Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 28385. (Read 26608579 times)

i was more thinking of india slumb style since i've been there recently and felt quite ashamed. and sure about 2billion "medium poor people" could benefit from bitcoin.. but only after the first billion that we are make profit.. on their back... sadly as always. thats all im sayin.

Bad things happen when strong governments fail, and when weak governments fail, and even when strong governments don't fail, and when weak governments become strong governments. They are just different bad things. The chaos that follows a failed state is a product of that failed state. That's Why America didn't turn into Somalia when the British government failed here but Russia turned into a Kleptocracy when the Soviet Union failed.

A monopoly government cannot be a strong government because the lack of competition makes it weak. It rots from the inside out just like private monopolies do. Some monopoly governments are stronger than others, but I don't think any of them are strong enough to accomplish what you want them to accomplish. If you want effective laws, common law is generally better and more effective than legislative edicts. Best practices emerge over time and are usually not handed down by you ivory tower types.

To answer your question, if Bitcoin was outlawed, I would use it to move my capital out of the country. Capitial controls are a strong signal that the time to get out of Dodge is coming soon. Hopefully many more people from other countries will have to use it for that purpose before I do and when they do, I will provide them with liquidity.

[quote author=Mervyn_Pumpkinhead link=topic=178336.msg6113718#msg6113718 date=1396892555

Well said..
I also agree that it would have been healthier for the development environment of bitcoin to have a year long resting period. I'm afraid that this isn't possible any more since the competition will also keep pushing. The word is out that it could be possible to offer monetary services separate from global banking. There are smart and powerful people and organizations developing their own variants, that won't be made public before they are considered perfect.
I personally think that the main thing that needs development is the coin supply. Fixed coin supply with increasing deflation makes the currency too attractive for speculative play. As long as there are good opportunities for speculative play, then there won't ever be price stability, and that is the main thing that creates a quality currency.
[/quote]

I found this a problem when I got into Bitcoin, instead of the Step Function to introduced new coins I thought a normal distribution function would work better.

I have since concluded that at this stage extreme volitility is a feature not a bug and I think it is distributing acceptably.

+1 third world countries have a middle class too.

It is an incredibly narrow (and supremely arrogant) point of view to consider anyone who is not "taking dumps in drinkable water" to be so poor they must be starving, sub-Saharan Africa style.

There are upwards of 2 billion people that could immensely benefit from BTC going mainstream, and, no, they are neither starving nor US/Euro level rich.

if your currency is the Zimbabwe dollar, bitcoin will change your life.

I would advise you to take the profits during uptrends and following a rational plan (when we will hit this price I will sell x% of my stash, etc.) - I hate stating the obvious, but I'd avoid selling during dowtrends and buying during uptrends.

no im saying that the unbanked masses main concern is access to food and water. people with bank accounts litterally take dumps in drinkable water. so just stop pretending that bitcoin will change those unbanked masses lives. What should change is the centralisation of the world's resources.

Bitcoin is not only a transaction tool.  It is also a store of value.  Unbanked people will benefit greatly from both, as it will enable economic development which would otherwise be infeasible.  And it is only economic development which makes the satisfaction of those needs to which you averr sustainable.

Because of its design Bitcoin won't be able to support real-world payment volume if the price per coin is not high, thus pure speculation (which currently amounts to 99% of the BTC transactions) is just making it easier for companies like Square to adopt it. In fact, the wild speculation on Bitcoin's future price is precisely what is making the price to reach quickly a level that makes it possible for bitcoin to support a real economy transaction volume.

Bitcoin has everything to change the world, quickly: it is a huge innovation that solves real life problems and has numerous applications apart from being "digital cash", and it has also built-in a huge financial incentive that makes its adoption to go viral - nothing speeds adoption faster than the promise of future wealth.

so you're saying people with bank accounts don't need food or water?

yea right. they cant even loan fiat. you expect them to loan satoshies from greedy wasps that speculated the shit outta bitcoin to make it rise >10k$.
much infrastructures

Explanation

I thought it was your position that none of those markets were accretive to the value of btc.  Have you repented?


Er, which premises are absurd?