Topic: Yanis-Varoufakis-Greece, Bitcoin WILL save them from Europe. It won't be pretty. - page 2. (Read 6213 times)

Max Keiser is addressing it in his program:

Keiser Report: Can Bitcoin save Greece? (E724)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s7UVY5yv7Y

Bitcoin puts them on a level playing field with USD… Bitcoin is essentially adopting all major fiat in one basket for now… They can have access to the global economy. Bitcoin is a boon to the economy. It opens up the economy, the rest is on the people of greece not the politicians. They can take their own future and wealth into their own hands. If they don't want to work, produce or educate themselves then, there is nothing we can do to help them, but bitcoin free's them from the debt systems, greeces systemic poor financial conditions are no longer the fault of the ECB essentially.

Just one week now boys. We'll see what the greek goverment really has to offer, 28 is the dead end.

Well, this is very bold statement, but I don't agree.
Greece can't be saved by bitcoin.
They need to recover economy and find new jobs for their people.
What is the point in changing currency if people don't work?
If people can work and national economy become better, nobody will care much in what currency is their salary.

Yanis has already given an answer to the main question of this thread:

See http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2014/02/15/bitcoin-a-flawed-currency-blueprint-with-a-potentially-useful-application-for-the-eurozone/

Imagine Yanis Varoufakis introduces his FT-coin idea or a Ripple-like system by April or May this year, mainly targeted at small and medium-sized businesses in Greece as a first step. This gives them the urgently needed liquidity allowing production to resume immidiately. One or two larger enterprises as well as thousands of computer-literate individuals will jump on the bandwagon. The other debt-ridden economies (Portugal, Ireland, ... ) cannot ignore the sudden drop in Greece's unemployment rate and start developing something similar, or even connect to the Greek blockchain. I'm pretty sure these systems could easily interact with our still fledgling Bitcoin ecosystem and would in turn give Bitcoin a substantial boost.

greekcoin would be a bad idea because it could easily crash due to shaky sentiment and people trading out of it. 

why not just use Bitcoin?  it's way more established, and I don't see any reason to believe some alt coin would gain more users faster.

Threads like this are what is for now preventing another cyprus bank bail-in… If they decide to do a bank holiday/bail-in it is going to have to be global all at once, or bitcoin to the moon and fiat dead. A global bail in would kill fiat and badly damage global trade. A localized bail in would basically be the same as the sentence before but it would buy the people of the world a few weeks to get some bitcoin… 98% of the world would be done though. It'll be years and years before any form of a new economy takes hold.

Picturing a massive letter drop from the sky 

Last night it sounded like Greece would be leaving, but a last minute deal seems to have been done. The first article link keeps it simple and the second one is a long winded EU version. Both articles explain the deal and how it works.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102441973#.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/02/150220-eurogroup-statement-greece/

A mass campaign for supporting greece and bitcoin adaption could be a good start.

it might be 20+ years before we get a hack proof bitcoin and a society worthy of using bitcoin securely, however at some point we will cross a threshold where bitcoin wallets are absolutely secure, and for generations the world will forever change. Our lifetime is almost not as important as the next generation, and I'm basically a baby in todays world.

Every time the possibility of mass adoption is mentioned there's always a govt official or media outlet saying "see, it's not secure you could lose your investment"... this is why the majority of VC funding needs to belong to improving security first. Until we can go several months without more news about exchanges getting hacked or several people hitting the forums with new lost coins it will be a tough sell.
It doesn't matter that the banks are also being hacked and major retailers CC systems are being compromised... that info isn't going to change the masses way of doing business as usual... we have to prove without a doubt that the wallet system is far more secure.
Sure best practices can prevent theft but for some reason it's not sinking in.
Let the traditional old heads have their regulated exchanges if that makes them feel safe as long as this isn't forced on those that don't want to be controlled/manipulated.

What exactly dont you understand when i say a simple fork of bitcoin? How come they would be able to print more of it?

I remind you that we discuss about whats the point of a country using Bitcoin instead of creating a new fork of Bitcoin.

Because dollar/euro/yen/rouble is crappy worthless printed tokens.
Printed by people that has no legitimacy on "controling" the economy monetary system.
They will fail at some point, as every other fiat currency has in the past.


A government only duty is to ensure its citizen safety and prosperity.  
Certainly not freaking controling every aspect of their lives and taxing the sh*t outta them.

edit: and actually, bitcoin's decentralization is

Why would a fork of bitcoin adopted by a country would be less decentralized than bitcoin? And why do you call it crappy gov token? It would be just a fork of bitcoin and accepted everywhere and for everything in that country. As a matter of fact, given the number of people now knowing about cryptos, it would be 10 times more decentralized than bitcoin.

The reality is that a government has to control her economy. Because if she cant she risks being controlled by others. So no goverment would/should ever risk to use a decentralized currency. But if they did adopt a new fork of bitcoin it would be more decentralized and easily more adopted.

nah, but still it'll be more decentralized than any crappy gov token, whether digital or not.

edit: actually bitcoin's decentralization is


who would mine the fork, ensuring blockchain security? goverments? XD

i think it aint happening. ever. bitcoin is just different. so political yet apolitical.

Are you implying that bitcoin is actually decentralized?

And i think that if a country creates a nice fork of bitcoin it would pretty fast acquire a big network.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/big-six-arms-exporters-2012-06-11

For what it is worth when you say Greece doesnt produce any goods the rest of the world wants…..

What about 'merica.

6. USA
The United States is by far the world’s largest arms trader, accounting for around 30 per cent of conventional arms transfers in terms of value. Its position on the ATT is therefore key.

Countries supplied
The USA supplies arms to more than 170 countries and has a mixed record of suspending arms supplies on human rights grounds. For example, it has restricted arms transfers to Myanmar, China, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe in addition to countries subject to UN arms embargoes. However, it has supplied arms to other countries, for example Sri Lanka, Bahrain, Egypt and Yemen, where there is a substantial risk that they could be used to commit of facilitate serious human rights violations.

Irresponsible transfers
As the main arms supplier to Egypt, the US authorized the sale of small arms, millions of rounds of ammunition and chemical agents for riot control, despite the security forces’ violent crackdown on protesters. Yemen was also supplied with small arms, chemical agents and armoured vehicles, and Bahrain with small arms. It provides Colombia’s security forces with arms, military aid and training, despite their persistent violations of human rights.

Stance on the ATT
Since October 2009, when the Obama administration reversed previous opposition to an ATT, US support has been crucial in getting to the current negotiation stage. The US has said it wants the treaty to raise the international standard for export control of armaments as close as possible to that of the US. However, the US position is weaker on human rights protection in the treaty than many of its allies. For example, US officials have not wanted to include obligations on states to prohibit transfers of arms even where there is credible evidence of their potential use for serious violations of human rights. US officials have also argued against including ammunition under the scope of the treaty, claiming it is too sensitive and would pose technical problems of implementation. Overall, US officials would prefer a short loose document that spells out general principles to “take into account” rather than strong binding measures.

because network effect #security #decentralization #legitimacy

Why are you guys keep posting about countries with problems adopting bitcoin? In the best case scenario that a country wanted to use a cryptocurrency why wouldnt they create their own coin instead of using Bitcoin?