all that metal, because that’s all you’ll be able to do with it. Actually try to carry 10kg of that silver shit in a backpack as I did from Manila to Davao (and back) in the 2011ish timeframe (and my shoulders were stronger at age 46 than now approaching 53), and you’ll appreciate silver a lot less especially after having to bribe police and airport inspectors along the way.

So it really boils down to you can choose precious metals and be expropriated by the nation-states, or support the Zionist’s Bitcoin plan for the NWO. The latter is also fraught with nation-state risk if you’re not careful (e.g. not doing KYC on the people you’re trading with and not trading on an exchange that does, a recent revelation for me that is discomforting), but at least there’s huge gains to offset the costs of paying fines, attorneys, accountants, and gaming the nation-state jurisdictional landmines.

Also the Zionists know damn well what they’re doing to take us to a NWO global reserve currency via a monetary reset which replaces the USD as the reserve currency with a global one. And that is why they created and planted Bitcoin as a surreptitious creative destruction of the nation-state central banking system with the USD as the reserve (which served it’s interim role but now they’re capable of moving to next level of global integration and control so they want to use subterfuge to disintermediate their own surreptitiously controlled central banks surreptitiously).

Of course, as I had explained 6 months ago that the nation-states would never politically agree to such a disintermediation by a global elite (if admitted in the open) and the nation-states would then fight over what should be the next global reserve currency because certainly China and Russia (and the rest of the developing world) don’t want it to be the USD (because the Armstrong’s $trilllion short-vortex dollar squeeze driving the USD skyhigh coming soon is going to collapse the world and make the nation-states realize how painful it is to be reliant on another country for the reserve currency, which btw Rothschilds installed Trump as POTUS via his control of WikiLeaks as I predicted presciently yet again and is continuing to do so, so that he can be blamed for this short-dollar vortex by all the nation-states of the world) and they indeed have been backing their economies with hard assets and some gold. Thus if hard assets were what was going to recapitalize the next monetary reset then the world would collapse into a Dark Age and a horrific WW3 between the major superpowers. The global elite are trying to avert such a horrible outcome (Bitcoin is a surreptitious way to avert the political morass of proposing and agreeing to a new independent global reserve unit, because for example SDRs backed by various baskets have gained no traction because as Armstrong pointed out the IMF is openly part of the politics and corruption), thus it’s absolutely necessary that they eliminate hard assets as a viable recapitalization, which is why they have no choice but to do 9/11. They’re all about their role of maximizing global cooperation, although it also requires them to be usurists, fixed capital investment, and probably incongruent with the knowledge age as I’ve pointed out to you again recently (prior page of this thread) about my theory essay on the Rise of Knowledge, Demise of Finance. Even Armstrong doesn’t understand this yet, because he’s too compartmentalized in his awareness and thinking. He thinks he’s in the global elite inner circle because he knew for example Margaret Thatcher personally, lol. The reason the global elite have not accepted his proposed Solution Plan, is because it would not resolve the global reserve currency issue!


So as I told you from the start, gold isn’t very useful in many collapse scenarios. The global elite instead has to create a surreptitious new global reserve currency named Bitcoin (which they surreptitiously control already) so that the nation-states will be powerless to resist it as the next reserve currency at the next monetary reset. Yes of course Bitcoin is a fiat but the fact that nobody can prove it is yet, is one of the key reasons that for this coming monetary reset, Bitcoin sits at the bottom of Exter’s Pyramid. You’re conceptualization is lacking an appreciation for changes over time. You think Exter’s Pyramid can be some static base asset indefinitely, but gold has never been a reserve currency since we entered the industrial age. It was merely a symbolic mirage maintained by Rothschilds for the purpose of leveraging his banking and finance empire without political resistance. And do note that a few years ago (right before or after Bitcoin was launched), Rothschilds exited the London Gold Fix business.

---

And they’ve done quite well for themselves with that niche marketing strategy. So perhaps we should conclude they’re marketing and strategic geniuses.

Agreed I was trying to make that point in other words:


Also I think they felt (based on for example my interactions with @smooth and @ArticMine) they were compelled to disavow any symptoms of a common enterprise for the purposes of maximium protection against securities and FinCEN regulation, which I had pointed out in my prior post is potentially going to put XMR in favorable position if the next crypto winter includes widespread regulatory action against the whales of ICO-issued projects (and perhaps equivalent obfuscations such as STEEM, EOS, and DASH, although note the larger projects seem to have bought off high placed former regulators such as Gary Ross in some juridiscations, yet the European regulatory powers have been apparently recently consolidated with MiFiD II but this is far too detailed for me to expend time to study in depth).

P.S. we intend something very strange with our CRED project to side-step that issue, which afaik has not been tried before in the cryptocurrency realm.

P.S. my past dissent (and disgust with some Monero community members former condescending arrogance about anyone who didn’t volunteer for them being critical of some of their technical/market/economic theory claims was attacked as being a defector who would be steamrolled by their superior opensource/volunteerism model/team, e.g. @iCEBREAKER) is mostly (notwithstanding the impact of CFS due chronic liver disease and Tuberculosis on a person’s mood, outlook, energy, objectivity, and (especially continuity required for programming) productivity— which btw the TB is confirmed cured and liver/spleen cysts are under natural treatment with diet/lifestyle changes) because I wanted to create mass-market project (as has been the focus/goal of every s/w project of my career except for the contracting work I did on EOS Photomodeler), and I needed to make money starting from an entirely depleted capital position (whereas those guys had capital and wanted a project to invest in and play with in their spare time).

There are multiple middlemen scenarios that can be imposed, if desired, and others which are less transparent. The most obvious being VAT. Platinum, Silver, etc already have VAT in multiple countries. So you can't (legally) buy or sell, without paying VAT. If the VAT, is, say around 20-25%, for every 4-5 times an ounce is transacted, the state has got back the entire value of the ounce in taxes. The same could be done in Gold with a few law changes.

There is also heavy mining centralization as governments practically own the ground beneath the surface. In most countries, if not all, you own the surface level of your house, but you don't really own the air above it, or the ground below it - these are rights reserved by the government. This gives the existing gold holders <1% of the gold that will ever be mined, and the states the 99%+ of the gold that will be mined in the future. This, in turn, allows for significant dilution of value (in fiat terms) of existing gold holders, if they can't "participate" in the "stock split" or "stock offer" - as quantities grow and grow but governments control the output.

I'm not saying this is happening, but there are various possibilities that can happen. Including the elimination of cash - which automatically means that all transactions will be monitored by big brother, including all buying and selling of gold/silver for e-fiat, unless the transactions are barter-like (which is ok but slightly primitive and suitable only for certain civilization breakdown scenarios).

I remembered how some people claimed Monero sounded like a mexican name or something, I then realized that "dinero" means money in spanish so that must be the connection to some claiming "it sounds mexican", not sure fluffyponny was aware on that.

fluffy doesn't indeed seem to care much about marketing. I reckon he once trolled people into thinking there was going to be some huge reveal in a conference, then he just played some comedy video making fun of ICOs and the market tanked (after the pump, so could also have been insider trading). Then again pretending not to care about marketing and the project's self image is also a form of marketing.

I addressed the whole damn post specifically towards you.  Read it and you will see why the world goes up in flames without gold and silver revaluation:

The r0ach report 33: The world enters a new dark ages without gold and silver revaluation

http://steemit.com/bitcoin/@r0achtheunsavory/the-r0ach-report-33-the-world-enters-a-new-dark-ages-without-gold-and-silver-revaluation

Slick Willy @r0ach said, “That depends on what your definition of 'is' is.” and “I tried marijuana once. I did not inhale”.


So gold isn’t going to protect us (that is unless we can live 600 years to await the Dark Age to end) when we economic collapse to food as money (and no it wasn’t barter but in fact rice that was the fungible money in Japan for 600+ years).

And gold isn’t going to protect us in the vast majority of the cases where the economic crisis resolves without reaching the need to revert to trading physical gold as a currency with weighing scales.

And gold isn’t going to protect us (from government totalitarianism in the sort of economic crisis where the bonds, currency and other monetary instruments on the pyramid fail) in any case any more because the times have changed and nobody will accept gold any more any where in the world, except for regulated dealers and market makers which the government controls.

So what the heck is Exter's (inverted) Pyramid (with gold at the bottom) useful for then? I’ll tell you what it’s useful for— propaganda for people who wear tinfoil hats.

You might be able to make the argument that central banks will still have gold on the bottom as the risk-free asset, but that has no bearing on what we as individuals should choose if we’re concerned about the bankrupted government expropriating our wealth. (notwithstanding that globalized decentralized cryptocurrency will subjugate and disintermediate nation-state central banking)

Physical money is so agricultural age. Gold ceased being money as we moved into the industrial age with well developed banking and finance. It was kept around by central banks mostly for symbolic reasons. Now as we move into the knowledge age, gold is a barbaric relic.

It’s impossible to have civilized discussion with a person who is unwilling to ever admit when he’s incorrect.


Iota didn’t come any closer than anything else. I challenged CfB to remove the centralized Coordinator (or any obfuscation of it) and afaik they haven’t because they can’t. The consensus will not converge without it. You've got altcoins out there with $billions mcaps which are entirely BS technobabble including RaiBlocks.

None of what you people typed refutes what I said about Exter's Pyramid.  Not a single thing.  As for claiming food becomes the base of Exter's Pyramid should this monetary system blow up, that would just be flat out barter and doesn't even count.  I define money as something that acts as an intermediary.  Doing 1:1 trades of a can of tuna for a chainsaw doesn't have that.  The further you abstract things away from barter, the bigger a scam it is, and physical commodity money like metals is the closest thing to barter without being barter.

As for why cryptos can't compete with metals as the base of Exter's Pyramid?  You can stop all the hand waving and bullshit - none of them remove middlemen or counterparty risk.  That's why I gave Come from Beyond best scamcoin of 2017 award.  Because it's the coin that comes closest to removing middlemen while still failing and being a scam:

2017 award for best altcoin scam - Come from Beyond of IOTA

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2017-award-for-best-altcoin-scam-come-from-beyond-of-iota-2789996

Okay one more post because this important and a timely issue.

I can’t say with certainty that you’re incorrect. I just want to point that you may be misunderstanding what appears to be driving this rocket. Afaics, it’s not transaction volume adoption, but rather the fact that everyone we talk to is interested in getting into speculating on Bitcoin. Most of them aren’t even informed enough to know about the transaction fee issue.

I think the Futures Exchange opening up, the bull up was massive. Now Dollars can Short bitcoin. I think there's going to be more Shorts of bitcoin in the Futures market. It will keep pushing bitcoin down for a period of time. When Lightning starts to get massive adoption, the new bitcoin boom will start. The Futures Traders that short will get squeezed out, transfer of wealth will go away from them and into bitcoin holders, and the next boom starts. End of this year looks like a good time as any, but can even go into next year.

I hear rumours that Wordpress will soon be able to accept bitcoin using Lightning, that's going to be a huge technology that will increase bitcoin usage.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/monero

#justsayin'

You still holding Litecoin?

P.S. Trump is kicking butt.


Or it could be like the peak in April 2013 and the drop from $214 to $64, then rise to $1200 months after:

https://99bitcoins.com/price-chart-history/ (turn on the log chart and turn off the events)

I do think we might get another leg down to $7000 – $8500 to shake the trees of weak hands, who fear a crypto winter now.

We’re not far enough above the regression fit trendline yet to have a crypto winter (click quoted link below for the chart):


We’re likely headed to $40k – $100k probably within 2018.

Also IMO (and other sophisticated traders I talk to) there’s too much new investment/speculation interest in Bitcoin for it to enter a crypto winter now. Everybody I talk to is thinking about entering Bitcoin but most have not yet. The general public has soured on general stock markets since 2009, yet they’re very much focused on buying the next Apple or Google specifically.

The SEC and European regulators are just warming up to ICO regulation. The SegWit theft attack is not probably not well seeded enough yet. South Korea is being petitioned by 200,000 of its citizens to not ban cryptocurrency exchanges. The Nasdaq futures are going to be launched after some months. Chinese exchanges are already transitioning to Japan. Etc.. Bitcoin can’t be banned by one or a few countries! Bitcoin is nation-state jurisdictional arbitrage, but @r0ach can’t seem to appreciate that gold doesn’t have this attribute anymore.

We’re just not quite at the point yet for another crypto winter. And when that winter comes, it will be shallower and longer in duration because as you can see the regression trend line is flattening as adoption matures. Click the quoted link (of the banned user) above.

Nothing is certain though. There’s some small chance we’re going into a crypto winter now and new ATHs will be more than 2 years from now.

---

In the knowledge age, it’s your credibility (reputation) that is more important than your monetary wealth. We want to move the centralized Internet (e.g. Wikipedia, Facebook, Redditard, Medium, etc) onto the decentralized ledger.


No more name changes. The token is CRED.


IMO and reflection on when I first heard “bitcoin”, was already a great name for its target market which was/is an “Internet gold” as the whitepaper stated. The “bit” could be misinterpreted a ”small portion” and the “coin” was more retail oriented than the actual hidden intention for the fees to go sky high and it become a reserve currency. Yet I posit the Zionist creators were also thinking about it being a unit-of-exchange in an offchain fractional reserve system they will control. And their intention was to market it initially as a transactional coin. So I can see why they chose that name instead of Szabo’s bitgold name.

IMO, Monero was a very cartoonish name when I first heard it and for me still is until now, because the name is targeting the serious notion of money but in a playful manner (people interested in money are very serious about it). They basically patterned the name on the concept of the game Monopoly (whether they realized it or not), thus it’s funny money aka monopoly money (not real money). Perhaps they were motivated by money+euro, I dunno. On the positive side, they would argue that everyone would know it has something to do with money and they would argue for brand name recall being reasonable. But my criticism remains the name is too silly (for a name that should mean serious money), too many syllables, and doesn’t speak to the advantages of the project. That the people who have invested in it have learned to like it, is I think not indicative of what a mediocre/sub-optimal if not horrible name it is, if the target market was something greater than a fringe anonymity cult. IMO, the name targets people who have an unsophisticated perception of branding and for me the personality of @fluffypony is indicative of the lack of mainstream marketing sophistication of that ecosystem. Even their logo sucks IMO. It‘s like they want it to be some volunteerism, playful enterprise yet also academically very serious. Reminds me of the way MimbleWimble started as a Harry Potter theme. Very geeky. Monero is like what happens when you ask young math/compsci PhDs to run the marketing department. I’m not going to feel bad for speaking frankly as this has been my unwavering position since it was launched. And they had the arrogance to presume that anyone who didn’t volunteer for them was a defector and an idiot.   Are you trying to get me banned? How about we stop talking about specific projects. The projects’ websites will be available for details. Btw, Monero was I presume as fairly mined as Bitcoin (if not more so), so that is one potential advantage it has going into the next crypto winter compared to ICO-issued (including obfuscations of ICO-issued) projects (if the regulators intensely go after the whales of ICO-issued, instamined, stealth mined, etc).

But realize the primary differentiation of the CRED project is not a decentralized currency, although one will be created that can do millions of tps with sub-second confirmation latency, and it’s important for the function of the project. We want to decentralize the entire Internet. Bitcoin is not designed to decentralize the Internet, but rather to decentralize banking. Which is why the programming language choice/issue is so important for our project. Millions of LOC (lines of code) to follow. And I think that for that target market, CRED name is a helluva a lot better than STEEM or EOS. What does “EOS” mean to your average Internet user? EOS, Ethereum, Cardano’s ADA, and others also target a ledger which validates scripts (aka programmable ledger), which is also something we’re looking into, yet this distinction is about focus, priorities, onboarding (without a dubious/illegal ICO nor mining!), and true decentralization. IOHK chose Haskell for example, which is an obtuse, academic language that isn’t likely to lead to wide-scale adoption by programmers. Specifically I mean focusing on adoption oriented applications as the highest priority, not pie-in-the-sky and hyped innovations for the future. My career history and skill set is on applications actually used by millions of users. So I will focus on my strengths. I can’t enumerate why I should be stronger in that area, you’ll just have to observe the result because it’s dozens or 100s of smaller design/focus/prioritization decisions wrapped into an outcome.


mono+ero

Lol, didn’t I just write that the “small portion” interpretation of ‘bit’ would be a weakness. And were they too myopic to realize the Monopoly is more well known in the world than Esperanto? (popularity in 103 countries versus 2000 native speakers and maybe only 2 million who can speak any) As I said, this is what happens when you put some math PhDs in charge of the marketing department.

So they were thinking of uniting/replacing the European languages into a single language (the reason Esperanto was created) and enjoining the failing concept of an EU? Were they so arrogant as to believe that they would displace Bitcoin as “the standard of money” because of their assertion that fungibility requires anonymity? If their coin is primarily about anonymity as the main distinction from Bitcoin, I think the name should reflect that. Any way, I think they also claimed they were just an experiment which they hoped could be added to Bitcoin in the future. I just don’t think they were ever that serious about the marketing.

What’s even more telling is that you can search my archives and you’ll find a post where I discovered monero was the Esperanto word for money, but obviously I forgot. So that exemplifies the problem with using words from obscure languages.

---

Well internally I advised taking profits at $300. But yes I would re-enter on this dip. And I believe we’re still holding some. And I know someone who is holding because to trade would incur CGT  (capital gains tax).

So yes to $500+ we go eventually. Note the alts seemed to rise more than BTC out of this bounce off $10K. Maybe they will continue to lead. I don’t know. I’m not thinking about speculation any more. So please stop following me for predictions on tokens. I’m a developer now.

---

Yep here goes his myopia again:


He doesn’t seem to comprehend technologically that all of the governments would have to ban it in order for Bitcoin mining to cease. And even then, the cryptocurrency addresses are like endospores and can’t be destroyed by any centralized actions.

And he doesn’t seem to understand that the move from public-to-private (which his model expects) may also be a move from centralized to decentralized governance. The consensus algorithm of my project is technologically along the lines of moving towards decentralized governance.


The technological problems are (on paper) solved and being implemented. The government will be all of us controlling it decentralized.

Nation-states are collapsing and dying. Decentralized ledgers are disintermediation (and I posit an intentional creative destruction subterfuge by the Zionists) of the nation-state.


Lol, he needs to read our refutations of @r0ach. How can you move gold, real estate, and shares to a new country without the government tracking it? Who will trade you for it without using a market maker regulated by the government?


Without a power grid, civilization reverts back to the Dark Age. In a Dark Age, only food is money. WTF  

We the people (and our governance) are not going to agree to go back to the 1700s or early 1800s technologically (which would be such a shock that it would takes us back to the Medieval Ages in terms of upheaval)!

And technologically we’d have decentralized ledgers running with decentralized power within a few months, with mesh P2P networks running and line-of-sight WiFi long-distance relay networks supplemented by short-wave radio and other decentralized means. Marty doesn’t seem to understand that technology is not stuck in the 1950s. We have 3D printers now! And advanced engineering knowledge is widespread due to the Internet. Also the Zionists who I posit are running this show, would never want to lose their intelligence gathering Internet network.

Marty is presumably (and understandably) so psychologically scarred by his (apparently unconstitutional and bogus charges) experience in Supermax prison and has such a great fear of government that he can’t see that the technology is changing what government can be. Government is still very powerful w.r.t. to individuals, but quite powerless to stop the Bitcoin phenomenon. I empathize greatly with what he endured. And I hope upon reading this, a light bulb will turn on in his head. We’d like for him to join in our prescience on this issue and be an elder of our tribe with his sacrifice at the hands of the corrupt government.

And I must say that all of this (interesting) discussion is drawing me out of INTJ mode and back to ENTP mode.

So let’s make this the last post for this week.

I see, in that case then it's good. I also liked "Lucid" for the programing language but I remember reading that there was another language called Lucid which is really old and forgotten and shouldn't lead to confusion but I guess it's best to use a name which has never been used for a programing language.

What is the idea behind calling it cred? I guess cred.me would be the website to download the software? what other names are considered right now? would the name of the decentralized ledger would be the name of the token too?

Bitcoin is a cool name and BTC is a catchy token name, it always helps. I do wonder tho how much the "Bitcoin" name is haloed by it's success. I wonder if in 2010 or so it was perceived as something cool and catchy or most people would have considered it a dumb name. Once something becomes successful most people no longer question it... it's like "Monero".. when I first heard it I thought it sounded pretty lame, but now people no longer question it, in fact it has became the default "anonymous currency" by the general crypto-population surpassing Bytecoin which I thought was a way better name.

Seesh you force me to repeat what I already wrote, as if you have the reading comprehension of a 5 year old.

You have not refuted the point that in every Mad Max 600 year Dark Age case, then food is at the bottom and what people turn to. Gold gets buried and is entirely useless.

And in the vast majority of the other economic crisis cases, we don’t make it to gold. It abates before it gets there. In the relatively few cases, where we do make it to gold being useful as a safe haven, then it’s only for about 2 years and then it either goes Mad Max (and gold becomes useless) or the economic crisis recovers.

And on top of that, what is at the bottom of the pyramid changes throughout history and gold's epoch is ending now. Right now. You are entirely on the wrong side of change in the monetary history of the world.

Yet I’m just repeating everything I already wrote.


Decentralized ledgers can’t be destroyed by any one country or even a grouping of them. That makes them more anti-fragile than national currencies, bonds, and gold at this time. We already explained why gold is more or less useless against governments now in this modern era. How the fuck am I supposed to move my gold out of the USA or Philippines surreptitiously during a divorce proceeding? Even if I manage to transport it on a boat, how the fuck do I sell it where I arrive into some fiat which I can use wherein it won’t be flagged as terrorist money coming from outside the banking system? And this sort of tracking is increasing all the time.

Although you may be correct with the implication that the Zionists may control Bitcoin, there’s many alternative ledgers and they don’t wish to reveal the level of their control yet, so for the time being they will pretend that Bitcoin is cardinal to their control of the nation-states.

And the innovation in this space continues interim.


You presume it's impossible to create a suitably decentralized ledger. Yet damn it, this is what I’ve been working on this issue for 4 years. Go ahead and presume I’m only a stapler. Your big mistake. The speculation on Bitcoin now, includes the speculation that some innovative black swan like myself or others will suddenly appear later.

Also interim there are significant differences between a corporate run database like Paypal, and the pseudo-decentralized, distributed ledgers. For example, no one controls who can create a Bitcoin address. Whereas, Paypal account creation is centrally controlled. And I had explained that cryptocurrency addresses and UTXO are like an endospore that can’t be destroyed, same as gold. Paypal can be taxed and pressured by individual governments. Bitcoin not. Btw, this is the primary reason that ICO-issued (and their obfuscations such as stealth mined and instamined) projects are not at all anti-fragile and their doomsday is coming in the next crypto winter, because the whales can be targeted by individual countries and expropriated.


Does lying to yourself help you in some way? I already refuted this in my prior reply to you.

---

Refuted.

---

I agree with the notion that they’re a tribe and they’ve found a way to be dominant, which forces them to maintain control of the institutions of civilization. And even within their tribe, they’re hijacked and co-opted by the Zionists sub-tribe.

But my reaction is that they’re just a natural outcome. We can’t destroy them without also removing the power vacuum that causes them to exist.

I base some of my hope in the my theories about the knowledge age ameliorating their power. Which is also one of the reasons why I work on decentralized ledger theory and implementation.

Armstrong explained that his assets like gold would not come down until then. It becomes clear to me that Oct will be in accordance with the initial transmission and that will encourage the liquidity draining effect of personal assets will likely increase some time after that.
Feeling to me is the volatility BTC has subsided for now in the eyes of a real storm coming in, and volatility will explode again and to the downside.
We can see the building of the pressure of transmission, for example the tabnloz pole about South America and Brazil. The first round of Chinese securities is dominated by the global economy as we write this.