Topic: On the cover page of The Economist - page 2. (Read 3717 times)
Congratulations to the one who have the idea to put the bitcoin technology on the front page of The Economist! This will bring much exposure to bitcoin and will definitely rise few procents in price.
I heard about The economist magazine before and it is very popular.
About the cover the design is great
, and i hope that will rise the bitcoin price.
From now i think that other magazines will try to copy this article and spread bitcoin article
About the cover the design is great
, and i hope that will rise the bitcoin price.From now i think that other magazines will try to copy this article and spread bitcoin article
Even though they say the mechanism behind bitcoin is the interesting part, their cover art clearly show how bitcoin is a central gear in turning the world.
Their actual image is saying the opposite of their words. :p
Oh yes, this is good.
This is like to see.
Next thing we need is to have stock exchanges get into Crypto, Wall Street as well. After all, BTC is a good, it can be freely traded.
This is like to see.
Next thing we need is to have stock exchanges get into Crypto, Wall Street as well. After all, BTC is a good, it can be freely traded.
there are already forex on line sites that do the price flow into binariy trades for investment on it but its not stock
I heard about The economist magazine before and it is very popular.
About the cover the design is great, and i hope that will rise the bitcoin price.
From now i think that other magazines will try to copy this article and spread bitcoin article
About the cover the design is great
, and i hope that will rise the bitcoin price.From now i think that other magazines will try to copy this article and spread bitcoin article
To people who are not familiar with this magazine, it's very highly regarded everywhere in Europe. It's British and more than 150 years old. I bet this cover page alone is worth a rise of at least 3% in BTC's price. The article is also available online but you need to register.
http://www.economist.com/
Wow, this is good! Bitcoin will have an even better image with that. And with that, an even better price. I hope bitcoin price goes up even more.
To people who are not familiar with this magazine, it's very highly regarded everywhere in Europe. It's British and more than 150 years old. I bet this cover page alone is worth a rise of at least 3% in BTC's price. The article is also available online but you need to register.
I agree with this. When such respectful periodicals like The Economist or Forbes cover the subject it is much much better for the Bitocin adoption than hundreds of articles by incompetent journalists in tabloids.
Oh yes, this is good.
This is like to see.
Next thing we need is to have stock exchanges get into Crypto, Wall Street as well. After all, BTC is a good, it can be freely traded.
This is like to see.
Next thing we need is to have stock exchanges get into Crypto, Wall Street as well. After all, BTC is a good, it can be freely traded.
Magazines such as The Economist have spent the past 4 years of Bitcoin's existence trying their best to ignore one of the most extraordinary technological achievements of all time, and in the arena of finance no less.
Better late than never...
Bitcoin need more and more advertisement/ to be known by many people, such a magazines have millions of users which is beneficial for the development of Bitcoin.
But lately i saw that they are interested with the blockchain more than bitcoin itself.......
Do you realize what exact words are they using on the cover? It is not: Bitcoin can change the world - instead it is - How technology BEHIND bitcoin (I assume: blockchain) can change world.
This is a huge difference.
This is a huge difference.
yes, at the moment we are on that stage of understanding. next stage will be
"we dont use bitcoin, but a sidechain of it!"
that should happen in 2016/2017
The "blockchain" is the genius of Bitcoin (not the currency).
Interestingly enough Satoshi basically invented nothing (even the blockchain concept had been documented before Bitcoin).
What he (or they) did was simply put together a bunch of ideas into a practical and working piece of P2P software.
Interestingly enough Satoshi basically invented nothing (even the blockchain concept had been documented before Bitcoin).
What he (or they) did was simply put together a bunch of ideas into a practical and working piece of P2P software.
Exactly, the one virtue that Bitcoin does have, however, is its community support....the lunatic fringe who inspired the early adopters who now move the chain and confirm the ledger. The blockchain works the magic but the community waves the wand. Bitcoin is the community that stands behind it; the community is what makes exchanging bitcoin unique.
Having said that, the blockchain technology that many economist are getting excited about is the key that makes this whole concept work. Magazines such as the "Economist," are in the process of building another community around a blockchain technology that will change the way people interact economically....it may not be the community we call "Bitcoin," but it will be a very valuable resource none the less.
Magazines such as The Economist have spent the past 4 years of Bitcoin's existence trying their best to ignore one of the most extraordinary technological achievements of all time, and in the arena of finance no less. To spend any portion of their capitulation attempting to denigrate what Bitcoin genuinely represents is simply a tacit admission of fault on their part. The vast proportion of their coverage has been spent interviewing Mike Hearn; now persona non grata amongst professionals, and strangely also the one developer who sought to change Bitcoin into a system that more closely resembles central banking in comparison to what Satoshi originally proposed.
So any attempt to portray The Economist as somehow the leaders of a cryptographic vanguard is misleading at best. Before Bitcoin, The Economist's name was to some extent synonymous with being well informed about technology and finance (amongst other qualities). Since Bitcoin, no longer. Their bias on monetary issues is naked.
This is very good thing because it basically means stable rise for price.
These papers cannot cause bubbles but strongish uptrends.
These papers cannot cause bubbles but strongish uptrends.
Yeah! this should have made some upward pressure on the price. This year was o a hell of a great year for bitcoin and the blockchain. I believe next year will be even better!
I agree. The trending is also increasing, with all the good news and publications. On http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=bitcoin&date=today%203-m&cmpt=date&tz=Etc%2FGMT-2
you can clearly see that the impact is highly positive. I just hope the interest doesn't dissipate as fast as it arose.
The "blockchain" is the genius of Bitcoin (not the currency).
Interestingly enough Satoshi basically invented nothing (even the blockchain concept had been documented before Bitcoin).
What he (or they) did was simply put together a bunch of ideas into a practical and working piece of P2P software.
Interestingly enough Satoshi basically invented nothing (even the blockchain concept had been documented before Bitcoin).
What he (or they) did was simply put together a bunch of ideas into a practical and working piece of P2P software.
Exactly, the one virtue that Bitcoin does have, however, is its community support....the lunatic fringe who inspired the early adopters who now move the chain and confirm the ledger. The blockchain works the magic but the community waves the wand. Bitcoin is the community that stands behind it; the community is what makes exchanging bitcoin unique.
Having said that, the blockchain technology that many economist are getting excited about is the key that makes this whole concept work. Magazines such as the "Economist," are in the process of building another community around a blockchain technology that will change the way people interact economically....it may not be the community we call "Bitcoin," but it will be a very valuable resource nonetheless.
This is bigger than many people might think... They have over 1.5 million average weekly circulation and more or less 50% of that is sold in the U.S.A
They also have about 11 million twitter followers and about 6 million Facebook followers and +/- 10 million Google Plus followers.
We are not talking about the local news paper here... The viewers are mostly financial and highly educated people with loads of money to invest.
They also have about 11 million twitter followers and about 6 million Facebook followers and +/- 10 million Google Plus followers.
We are not talking about the local news paper here... The viewers are mostly financial and highly educated people with loads of money to invest.
Not only that, a large percentage of those published are put in school and public libraries around the world. The exposure is huge.
Do you realize what exact words are they using on the cover? It is not: Bitcoin can change the world - instead it is - How technology BEHIND bitcoin (I assume: blockchain) can change world.
This is a huge difference.
This is a huge difference.
Yes, it's not ideal. At least the article holds a neutral stance regarding bitcoin and the word "Bitcoin" is on the front cover. It will get newbies interested.
This is bigger than many people might think... They have over 1.5 million average weekly circulation and more or less 50% of that is sold in the U.S.A
They also have about 11 million twitter followers and about 6 million Facebook followers and +/- 10 million Google Plus followers.
We are not talking about the local news paper here... The viewers are mostly financial and highly educated people with loads of money to invest.
They also have about 11 million twitter followers and about 6 million Facebook followers and +/- 10 million Google Plus followers.
We are not talking about the local news paper here... The viewers are mostly financial and highly educated people with loads of money to invest.
Thank you kindly for putting this into perspective. Interesting stats!
Not to mention that it's around 150 years old. And so the historical list of proprietors and investors is interesting.
This is bigger than many people might think... They have over 1.5 million average weekly circulation and more or less 50% of that is sold in the U.S.A
They also have about 11 million twitter followers and about 6 million Facebook followers and +/- 10 million Google Plus followers.
We are not talking about the local news paper here... The viewers are mostly financial and highly educated people with loads of money to invest.
They also have about 11 million twitter followers and about 6 million Facebook followers and +/- 10 million Google Plus followers.
We are not talking about the local news paper here... The viewers are mostly financial and highly educated people with loads of money to invest.
Thank you kindly for putting this into perspective. Interesting stats!
Yeah! this should have made some upward pressure on the price. This year was o a hell of a great year for bitcoin and the blockchain. I believe next year will be even better!
Arriving at the cover page of "The Economist" it is not at all easy. It is one of the most prestigious magazine in Europe and even more. I haven't found any article about bitcoin in the link given by OP (maybe is my fault) to have a more clear idea about the meaning and the aim of this fact. But it is enough even the meaning of cover page to understand the behavior and the position of this magazine versus it.
If The Economist think that bitcoin will (can) change the world, this, not only is a important recognition from this prestigious and very influential magazine versus bitcoin, but even a prelude of the possible advancement of the status of bitcoin in Great Britain. Actually its status is "private money". Maybe soon we will see it to have the new status as a full currency with all the power that such status can give.
If The Economist think that bitcoin will (can) change the world, this, not only is a important recognition from this prestigious and very influential magazine versus bitcoin, but even a prelude of the possible advancement of the status of bitcoin in Great Britain. Actually its status is "private money". Maybe soon we will see it to have the new status as a full currency with all the power that such status can give.
The article is great to read in many terms.But again it's "Praise the blockchain and forget Bitcoin"!
Therefore I like to link to Erik Vorhees' article "It's all about the Blockchain".
http://moneyandstate.com/its-all-about-the-blockchain/
Therefore I like to link to Erik Vorhees' article "It's all about the Blockchain".
http://moneyandstate.com/its-all-about-the-blockchain/
Quote
First, let’s understand why the change in narrative had to happen, why it was necessary and indeed inevitable.
Bitcoin, to many in the world who have casually heard about it, is an uncomfortable and cryptic creature, existing somewhere between Ponzi Scheme and “money used by bad people.” Didn’t Bitcoin go bankrupt in Japan? Wasn’t the CEO arrested? To others, it’s just downright weird and unnecessary. Visa works just fine, thank you.
More importantly, though, to professionals in the money realm – to bankers and investors and financial regulators – Bitcoin is an awkward and annoying development, a technology almost all of them dismissed as absurd and useless, and yet it keeps growing. Bitcoin promises a dangerous world without strict top-down financial control. Terrorism. Think of the children. Bitcoin made the term “fiat” a thing, and when something has a name, it can be critiqued. Every day Bitcoin exists, it demonstrates the naive idea that money may be able to work without central planning. Worst of all, Bitcoin brings with it an obnoxious cult spouting proletariat nonsense like “financial privacy is a human right,” and “money should move faster than an anvil FedEx’d to Singapore.”
What respectable banker wants to deal with that?
And while the technology brings with it vast promises of financial innovation, these cannot be discussed in terms of “Bitcoin,” because this term brings with it all the aforementioned baggage. One cannot discuss Bitcoin in polite company, for the conversation may veer into one of monetary theory, human rights, massive sovereign theft and bank fraud… better stick with the weather.
But how do you convince your boss or shareholders that you’re keeping pace with innovation? They read the news, they know that disintermediation is a thing. At the edges of their mind, they have a sense that, perhaps, charging $45 to send a money transfer message is neither logical nor sustainable. As Jamie Dimon recently warned in his annual letter to shareholders, “Silicon Valley is coming.”
Enter “Blockchain.”
Ahhh, what a term! It encapsulates all the magic, all the technological brilliance, all the promise and the sparkle of true financial innovation. And it does it without devolving into a discussion of Silk Road or Jekyll Island.
Blockchains, as a concept, are not controversial. Bitcoin is highly controversial. That is why the narrative changed – because “Bitcoin” makes financial professionals uncomfortable. There was no conspiracy to change the subject, it just happened naturally; the path of least resistance.
Bitcoin, to many in the world who have casually heard about it, is an uncomfortable and cryptic creature, existing somewhere between Ponzi Scheme and “money used by bad people.” Didn’t Bitcoin go bankrupt in Japan? Wasn’t the CEO arrested? To others, it’s just downright weird and unnecessary. Visa works just fine, thank you.
More importantly, though, to professionals in the money realm – to bankers and investors and financial regulators – Bitcoin is an awkward and annoying development, a technology almost all of them dismissed as absurd and useless, and yet it keeps growing. Bitcoin promises a dangerous world without strict top-down financial control. Terrorism. Think of the children. Bitcoin made the term “fiat” a thing, and when something has a name, it can be critiqued. Every day Bitcoin exists, it demonstrates the naive idea that money may be able to work without central planning. Worst of all, Bitcoin brings with it an obnoxious cult spouting proletariat nonsense like “financial privacy is a human right,” and “money should move faster than an anvil FedEx’d to Singapore.”
What respectable banker wants to deal with that?
And while the technology brings with it vast promises of financial innovation, these cannot be discussed in terms of “Bitcoin,” because this term brings with it all the aforementioned baggage. One cannot discuss Bitcoin in polite company, for the conversation may veer into one of monetary theory, human rights, massive sovereign theft and bank fraud… better stick with the weather.
But how do you convince your boss or shareholders that you’re keeping pace with innovation? They read the news, they know that disintermediation is a thing. At the edges of their mind, they have a sense that, perhaps, charging $45 to send a money transfer message is neither logical nor sustainable. As Jamie Dimon recently warned in his annual letter to shareholders, “Silicon Valley is coming.”
Enter “Blockchain.”
Ahhh, what a term! It encapsulates all the magic, all the technological brilliance, all the promise and the sparkle of true financial innovation. And it does it without devolving into a discussion of Silk Road or Jekyll Island.
Blockchains, as a concept, are not controversial. Bitcoin is highly controversial. That is why the narrative changed – because “Bitcoin” makes financial professionals uncomfortable. There was no conspiracy to change the subject, it just happened naturally; the path of least resistance.
The "blockchain" is the genius of Bitcoin (not the currency).
Interestingly enough Satoshi basically invented nothing (even the blockchain concept had been documented before Bitcoin).
What he (or they) did was simply put together a bunch of ideas into a practical and working piece of P2P software.
Interestingly enough Satoshi basically invented nothing (even the blockchain concept had been documented before Bitcoin).
What he (or they) did was simply put together a bunch of ideas into a practical and working piece of P2P software.
Jump to: