The SEC Shows Why Bitcoin is Doomed.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: TheButterZone on January 03, 2014, 05:48:21 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 03, 2014, 11:22:06 AM

It does not matter if an elected body can be removed during the next election because the acts they perform while in office remain. It's not possible to "unbomb" Nagasaki or "unmurder" the Vietnamese people. When you vote for someone you're voting for every action they take while in office.

Was going to say that, but then I remembered, the worst possible evil is always made to "win" where it matters. The only way to win is to not play the rigged game.

That's very true. There's no one to vote for in my country that will win any election because of the rigged game.

TheButterZone

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 1032

RIP Mommy

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 03, 2014, 11:22:06 AM

It does not matter if an elected body can be removed during the next election because the acts they perform while in office remain. It's not possible to "unbomb" Nagasaki or "unmurder" the Vietnamese people. When you vote for someone you're voting for every action they take while in office.

Was going to say that, but then I remembered, the worst possible evil is always made to "win" where it matters. The only way to win is to not play the rigged game.

bbit

legendary

Activity: 1330

Merit: 1000

Bitcoin

Bitcoin is never doomed!!!!

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: justusranvier on January 03, 2014, 08:46:15 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 08:23:27 PM

That concept "the rest of the world will save us" really doesn't seem to be working anymore. I think it's not working because most of the worlds governments/regulatory systems are as dysfunctional as the US system.

You've got it wrong: the rest of the world will save themselves, and Bitcoin is going to help them do it.

The dysfunction of other world governments is an advantage here. Outside the G7 governments aren't nearly as capable of maintaining the illusion of benevolence.

People in Latin America, Asia, and Africa are very comfortable operating in the informal economy and there's no particular stigma toward doing it. In fact, most of the world's population operates in the informal economy as a matter of survival. Outside certain pampered population in Europe and North America, you won't find people declaring that Bitcoin has to shed its black market enabling properties in order to reach mainstream adoption - those will be its primary selling points for the other six billion people in the world.

That still agrees with what I said. I don't see the need to rely on the rest of the world to save Bitcoin in the nations that clearly Bitcoin is coming under attack. You do realize that 36% of the worlds population, almost 3 billion people, live in China, the USA and India, right? It's nice that Bitcoin can conquer the black market in the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago or Uzbekistan but that will not save almost half of the worlds population. Without the big three it's going to be difficult to replace Western Union as a value transfer system.

You're also missing the concept that Bitcoin is a financial tool for transferring wealth between people. We need to exist in those places where Bitcoin can easily be purchased and used. Of course, Bitcoin needs to be used by the poor people of Africa using cell phones. They have a great need for it. Just don't expect them to be capable of large purchases of Bitcoins when the price is outside their reach. Satoshi's will seem like millions to them.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: Coin_Master on January 03, 2014, 07:55:21 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 02, 2014, 04:36:13 AM

Quote from: Coin_Master on January 02, 2014, 03:05:30 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 03:20:44 PM

I just read this Timothy Lavin Bloomberg story and wondered if it's been discussed yet. I can't seem to find anything on it. If it has please direct me to the thread. The comments at the bottom are as interesting as the article. He raises some interesting points considering all the recent action from government agencies lately (like Mike Caldwell's recent letter forcing him to close up shop). Will governments simply regulate Bitcoin to death like so many good ideas of the past? Will business competition cease to make Bitcoin a worthwhile alternative? Is this just another naysayer that is missing the "point" of Bitcoin? Is the "point" to provide an outlet for crime or does Bitcoin have a place alongside other payment systems and is simply waiting to claim its market share?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-08/did-the-sec-just-validate-bitcoin-no-.html

Far too often I see the 'government' referred to as this 'thing that wants to stop people from conducting private legal activities'. Please remember the 'government' are people, elected representatives of the people (at least in democratic countries, sorry to all those that don't get a say in who they would prefer to represent them). If the people choose to allow Bitcoin, the 'government/elected representatives' will do exactly what they are paid to do, as employees of the state, if they don't they get fired/not re-elected. Bitcoin will continue to be a success, as it already is (by the people, for the people).

Were you the one that voted for the 21 kiloton atomic bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki? I'm against genocide for the greater good so I voted against it. Oh, I voted against Vietnam too, twice.

Don't assume governments will do what the citizens want and don't assume that you are in the voting majority.

Really, you voted against dropping an Atomic Bomb on Nagasaki? I do not see how that is possible given The Manhattan Project was 'Top Secret' until after the war. Perhaps you are confusing fantasy with reality?

That's the point. Once leadership is in power they can do a lot of damage before leaving office. A famous American writer, Mark Twain is known for quoting Judge Gideon J Tucker who said, "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." This speaks to the continuous flood of harmful legislation that streams from the ruling bodies.

It's easy for bad laws to be passed and very difficult for them to be repealed. It does not matter if an elected body can be removed during the next election because the acts they perform while in office remain. It's not possible to "unbomb" Nagasaki or "unmurder" the Vietnamese people. When you vote for someone you're voting for every action they take while in office.

skivrmt

hero member

Activity: 994

Merit: 501

Quote from: justusranvier on January 03, 2014, 08:46:15 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 08:23:27 PM

That concept "the rest of the world will save us" really doesn't seem to be working anymore. I think it's not working because most of the worlds governments/regulatory systems are as dysfunctional as the US system.

You've got it wrong: the rest of the world will save themselves, and Bitcoin is going to help them do it.

The dysfunction of other world governments is an advantage here. Outside the G7 governments aren't nearly as capable of maintaining the illusion of benevolence.

People in Latin America, Asia, and Africa are very comfortable operating in the informal economy and there's no particular stigma toward doing it. In fact, most of the world's population operates in the informal economy as a matter of survival. Outside certain pampered population in Europe and North America, you won't find people declaring that Bitcoin has to shed its black market enabling properties in order to reach mainstream adoption - those will be its primary selling points for the other six billion people in the world.

I agree almost completely with this. So many people think Bitcoin will become the main currency in the major countries around the world. I think it has little or no chance of that. While the starting influx of money and growth in Bitcoin will come from developed countries, I think its the developing world that will embrace it. The US, Europe, developed Asia will use Bitcoin to the extent that each individual economy (and government) embraces it, but I think down the road (5+ years), you'll see countries in Africa, Middle East, and Latin America using it as a greater % of currency that any developed nation.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 08:23:27 PM

That concept "the rest of the world will save us" really doesn't seem to be working anymore. I think it's not working because most of the worlds governments/regulatory systems are as dysfunctional as the US system.

You've got it wrong: the rest of the world will save themselves, and Bitcoin is going to help them do it.

The dysfunction of other world governments is an advantage here. Outside the G7 governments aren't nearly as capable of maintaining the illusion of benevolence.

People in Latin America, Asia, and Africa are very comfortable operating in the informal economy and there's no particular stigma toward doing it. In fact, most of the world's population operates in the informal economy as a matter of survival. Outside certain pampered population in Europe and North America, you won't find people declaring that Bitcoin has to shed its black market enabling properties in order to reach mainstream adoption - those will be its primary selling points for the other six billion people in the world.

Coin_Master

full member

Activity: 148

Merit: 100

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 02, 2014, 04:36:13 AM

Quote from: Coin_Master on January 02, 2014, 03:05:30 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 03:20:44 PM

I just read this Timothy Lavin Bloomberg story and wondered if it's been discussed yet. I can't seem to find anything on it. If it has please direct me to the thread. The comments at the bottom are as interesting as the article. He raises some interesting points considering all the recent action from government agencies lately (like Mike Caldwell's recent letter forcing him to close up shop). Will governments simply regulate Bitcoin to death like so many good ideas of the past? Will business competition cease to make Bitcoin a worthwhile alternative? Is this just another naysayer that is missing the "point" of Bitcoin? Is the "point" to provide an outlet for crime or does Bitcoin have a place alongside other payment systems and is simply waiting to claim its market share?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-08/did-the-sec-just-validate-bitcoin-no-.html

Far too often I see the 'government' referred to as this 'thing that wants to stop people from conducting private legal activities'. Please remember the 'government' are people, elected representatives of the people (at least in democratic countries, sorry to all those that don't get a say in who they would prefer to represent them). If the people choose to allow Bitcoin, the 'government/elected representatives' will do exactly what they are paid to do, as employees of the state, if they don't they get fired/not re-elected. Bitcoin will continue to be a success, as it already is (by the people, for the people).

Were you the one that voted for the 21 kiloton atomic bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki? I'm against genocide for the greater good so I voted against it. Oh, I voted against Vietnam too, twice.

Don't assume governments will do what the citizens want and don't assume that you are in the voting majority.

Really, you voted against dropping an Atomic Bomb on Nagasaki? I do not see how that is possible given The Manhattan Project was 'Top Secret' until after the war. Perhaps you are confusing fantasy with reality?

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

Quote from: e521 on January 02, 2014, 09:09:02 AM

Quote from: johnyj on January 02, 2014, 08:54:53 AM

Bitcoin's value is backed by all the infrastructure investments in mining operations, you can copy the source code, but you can never copy the hardware infrastructure

Since the essential of bitcoin is a consensus that people around the world using one currency with fixed limited money supply, any addition of other cryptocurrencies will just inflate the money supply and make that experiment more and more close to fiat money, which is not interesting. Majority of people will come back to bitcoin when they finally realize this

Litecoin could work as a backup in case the bitcoin failed, but since bitcoin is not unchangeable, when an extinction level event occur, miners around the world will agree to switch to a new protocol, so it is almost immortal

I disagree with you and I think you actually contradicted yourself.
We will never ever see Bitcoin changing from SHA256 to scrypt.
ASICs are the real value behind Bitcoin right?

Switch to a scrypt-based protocol will require re-investment of the hardware infrastructure, which is very unlikely. What I meant for new protocol is to solve some existing limitations, for example, scalability is a concern in not-so-far future

luqash3

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Let everyone make their own predictions they are either big liars or no nothing. Did they predicted the crisis in 2007? Simply answer is No then how come we believe in their prediction today. Let them say whatever they want while we should hold bitcoins and wait patiently for it to rise.

prophetx

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1010

he who has the gold makes the rules

Quote from: Peter R on January 01, 2014, 04:14:51 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 03:43:37 PM

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on January 01, 2014, 03:37:42 PM

thats from the Aug 8, 2013.

Using similar logic, I expect eventually all non-open source services/products that could potentially steal a users funds will be regulated in a way similar to MSBs. Even something like the Trezor (if purchased as a complete device, not as hardware to which you load open-source firmware) I could see regulated in the USA because it's possible that the Trezor has hidden code that eventually steals peoples coins.

but why isn't the NSAs hidden code on every machine regulated??!?

prophetx

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1010

he who has the gold makes the rules

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 03:51:37 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Someday food will need to be purchased in the black market. Wink

I think gasoline will be first.

guns and explosives black market already exists

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: bluemeanie1 on January 02, 2014, 03:12:57 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 02, 2014, 03:02:27 PM

Quote from: bluemeanie1 on January 02, 2014, 02:35:36 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 03:20:44 PM

I just read this Timothy Lavin Bloomberg story and wondered if it's been discussed yet. I can't seem to find anything on it. If it has please direct me to the thread. The comments at the bottom are as interesting as the article. He raises some interesting points considering all the recent action from government agencies lately (like Mike Caldwell's recent letter forcing him to close up shop). Will governments simply regulate Bitcoin to death like so many good ideas of the past? Will business competition cease to make Bitcoin a worthwhile alternative? Is this just another naysayer that is missing the "point" of Bitcoin? Is the "point" to provide an outlet for crime or does Bitcoin have a place alongside other payment systems and is simply waiting to claim its market share?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-08/did-the-sec-just-validate-bitcoin-no-.html

I certainly would like to know why the US Taxpayer is funding these witchhunts for people who are building alternatives to an obviously broken, biased and corrupt system?

in the name of our own personal safety? who are they kidding?

Alexander Hamilton believed the American electorate was a "great beast". He said it best:

Quote

It has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.

Hamilton advocated for central banking, he somehow got the title of 'founding father' of America although he was never a president, but was the treasurer.

I do agree with that quoted statement. Capitalism is the solution to the tyranny of democracy. I want to put Capitalism back in office. That's what http://altchain.org is about.

It's pretty clear from the article that the very people who manipulated our system into giving them trillions of dollars are now terrified at the prospects of what Peer To Peer Finance can actually do. The OP article reads like a scary bedtime story.

It is kind of scary. The real problem with saving people is making sure they know they need to be saved. America is described as a great melting pot that accepts anyone into the fold. Really it's a salad where a multitude of different peoples that hate each other are tossed together and that is reflected in the way they vote and choose leaders.

bluemeanie1

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 257

bluemeanie

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 02, 2014, 03:02:27 PM

Quote from: bluemeanie1 on January 02, 2014, 02:35:36 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 03:20:44 PM

I just read this Timothy Lavin Bloomberg story and wondered if it's been discussed yet. I can't seem to find anything on it. If it has please direct me to the thread. The comments at the bottom are as interesting as the article. He raises some interesting points considering all the recent action from government agencies lately (like Mike Caldwell's recent letter forcing him to close up shop). Will governments simply regulate Bitcoin to death like so many good ideas of the past? Will business competition cease to make Bitcoin a worthwhile alternative? Is this just another naysayer that is missing the "point" of Bitcoin? Is the "point" to provide an outlet for crime or does Bitcoin have a place alongside other payment systems and is simply waiting to claim its market share?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-08/did-the-sec-just-validate-bitcoin-no-.html

I certainly would like to know why the US Taxpayer is funding these witchhunts for people who are building alternatives to an obviously broken, biased and corrupt system?

in the name of our own personal safety? who are they kidding?

Alexander Hamilton believed the American electorate was a "great beast". He said it best:

Quote

It has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.

Hamilton advocated for central banking, he somehow got the title of 'founding father' of America although he was never a president, but was the treasurer.

I do agree with that quoted statement. Capitalism is the solution to the tyranny of democracy. I want to put Capitalism back in office. That's what http://altchain.org is about.

It's pretty clear from the article that the very people who manipulated our system into giving them trillions of dollars are now terrified at the prospects of what Peer To Peer Finance can actually do. The OP article reads like a scary bedtime story.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: bluemeanie1 on January 02, 2014, 02:35:36 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 03:20:44 PM

I just read this Timothy Lavin Bloomberg story and wondered if it's been discussed yet. I can't seem to find anything on it. If it has please direct me to the thread. The comments at the bottom are as interesting as the article. He raises some interesting points considering all the recent action from government agencies lately (like Mike Caldwell's recent letter forcing him to close up shop). Will governments simply regulate Bitcoin to death like so many good ideas of the past? Will business competition cease to make Bitcoin a worthwhile alternative? Is this just another naysayer that is missing the "point" of Bitcoin? Is the "point" to provide an outlet for crime or does Bitcoin have a place alongside other payment systems and is simply waiting to claim its market share?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-08/did-the-sec-just-validate-bitcoin-no-.html

I certainly would like to know why the US Taxpayer is funding these witchhunts for people who are building alternatives to an obviously broken, biased and corrupt system?

in the name of our own personal safety? who are they kidding?

Alexander Hamilton believed the American electorate was a "great beast". He said it best:

Quote

It has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.

bluemeanie1

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 257

bluemeanie

Quote from: BCB on January 01, 2014, 08:04:54 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 07:54:27 PM

Quote from: BCB on January 01, 2014, 07:46:35 PM

It is my understanding that bitpay is a "third party payment processor" which is EXEMPT from "money transmitter licensing"

Essentially Bitpay has a contract with their clients, the merchant and when a consumer sends bitcoin to bitpay and bitcoin converts that to cash and sends it to the merchant, the consumer is "legally" sending "other value that substitutes for currency" directly to the merchant. There for bitpay is not a "money transmitter."

But is it not possible for a drug dealer to sell drugs for btc then buy a couple of lamborghinis at a dealership for btc and sell them for dollars. In that scenario isn't BitPay enabling money laundering?

A drug dealer would not be able to open an account with bitpay. (If that is what you are asking???)

A drug dealer WOULD be able to open an account with Confidence Chains. They could even loan out money with it.

BUT, the crime is dealing drugs, not using untraceable money.

bluemeanie1

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 257

bluemeanie

Quote from: Its About Sharing on January 01, 2014, 05:09:21 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 04:14:46 PM

Quote from: Its About Sharing on January 01, 2014, 03:59:07 PM

Regarding Mike and the Casascius coins, Mike just chose not to get the licensing. (Which is proving great for those who already have his coins as the price has of course shot up. But bad for newcomers).
Titan has the licensing and they have also raised prices A LOT. Go figure. I do think Mike will get the licensing, at least in some states as he was doing just too well imo.

SEC stopping BTC? LOL, please, this isn't just about America, much less regulations...

Of course, that's the point of the article. Did you read it?

SEC isn't attempt to stop Bitcoin. Again, that's what they are talking about. Bitcoin isn't about America. It's about India, the UK, China, the EU and everywhere else. What's happening in India and China right now?

I had not read it but gave it a read and am still not clear on it! These titles are just getting a bit old and I once again was only partly pulled in.

Regarding India and China, first India, I think they are trying to get a grasp on what BTC is. They seem a bit against it.
China on the other hand, and shockingly so, seem to just want to separate it from their money system and categorize it as a commodity. I'm still shocked by it.
It will take time to play out and I think the run continues once things get clear in China (then later, much later, India). Of course, it can get ugly in either case, but at least with regards to China, I'm not so worried.

Your perspective on India and China?

the thing with China is that there is an 'inner circle' of wealth elites there who seek to avoid taxation and the like, then there's the rest of China(the peasants).

so China has to appear to be tax compliant, when really the people running the show want to evade taxes, thus it appears they have a schizophrenic stance on this.

China even has two official currencies.

bluemeanie1

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 257

bluemeanie

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on January 01, 2014, 03:20:44 PM

I just read this Timothy Lavin Bloomberg story and wondered if it's been discussed yet. I can't seem to find anything on it. If it has please direct me to the thread. The comments at the bottom are as interesting as the article. He raises some interesting points considering all the recent action from government agencies lately (like Mike Caldwell's recent letter forcing him to close up shop). Will governments simply regulate Bitcoin to death like so many good ideas of the past? Will business competition cease to make Bitcoin a worthwhile alternative? Is this just another naysayer that is missing the "point" of Bitcoin? Is the "point" to provide an outlet for crime or does Bitcoin have a place alongside other payment systems and is simply waiting to claim its market share?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-08/did-the-sec-just-validate-bitcoin-no-.html

I certainly would like to know why the US Taxpayer is funding these witchhunts for people who are building alternatives to an obviously broken, biased and corrupt system?

in the name of our own personal safety? who are they kidding?

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote from: BCB on January 02, 2014, 12:40:01 PM

Quote from: Fundmanager23 on January 02, 2014, 08:55:48 AM

It don't think the SEC cares much about bitcoin. It has too many other things to worry about unless someone tries to sell bitcoin stocks or bitcoin securities without proper registration. There are other branches of govt that might be more interested. Again it is US only and they have't stopped online gaming.

+1

Most US Law enforcement and Regulatory Agencies are already on the record as saying they are only concerned with virtual currency to the extent is is used for illegal or fraudulent activities.

This includes
The Fed
US Secret Service
Department of Justice (FBI, DEA, ATF)
Department of Treasury
Security and Exchange Commission

.... except in most cases the laws are so vague and subjective that they can declare lots of things "illegal" in one of there "guideline interpretations" and entrpreneurs are out of business if they wish it to be so (or face an insurmountable legal challenge) e.g. Mike Caldwell of Casascius coins https://www.casascius.com/

You're in la-la land of how the govt. really operates, it must be fun living in such a denial bubble?

Bob Derber

newbie

Activity: 44

Merit: 0

Just FYI, before you say they haven't stopped online gaming ...

Do check out Blizzard closing the Daiblo III auction house..... the rationale per Blizzard is its impact on game play, which I am sure it has, but they could have integrated the auction into their gaming environment in another way but chose not to.... I highly suspect that choosing to just shut it down has quite a bit to do with what is happening in virtual currencies generally....

It's not all about bitcoin out there. Rather, we're the bad boy on the block, and the block is otherwise quite occupied - gamers and VR envronments (Second Life) were there well before virtual currency took hold. We need a little image control/brand development, I think......

I peeked up during the holiday and saw the recent 'offering' on this forum for a new 'bitcoin' investment: growing marijuana. I thought, as the discussion went on about shares for sale and no business plan but what a cool idea... Just another PR opportunity for FinCEN if they want to bash bitcoin, or the SEC if they feel interested in tempering any positive traction bitcoin might get.

We seem to have a knack of bringing it on ourselves. We should have outted Silk Road way before they did......

Topic: The SEC Shows Why Bitcoin is Doomed. (Read 9186 times)