Topic: The VOICE(es) of Bitcoin (?) (Read 841 times)
Interesting point you bring up with NameCoin. It's interesting that the only real value a "Bitcoin" has is.. scarcity? It's uniqueness. I tend to agree that if something has another use, such as gold as a metal or Namecoin as you describe then it stands to reason it would indeed be more valuable. Hmm.. I still see Bitcoin (with enough usage) becoming a de-facto standard for net currency. Like the US dollar in Cuba.
Yes, but you can also buy drugs in the real world with cash and cash has also been demonized. However when Silk-Road was in the public eye briefly via mainstream news the value of Bitcoin actually increased. As did the user base at Silk-Road.. But what is the point you are making? Yes you can buy drugs and guns online with Bitcoin. So what. If you would care to elaborate the point you are getting at... Bitcoin WILL be demonized from many angles; the question is will it be able to survive and thrive in this time of exposure and publicity? As of this posting, Silk-Road is still up and Bitcoin has increased in value in the past few days.
I don't think they can take 'The Silk Road' down. I think digital currencies are very immature and have a long way to go and if you want my two pence worth I think NameCoin will eventually become the highest value in demand currency. As it's generated off the back of the BTC block chain but is also used for .bit domain names a peer2peer DNS system. So it's not just money for the sake of money it actually has a purpose as well.
Yes, but you can also buy drugs in the real world with cash and cash has also been demonized. However when Silk-Road was in the public eye briefly via mainstream news the value of Bitcoin actually increased. As did the user base at Silk-Road.. But what is the point you are making? Yes you can buy drugs and guns online with Bitcoin. So what. If you would care to elaborate the point you are getting at... Bitcoin WILL be demonized from many angles; the question is will it be able to survive and thrive in this time of exposure and publicity? As of this posting, Silk-Road is still up and Bitcoin has increased in value in the past few days. And it is not Silk-Road that is actually demonizing Bitcoin, that is simply a website. It is the opponents using Silk-Road as a catalyst to associate it with "drugs and guns". Oh and evil "hackers". But cash is used by the mafias.. Bitcoin seems to be the digital cash dollar. When a dollar is digitized, it looses anonymity. But in physical world cash is as anonymous as Bitcoin. So it's a vice-verse type of thing as I see it.
Bitcoin has already been demonized by Tor only website 'The Silk Road'. Where you can buy/sell any drug and even firearms delivered to any place in the world.
Hallo Everybody!
I am new to the forums and have been doing some extensive research on Bitcoin, and things associated. Then I came upon this guy in New York (Bruce W) I have seen many posts and did a little review of his background and is it just me or does this guy seem too "mainstream(ly) connected"? He has a internet TV show on Bitcoin, and he touts himself to be the biggest promoter/supporter.. however; I can't help but think that this guy is there for other more nefarious reasons possibly. I am not talking about a scam of sorts, but rather a co-opt/hijack of the Bitcoin name itself.
Could it be that someone is there to promote, publicize and eventually demonize (by being associated in some negative way) with bitcoin and get the public eye viewing anyone associated with it as "an evil hacker", or a "scam artist", or "worse"? He is associated with the biggest bitcoin loss (being too dumb to keep his wallet in his front pocket - or ...), and whats all this crap about boys and sex?!
When (yes when) Bitcoin goes mainstream there might be large corporate/government/financial entities that will want to either stamp it out, or co-opt and control it. As it is virtually impossible to control conventionally, would it not be a vested interest to at least have a controlled opposition, or in this case a controlled advocate? Someone that is well funded, with a shady past but connected enough to the mainstream like Hollywood (he wrote screenplays, etc) and previously involved in mortgage fraud, and associated with sex deviation?
This wreaks of someone attempting to hijack and soil the name of Bitcoin because no one of character would want to be associated with someone like this. But most folks when first learning of Bitcoin, if it's from him, after learning a bit more about Bitcoin's "chief spokesman" (NOT) would probably not do much more research and simply steer away and not want to even mention the word "Bitcoin". People have short attention spans, and if Bitcoin is to ever survive it would need a larger user base, it would need to be known by mainstream folks walking around 42nd street and Broadway.
So now we have a bunch of us folks that I would assume are advocates (pro) Bitcoin right? And we have one guy in NY with a TV show and (a little help obviously) self-proclaiming himself as King Bitcoin? I would be willing to co-host a counter TV show (From the west coast) - if I had some help! I don't think it is right to have a loud false-Bitcoin-supporter out in front leading the Bitcoin charge. Is there anyone out there that agrees with me here and might consider to this situation? Recently he has even done an interview with stars from a CBS show that is supposed to air a Bitcoin related show?
He is getting stronger, gaining ground. Already a Wired article hails him, and everyday that goes by with the real Bitcoin community being unheard by the mainstream is detrimental to the movement in my opinion. That is why I would appeal to anyone willing to collaborate that we should counter that voice with our own and make it clear what Bitcoin is in a positive aspect with our numbers as opposed to one man's controlled perversion of it.
Maybe someone has a studio in SF? Maybe a few of us want to get together in person/video conf and promote Bitcoin with our own means and ideas on a regular basis. There is a guy in the UK attempting to get merchants to accept Bitcoin, we could do that where ever we are. Lets pool our resources and set the record straight.
Who wants to make a lunch date next week?
Or we just let this guy in NY be the voice of Bitcoin and abandon the cause as it's going to fail anyway so may as well go watch the game on TV. Yes?
Anyway thanks for reading and have a nice day,
RX
I am new to the forums and have been doing some extensive research on Bitcoin, and things associated. Then I came upon this guy in New York (Bruce W) I have seen many posts and did a little review of his background and is it just me or does this guy seem too "mainstream(ly) connected"? He has a internet TV show on Bitcoin, and he touts himself to be the biggest promoter/supporter.. however; I can't help but think that this guy is there for other more nefarious reasons possibly. I am not talking about a scam of sorts, but rather a co-opt/hijack of the Bitcoin name itself.
Could it be that someone is there to promote, publicize and eventually demonize (by being associated in some negative way) with bitcoin and get the public eye viewing anyone associated with it as "an evil hacker", or a "scam artist", or "worse"? He is associated with the biggest bitcoin loss (being too dumb to keep his wallet in his front pocket - or ...), and whats all this crap about boys and sex?!
When (yes when) Bitcoin goes mainstream there might be large corporate/government/financial entities that will want to either stamp it out, or co-opt and control it. As it is virtually impossible to control conventionally, would it not be a vested interest to at least have a controlled opposition, or in this case a controlled advocate? Someone that is well funded, with a shady past but connected enough to the mainstream like Hollywood (he wrote screenplays, etc) and previously involved in mortgage fraud, and associated with sex deviation?
This wreaks of someone attempting to hijack and soil the name of Bitcoin because no one of character would want to be associated with someone like this. But most folks when first learning of Bitcoin, if it's from him, after learning a bit more about Bitcoin's "chief spokesman" (NOT) would probably not do much more research and simply steer away and not want to even mention the word "Bitcoin". People have short attention spans, and if Bitcoin is to ever survive it would need a larger user base, it would need to be known by mainstream folks walking around 42nd street and Broadway.
So now we have a bunch of us folks that I would assume are advocates (pro) Bitcoin right? And we have one guy in NY with a TV show and (a little help obviously) self-proclaiming himself as King Bitcoin? I would be willing to co-host a counter TV show (From the west coast) - if I had some help! I don't think it is right to have a loud false-Bitcoin-supporter out in front leading the Bitcoin charge. Is there anyone out there that agrees with me here and might consider to this situation? Recently he has even done an interview with stars from a CBS show that is supposed to air a Bitcoin related show?
He is getting stronger, gaining ground. Already a Wired article hails him, and everyday that goes by with the real Bitcoin community being unheard by the mainstream is detrimental to the movement in my opinion. That is why I would appeal to anyone willing to collaborate that we should counter that voice with our own and make it clear what Bitcoin is in a positive aspect with our numbers as opposed to one man's controlled perversion of it.
Maybe someone has a studio in SF? Maybe a few of us want to get together in person/video conf and promote Bitcoin with our own means and ideas on a regular basis. There is a guy in the UK attempting to get merchants to accept Bitcoin, we could do that where ever we are. Lets pool our resources and set the record straight.
Who wants to make a lunch date next week?
Or we just let this guy in NY be the voice of Bitcoin and abandon the cause as it's going to fail anyway so may as well go watch the game on TV. Yes?
Anyway thanks for reading and have a nice day,
RX
Jump to: