Topic: U.S. Judge determines bitcoin is a currency (Read 6088 times)

Wasn't that already done about a billion times with E-gold? Wasn't 12dailypro & all that jazz all using E-gold, for at least a period? Noteably, the person who started 12dailypro I believe still has faced no persecution (although she still might in the future), although the people that ran E-gold (and committed no real crimes, other than the BS that is money laundering), have.

.

Dude search this forum. Trendon Shavers AKA pirateat40 is an epic component of bitcoin history. He was the Bernie Madoff of bitcoin.

Edit: it's ok found it a few posts down
who's mr shavers? all google gave me was mach 3's (not really mach 3's but lots of hairdressers)

Gabi, I think you know already that when Ben Bernanke told Congress gold was not money, he was widely considered to be equivocating in order to cover for the fraud in which his organization is involved.  That's the likely reason Ron Paul asked the question.  It was a trap.

One of the major founders of the Federal Reserve, JP Morgan, after all, famously said that "Money is gold and nothing else."  The FED has been considered to be in default, by many, since the 70s when they de-monetized gold.

People, like the judge in this case, (and you as well) tend to use "money" and "currency" interchangeably, while the technical definitions are quite different.  In my opinion, Ben Bernanke was trying to "play dumb" by telling Congress that gold was not currency, that it was an "asset" instead, when he knew full well that this was not the question that was asked.

It sounds as though Mr. Shavers tried something similar, by arguing that Bitcoin was not currency, when in fact the issue at hand is simply whether Bitcoin has value.  And when the judge responded by saying that Bitcoin is in fact currency, he simply meant that it has value and therefore can be the subject of legitimate contract disputes or, in this case, alleged fraud.

Of course it's hard to know the exact context without a transcript or copy of the decision.

at least someone realize fact and going with truth

Again btc is purely a speculative tool, most users only value it based on what its worth in USD, and its success is measured by most against this value.
As a genuine currency its almost completely useless. A currency kinda needs to be stable to be usable but thats lost on so many diehard btc fanbois.
Mostly all the uses as a currency a pretty much token efforts to say "see its a currency".

Obviously.  And this thread isn't intended to discuss matters that are important to those few billion people.  In case you couldn't tell, this thread is intended to discuss issues that are important to the 320 million or so that are in the U.S. (as well as the many others who buy products and/or services from those in the U.S., sell products and/or services to those in the U.S., or otherwise engage in transactions with those under U.S. jurisdiction).

You are very shortsighted.  I'm not necessarily saying that bitcoin will be accepted "by a fuck load more people on the planet in exchange for goods and services", but I see that as one potential outcome.

Gold on the other hand is a speculative tool and almost completely useless as a internet age currency.

pretty sure the charges that stuck with the liberty dollar had nothing to do with creating your own currency, but more to do with replicating a legal currency, hence now the new liberty dollar (without in god we trust).

anyway this is all US centered bs.....there's a few billion other people outside the US who don't give a flying fuck about US judges or congress or whatever

Sorry but I am pretty sure Gold would be accepted by a fuck load more people on the planet in exchange for goods and services then bitcoin ever would.

Bitcoins a speculative tool and almost completely useless as a legit currency.

I don't think he meant to, but that's pretty much what he said:

= Gold is backed by money


So... Gold is backed by money which is backed by nothing.

Though, really there are properties of bitcoin, gold, money, plastic shit from Walmart that make them desirable to have. That desire (demand) weighed with how much of it there is (supply) gives it it's value. A belief that the balance between supply and demand will remain steady or at least predictable satisfies much of the properties (such as store of value) needed to be useful as a currency.

ummmm YEP!!

You are mistaken.  Bitcoin has monetary value.  And gold is not backed by anything.

Open a thread on Bitcointalk about the judges ruling and get a philosophical thread about what is money and what is the meaning of life.

gold is different it has monetary value bitcoin does not, our money is not backed by gold anymore so it is kind of like bitcoin its not backed by anything.

History always repeats itself in new clothing.

its hard to tell without doing more research on it though people are opening up bitcoin companies that have similarities to banks, exchanges and ponzi's so its obviously setting of alarm bells, going to be interesting times

There have been many, many gold-based Ponzi schemes. Here's one from this year. Gold mining scams go back to the 18th century at least. Here's some background.

It's worth learning about the history of financial scams. None of the ones involving Bitcoin are new.

I'll start one:

1. Send me a bar of gold.
2. I pay you back an extra bar of gold in 3 months. I now owe you two bars of gold. Don't "withdraw" it and I'll owe you 4 bars of gold in another 3 months.
3. You're not allowed to "withdraw" your gold for at least 3 months.
4. Wait for the whole scheme to implode in 3 years.

Although, I prefer bitcoins and much easier to compute 7% per week up to 8 decimal places.

almost wasted my time reading 3 pages .... then I saw this on post 4 .. then realised you know nothing about Government ... a single ruling will have no effect whatsoever on the status of bitcoin.

Secondly any official positive/negative stance on bitcoin by the US government would send the price through the roof.