Bitcoin Forum

..

There we go, the insiders are moving in to take over Bitcoin in a United States corporation. If this is not a warning, what is?

CШA взялa пoд кoнтpoль Bitcoin и выcтaвил eгo нa pиcки cиcтeмы CШA зaкoннoй. Toвapищи, мы дoлжны coбpaтьcя вмecтe, чтoбы взять пoд кoнтpoль кoд. Satoshi пpизывaeт к нaшeй пoмoщи.

Los Estados Unidos han tomado el control de Bitcoin y ha expuesto a los riesgos del sistema legal de los Estados Unidos. Camaradas, hay que reunirse para tomar el control de la base de código. Satoshi está pidiendo nuestra ayuda.


米国は、Bitcoinのを制御していると米国の法的システムのリスクにさらされています。仲間は、私たちは、コードベースの制御を取るために一緒に収集する必要があります。サトシたちは助けを求めている。

美国已采取的控制Bitcoin的和已经暴露了美国法律制度的风险。同志们，我们必须聚集在一起，采取控制的codebase。聪呼吁我们的帮助。

Les Etats-Unis ont pris le contrôle de Bitcoin et l'a exposée aux risques du système juridique des États-Unis. Camarades, nous devons nous rassembler pour prendre le contrôle du code source. Satoshi lance un appel à notre aide.

De Verenigde Staten heeft de controle over Bitcoin genomen en heeft zij blootgesteld aan de risico's van de Verenigde Staten rechtssysteem. Kameraden, we moeten samenkomen om de controle van de codebase te nemen. Satoshi vraagt ​​om onze hulp.

Usono faris kun Bitcoin kaj elmontris gxin al la riskoj de Usono leĝa sistemo. Kamaradoj, ni devas kunvenigu al fari kun la codebase. Satoshi vokas nian helpon.

One does not simply "set" the exchange rate for bitcoin.  If they attempt to, a free market exchange system could easily emerge outside whatever they try to set up.  If they try to force people to use it, users abandon the client (or not install the new one).  

Lol? Now the "foundation" is an allmighty entity? As far as i know it is only a company, and there are tons of them related to bitcoin  :-\

if anyone actually follows max keiser, they would know most comments about giving a sole entity control, is where he is being sarcastic.

he is also making an exchange himself. for the UK pound to flow freely instead of having the dollar control over bitcoin.

so treat the statement of keiser saying allow the foundation fix prices as a sarcastic comment

This is pretty stupid, and no I don't think he's being entirely sarcastic, namely because of his FinCEN/exchange comments.

Pegging Bitcoin ala China to the dollar would never work because nobody controls the Bitcoin inflation rate. The market would soon figure out the true price of a bitcoin to a dollar.

Aside from this being a very bad idea, i don't see how this could be achieved...?

It won't be possible to "just set a Bitcoin price".

The market will always decide what the fair price for one Bitcoin is...

Let him I say. It could a... wait for it... teachable moment for him.

Lol. You're going to need a lot more consensus than the foundation could muster for that one!

How did the foundation go from being a "hey guys let's pitch in and get Gavin a salary (and generally put our heads together to promote Bitcoin technology)" foundation to a multi billion-dollar conspiracy organization?

So the valuations are set by 'fiat' of the Bitcoin Foundation.  I can buy BTC at $100 from anyone I can find who will sell them to me for that price (which means effectively nobody.)  When I wish to by some trinket at the bitcoinstore.com, remittance is payable in BTC and nothing else.  They won't sell the trinket to me if I pay in USD no matter what $$$ number the little official-peg-widget might display.

Not a bad idea really.  Probably it would go some distance toward solving the problem of developing an internal economy in addition to addressing some of the other regulatory and tax hurdles which might be associated with highly volatile (and rising) real values.

Keiser does seem to have an agile and orthagonal mind in addition to an exceptional understanding of real-world market economics which baffle most people.  He probably should be more careful to dumb things down sometimes.

I don't mind. Bitcoin will fail in this case, but before that I'll exchange all my bitcoins for litecoins.

According to him , he is a bitcoin multi millionnaire. He could use his bitcoins as a cashflow type to be used as a break if the machines goes crazy. He needs the bitcoin to go at least $1000 per bitcoin for the start of a long term stable currency. iI believe that is the plan. Then MtGox will die out and everyone will exchange using his K-exchange.com.

oh hell naw

Controlling the exchange rate would mean controlling the supply of bitcoins. Bringing the price down is easy; you just generate more (e.g. allow more to be mined, or sell BTC on the market). Raising the price would essentially require buying enough in the open market that the price rises to the desired target price.

Not impossible, but you would need to have very, very deep pockets to be successful (and start with a large supply of both USD (or whatever your "peg" currency is) and BTC).

It could have the effect of stabilizing the currency (this has been successful with other currencies that have pegged to the USD), but it is artificial, and goes against the idea of BTC being an independent currency.

This is practically impossible. Nonsense.

Not only is this a bad idea, it's also virtually impossible to implement. You'd have to fix the price on every single exchange. Good luck convincing every exchange to do that...

Furthermore, it defeats one of the main purposes of Bitcoin which is a way to avoid manipulation via corrupt central control.

Looking at Bitcoin's continued increasing popularity DESPITE volatility, I don't think volatility is going to be the death of bitcoin. I think it's yet another hurdle that we'll cross once serious market makers begin fighting the volatility and exchanges get their act together.

I used to be able to move the price of bitcoin a few ticks on my own with $10k a few years ago. It was much more vulnerable then to volatility. Now that $10k would be just a blip taken over by a few traders.

Now there is big money coming in and moving the price. In a few years that big money will be just a blip.  Whole governments will need to throw their money at bitcoin to have any affect.

Then they will be just a blip.

The instability of price is a very real barrier to adoption as a currency.  The problem is that at the moment the market wants that volatility.  People want to treat it like a stock or commodity because that's where quick profits lie.  You really have several very different and largely incompatible agendas at this point and the speculators have the biggest influence over price.

For what it's worth, you don't need to peg a currency to another currency.  It's convenient to do so, but you can peg it to anything which is relatively stable - you could peg it to the average price of a loaf of bread in Bumfuck Alabama if you wanted to.

Regardless of what Satoshi envisaged or what ideologues believe Bitcoin "should" be, the market will determine what it is in reality.  Right now the market want it to be a speculative vehicle, not a currency, and setting an "official" exchange rate might drive speculators off MtGox but it wouldn't drive them out of the market.

Max is starting to lose it. See this from his latest broadcast...

http://youtu.be/-ASkas1ThFA?t=1m48s (http://youtu.be/-ASkas1ThFA?t=1m48s)

He's mad as hell, and he's not gonna take it anymore.  ;D

I think Max may have been spending some of those bitcoin millions on the SR ... this reads like a coke-fueled rant of meglomania ... if he wants to sell all his BTC to preserve the $100 peg I'm sure there are people willing to take them off his hands.

So here is a thought experiment:
If Max convinces large regulatory groups to try to implement this idea as a solution to the "bitcoin" problem. By the time they figure out that it is impossible due to the decentralized nature, we will have several more 100's of THz to contend with.
Well played, Max. Well played.

Thanks for posting this. Until I have good reason to do otherwise, this, my first Keiser experience, will also be my last.

One needs someone with lots of BTC and USD to do this. What is been proposed here is in fact no different from the USD pegged to gold until Nixon closed the gold window in 1971. Why did Nixon close the gold window? Because the United States was running out of gold. I suspect that if Max Keiser and / or The Bitcoin Foundation try this they will suffer same fate as the United States did in 1971, and will have to close the Bitcoin window or run out of Bitcoin.

PS: If Max Keiser wishes to sell me some BTC for 100 USD per BTC when it is trading at 136 USD per BTC I am game.

I'm glad Kaiser finally came to senses.  :D

that foundation can kiss my royal irish ass!

I think Max knows that FINCEN is taking aim at bitcoin and that they will deal it a very serious blow.  News of the arrests will crash the price to below $10 for a long time as all the giddy kiddies and pro-establishment pussies wet their pants and bail out in fear.  (Just observe how many people on these forums are just DYING to pay their taxes to the U.S. mafia).

After that, bitcoin will stay down for a long while and its price will climb very slowly over years as it is taken up by foreigners who thumb their noses at the U.S. imperialists and those brave westerners who know how to cover their tracks.  Government is, and always has been, the biggest threat to this experiment.  Government is the biggest threat to everything.

I listened to the podcast "Let's Talk Bitcoin! Episode 1" which featured Bradley Jansen of FreeBanking.org who talked all about FINCEN.  There IS a train wreck coming.  I encourage any of you to check it out.

stupid idea and not even possible given Bitcoin's design.

It's semi-possible.  Other currencies have an official exchange rate but are also used for speculation.  Likewise, precious metals have an "official" price but you can still trade them in a speculative manner.

If you believe that Bitcoin won't stabilise without "someone" doing "something" then you need to consider "who" and "what".  You also need to consider whether now is the appropriate time to try to stabilise Bitcoin.  Are there enough people wanting to use Bitcoin as a currency and enough ways to use it as a currency right now to justify trying to stabilise it or are we years away from it being viable as a currency? 

You can't just ignore the fact that many people view Bitcoin primarily as a means of increasing their net worth and it's not especially useful for that purpose if it becomes a stable currency.

If you drive out the speculators, is there enough momentum to sustain Bitcoin as a currency or have we not yet reached that critical mass?

That would be too far. He's a crazy-assed megalomaniac and shameless entertainer, but there is method to the madness, he's right about a lot of things where most others are wrong, & he's is worth keeping an eye on for several reasons. Just take everything with a healthy dose of salt.

Semi is the operative word here. The US Government did this with gold and the USD before 1971.

And here we are with people still speculating on the price of gold and the USD.

My simple solution to this perceived problem is to simply encourage the adoption of cBTC or some other SMALLER unit as the standard unit referred to in exchange rather than the full bitcoin. This way you just change the scale of the exchange rate, thus changing the public perception.

So then, for example, today's price would be expressed as $1.35 cBTC. And it would stay in that small relatable scale until 1 BTC hit $1,000. Then that previously scary price would be represented as $10.00 cBTC, which seems like a relative pittance.

Switching over to millibits would probably be even better. Today's price would be $.135 mBTC.

Bitcoin is a *very* limited issue. Think about how small 21 million units is for a currency! The scale simply has to change and the sooner the better. This could be adopted by consensus over time. Once the exchanges adopt it, then one of the major public perception problems of Bitcoin is gone. People will want to throw money at it if they can buy units for next to nothing - just like the very early adopters did.

I have very hard time believing Max can have written that.

this is my reply to repentance above about the possibility of a Bitcoin peg:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg1956126#msg1956126

Well, if MK thinks the price should be around 100$, all he has to do is to sell his bitcoins whenever the price is above 100$, and buy them back whenever it is below.

Everyone has an incentive to sell when the price gets higher anyway.  So there is a natural feedback loop.  No need for a supreme entity, whether it is the bitcoin foundation or whatever, to fix the price.  The market will do.

I doubt the bitcoin foundation owns enough bitcoins to perform price control, anyway.

Bitcoin price is already set by a Japanese corporation. Look what good that does. Bitcoin price should be set by a mathematical algorithm as a layer on the protocol. In math we trust.

 ::)

I was about to say that this is ridiculous, but I'll be diplomatic and suggest you tell us more about what kind of algorithm you have in mind exactly.

And Max Keiser is going to guarantee a particular BTC exchange rate using his own funds is he?

Ok, fine.

Max Keiser should know this, Especially at these times of financial turmoil. You can't stabilize Bitcoin price since what you are stablizing it against (fiat) is NOT stable!

This is Bitcoin. The people speak not Foundations nor Keisers, Max or not. Don't you forget it people. If Bitcoin is messed with the tech will only evolve and the miners would simply mine another chain.

This makes sense. I followed max enough to know he ain't going to write that and actually mean it!

It's at the mercy of them, it's not set by them.


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oq0EkHY8Cr8/T-60DrYSzuI/AAAAAAAAAos/lI63t6ARBYg/s1600/jackie-chan.jpg

It's basic statistics. Use groups of exchanges and groups of transactions. It's simply a math based fiat pegged to the currencies it is traded in.


http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_maxpieCmjF1qh5u4lo1_500.gif

That could give you a number to which you think it would be good if the price of one bitcoin would be close to.  But how do you plan on making the actual price closer to this number?  You can't really control the price unless you control the amount, either by creating bitcoins or the other currencies at will, or owning a huge bunch of them.

The price has been volatile lately because of a Panurge sheep style behavior induced by mimetic journalism on TV and other mass media.

It's not bitcoin which is at fault.  It's the obsolete centralized information system.

You would not use that price for trading, it would be a useful average price for business using a decentralized algo rather than a separate service. The price could be encoded into the most recent block. Mainly this would have a strong psychological effect on price stability.

To peg a currency exchange rate, you must be able to buy when there are lots of seller, means you need to have a huge amount of USD reserve. And you should be able to sell when there are lots of buyer, means you need to have a huge amount of local currency when needed

China have a USD reserve of more than one trillion, and they can produce RMB as wish, that's the basic requirement to keep a currency peg

That would be a sovereign fiat currency peg. Bitcoin is a decentralized currency that replaces the sovereign with math. A decentralized peg can also replace the sovereign with math.

Quick answer: NO

That'd be bat-shit crazy. Even powerful communist governments were not able to set prices in stone and prevent them from shifting relative to each other depending on actual world realities.
You can be assured that this will never happen.

Didn't read, but if he mean moving the decimal to account for USD value, it's not a bad idea.

I would be OK moving the value of a BTC to 1.2$ if price stay stable in the 1200$ range. (1000:1 split)

I think Bitcoin is too new to bother about this in the xxx$ range.

Go fuck yourself Bitcoin Foundation, I refuse to allow another central bank to form while I can do something about it.

Writing a price on something is pointless.   Prices emerge from markets:  offer and demand.   Not from a numerical label you put on something.

If I write 10$ on a one once gold coin, it does not mean I can actually buy it for 10$.

The coin analogy is actually very accurate.  In numismatics, there is what we call the "facial value".   Often states mint precious metal coins and they try to give them an official value by writing an amount in fiat currency on it.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ef/2006_AEGold_Proof_Rev.png/220px-2006_AEGold_Proof_Rev.png

Usually when the coin is created, the facial value is close to the gold value, but very soon the facial value becomes obsolete and nobody pays much attention to it.   Try to buy the above coin for 50$, for instance.

It's not just because of the former gold standard in US.  Recently in Europe they tried to do something like that with euro gold coins.  They emitted some at a facial value that was only slightly higher than the price in gold at the time.  Since then the price of gold has increased and the facial value is now just a silly number on a coin.  That's what a facial value is:  just a number that does not mean much.



What you are suggesting is to put a facial value on a bitcoin block.  It's very silly and I would certainly not run a bitcoin fork that would do that.

Keiser lol  :D

You have to ask yourself a serious question here:

Do you really think that the global financial system is going to get better? It looks like other countries are coming home to roost Cypress style. (e.g. Take you pick of Ireland, Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal and the USD/bond market is very very very close behind.)

I think that by the time they get to bitcoin the preceding will be in full effect. And Bitcoin will be the least of their problems and rather a partial solution that the masses will have already been moving to. You want to try to stop that? Maybe the US government can but by this time it won't matter if the US is a player or not as there are only 11 million shares right now. Think about that...

But I really don't know, we are all pioneers in this and knowingly taking a chance.

IAS

I agree, the psychological barrier to paying 1000USD/btc is extreme! So how do we remove the psychological limit, if there is one? The only way to do this is through education so that people begin to use the MilliBTC and MicroBTC denominations... I propose a move to everyone, we now speak of the price of Bitcoin as being in Bitcents. At current pricing it is 1.36USD/Bitcent.

My thinking is look at the distribution of bitcoins,    21,000,000 . 000,000,00  , That looks like a perfect division to me a very symmetrical number. so we have 11 million BTC in circulation and with a market cap of 1.5 billion USD... that means that if we translate that number to that division it is...   1,500,000,0.00 . that looks like a good way to figure out where we should be considering the starting point to talk about Bitcoin if we want it to get past that mental barrier.


and About Max Keisers comments.  I agree with him a set price would be good, but who should set that price is definitely not a central authority.

and there is no way that it would be feasable; if the Soviet Communists couldn't set the price in Russia, what chance does a small organization outnumbered by the vast majority of humanity have? just wait for the first herd of new users from a G20 country and you'll know it can't be done.



The question is what the hell are we basing Bitcoins price on? Market Data? Future growth? I doubt anyone doing the trading is even bothering to do an economical analysis.

Look at this article I found: it explains how Bitcoin is an empty valueless stock which it's only purpose is to gamble... If this is the mentality of the traders we are in trouble, because they are basing their assumptions on the fact that everyone else on the exchange is just gambling as well.

http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-bitcoin-bubble-bad-hypothesis-8353

WE NEED MARKET DATA! to back the movement of bitcoin. How many businesses are getting on-board with Bitcoin?  What is their market size? What amount of their customers are Bitcoin users? etc, etc... Education is the only way to stabilize the price after we remove the psychological barrier,

Smart, Intelligent, informed traders, consumers and miners is the only way we are going to gain stability.

the whole idea of bitcoin in 2009 is this

imagine the amount of bitcoin a person can mine in a day is minimum wage

then imagine how much bread, milk, rent, (lifestyle stuff) they would usually buy in a day.

use that as their bases for value.

so if they could only mine 0.3BTC a day and needed to get some bread, meat, veg, milk, OJ, pay their electric then they would work out the dollar value and find someone that would give them the dollar value for that daily use.

localbitcoin.com bartaring style.

so imagine he needs $50 a day to live a healthy lifestyle. that makes a whole bitcoin valued at $150.

back in 2009-2011 people were receiving many bitcoin a day so bitcoin had a low value. now its harder to mine coins so the value of products/services vs bitcoin income makes bitcoin worth more then in 2009-2011.

i personally prefer to see a ticker that adds up all of the miners currently mining and divides the income (rewards) by the amount of people mining per day to get an average income per person. then use this number as a minimum wage value to compare to real life products.
25 coins/10minutes = 150 an hour = 3600btc a day
imagine there was 10,000 miners mining today
average income= 0.36BTC

loaf of bread=2% of average income
4 pints of milk=2.4% of average income
bottle of beer in a bar=5% of average income
pack of cigarettes=10% of average income

that way  value is based on proof of work not speculation, and different countries which had differing values for products (EG USA has cheaper electricity and car fuel then the UK) the US would vary its product percentages accordingly

and that is how you create a non centralised value that has a bit of stability as the value is bartered between a few people untill they all agree on a set level for easy calculation...not ramped and dumped by a few rich people on an exchange.

It is a great idea to move our terminology to bitcents. It may be quite a bit premature to do that though. The adoption rate is still very very low and the volatility still high (but that is due more to the uncertainty of dollars, Euros, etc.)

The bitcoin price is basically based on the market share while considering the supply/demand. If there are only 11 million shares right now, then clearly as the market share rises there just aren't enough bitcoins to go around. But there are enough bitcents, Satoshi's, etc. As far as what is backing Bitcoin, it is essentially a digital decentralized fiat currency/commodity/? backed by trust via use and acceptance. Anything, including gold, dollars, etc. only have the value we give it. What is on our side is that currencies all over the world are in collapse and people need to put their money elsewhere e.g. - Gold, silver, bitcoins, etc.

IAS

So how do we set this up then?

I would like to see how many miners there are on the system/country, this can give us a picture of what the Cost of living is in all these countries, we could speculate from such data where the strongest mining hubs will be... obviously in spain at the moment they just hit 29% unemployment.

and also I found this while crawling the web a little while ago. the original bitcoin 0.1 release... pretty damn cool.

this is what Satoshi Wrote

Total circulation will be 21,000,000 coins. It'll be distributed
to network nodes when they make blocks, with the amount cut in half
every 4 years.

first 4 years: 10,500,000 coins
next 4 years: 5,250,000 coins
next 4 years: 2,625,000 coins
next 4 years: 1,312,500 coins
etc...

When that runs out, the system can support transaction fees if
needed.  It's based on open market competition, and there will
probably always be nodes willing to process transactions for free.


This tells me something, Satoshi wanted people to get on board but have an option to only accept paying Bitcoin Customers as well, but you could do it for free too if you like, It's a 40 year plan, with the first few years being completely subsidized by the Bitcoin Lottery... It's obvious satoshi wanted people to make a living off of this... the Cost of living for the conglomerate of Miners has to be taken into account.

when they by-lawed satoshi's ghost into it

Well it looks like nobody here is able to make an estimate of the bankroll it would take to be the market maker Max suggests. 

First step of course would be to sell to all bids dropping the price to 100.  Then build a nice fat bid and ask wall at 100 and 100.1 or so. 

I'm no expert in this field either but "maitenance" of this position would be expensive, however while able to hold it there would be some profit to help the maintenance fund.  If I had to make a guess I would say a factor of 100 or so total daily volume would be needed to get this project going :) 

That is a terrible idea and ruins the whole idea of bitcoins to me personally.

The problem is a lot of people are not just thinking of bitcoin as an alternate currency to the USD, Euro and other currencies. People like Max Keiser are using it as an investment only.

Bitcoin was designed to have no controlling authority and it should remain that way. If things keep progressing, it could become adopted as an extreme viable currency in a lot of places and accepted even further than it already is

If that is true we should ignore him since he isnt thinking of the big picture.

So now people want to centralize a decentralized currency to make it mainstream and become rich? You know i am becoming increasingly worried with the direction Bitcoin has started to take in the last couple of months. People don't want a decentralized currency that can never be taken down by governments and that will free people of oppression. They want to give Bitcoin to central bankers, let the big fish control it, just so 1 BTC can increase in value.

I'm salivating more and more at the potential to have the best of both worlds.  That is, let Bitcoin make me rich, then throw my affections behind a solution which is more likely to remain highly decentralized and operated by the plebs (which was definitely the 'killer app' aspect of Bitcoin when I first became actively interested in the solution and the think with produces credible 'backing' in my opinion.)

Most Bitcoiners don't hate the current system. They just hate not being on top of it. If they are the new masters, it's alright.

In my opinion centralization kills every chance of anything being operated by the plebs. When i view Bitcoin as a social experiment it does wonders for me in (not) understanding humanity. I mean, we have a decentralized currency and a chance to build a whole new economy from step one by the people for the people. What has happened? In 4 years we have developed our own central bank (MtGox) and you see sellouts everywhere screaming for more centralization and regulations. I guess human greed is as infinite as human stupidity.

I think your equation is not arranged correctly.  The problem, to me, is that it is constrained toward centralization as the only realistic way forward.

I don't think that anyone, and certainly not most of the primary devs, have anything against decentralization.  It's mostly that without a very well thought out scaling design there is simply no way to make any solution scale to encompass the vastness of the street-level transactions of humanity and yet remain operational by the masses.  Bitcoin was never specified with either vertical (sharding) or horizontal (multi-tier) scaling concepts, and that is, in my opinion, it's Achilles' heal when it comes to decentralization.

The opportunity existed (or possibly still 'exists') for Bitcoin to remain a viable foundation upon which a horizontal system could be constructed but that is not the direction that things seem to be headed.

Agreed, for most of the people float point calculation is just too complex, it will be much better to use integer units. We could use carat and grain such kind of totally different naming unit, so that the count can always be done with an interger value without the impression of cheap sub-units like dime and cent

Let's suppose that after 100 years, 1 bitcoin's value will correspond to 1 big diamond which is 100 carat, it is not convenient to use this large unit to do anything, they have to use much smaller units, so the more useful unit is carat or grain

100 carat bitcoin = 1 full bitcoin
100 grain bitcoin = 1 carat bitcoin
100 micro bitcoin = 1 grain bitcoin
100 satoshi = 1 micro bitcoin

This can give an impression of the smaller unit are still quite valueable

1 carat bitcoin currently only cost 1.2 dollar, isn't that a super bargain?  ;)

I await the Bitcoin Foundation Bible and all the morals they will teach me.

This.

Brother you want to know the game plan?

This is what I think is what is going to happen. Bitcoin is the foundation for Web 4.0, the beginning of full decentralization, the masses begin to distribute the wealth that was centralized by businesses, yes the businesses shared the wealth to their employees but mainly concentrated it unto themselves, so people swindle them with Gucci crap I can make in my basement for 5 dollars in textiles.

Web 4.0 is the Virtualization of all human institutions, where the mass of people gave their decentralized currency to centralized business, the tables get turned, now the masses give unto themselves for their hard earned effort. You get to choose who you support, ten years from now someone will be firing up their Vertex 7 2000T to help out a virtualized corporation that works by the people for the people, Democracy 2.0; the world wide roll-out.

Bitcoin is the beginning, next step p2p weather stations that run on your phone, off of Open Source hardware, world wide data distributed to the masses.

Decentralized agricultural machinery, running world wide off a p2p A.I specifically built to efficiently run off of human supply and demand; and everyone who runs their FPGA to help gets paid.

World wide co-ordinated supply chain, trucks cars run by A.I delivering you groceries to your door, monitored thanks to the help of you, and you get paid!

Watson diagnosing your medical condition and analyzing it/ comparing it to all humans/ monitoring industry to regulate toxins thanks to your FPGA contributing it's effort to the health of every human being alive.

Pay for Contribution will become the norm... and no-one can stop it, they can attempt to destroy the individuals but it is unstoppable the only solution for them if they want to control is to create the greatest CCTV camera system ever created, with chips implanted in every human being, effectively zombifieing the population, and if they choose that route they may as well destroy us all, and replace us with machines... :) good luck at this point; our collective intelligence out-computes anything that a centralized system could produce, it can only be delayed.

The multi-headed Machine that Satoshi unleashed is unstoppable, there are clones everywhere; The idea has been released, there is no choice, the collective can out-think any individual, and it does not forget.



Edit: If this distribution does not occur, and it keeps centralizing, the threat of automation will throw us into the deepest depression ever seen. The wealth will keep accumulating into the hands of a few, their taxes will keep being cut, more will be demanded of the middle class, increasing the lower classes. The only thing the Fed can do is keep printing more money to hide this ever increasing erosion, that is why inflation has not skyrocketed, they are offsetting the wealth distribution, but the stimulus' will get bigger and bigger as less and less of that money trickles down. labour will keep migrating faster and faster, people will be trained year after year in different industries because their old ones no longer are demanded. Social decay will begin to take over as the only income that people are getting is from Social Welfare programs that do not allow them to invest in their communities, just enough to subsist. Eventually power will concentrate into a few hands, into the hands of those that control the government and their descendants, a invisible monarchy will arise where we elect the chosen of the aristocracy, bringing about a communist system that subsidizes all industries for support... central control... or worse; a feudal system similar to what was described in the novel Dune.

Hey Tracker, remember your idea for a voting system/decentralized idea machine?


Parts of Bitcoin are rushing to the center to compete with existing systems, while other development is racing to the edge of what is possible. Guess which angle has more real estate? The  new possible is unpredictable, undeterministic, wild and untamed. The frontier of our existence just within reach.
Let them(whoever) set a price on Bitcoin, regulate and strangle innovation. Innovation has already moved from the center, never to return. They may possess only the illusion of centrality, we remain dismissive of compromise and contention.

You have broken through the illusion,"Fight them where they aren't".

4 eyes are better then 2 and so on and so forth. it will work it has to, that's the genius of strength in numbers, humans are pack animals problem is most are only just realising.

Shameless is right. He sounds much more intelligent and reasonable here: http://rt.com/op-edge/if-bitcoin-exchanges-shut-down-518/

 ;D ;D ;D
Very funny:
http://thegenesisblock.com/no-mr-keiser-bitcoin-should-not-peg-itself-to-the-dollar/

Interesting.

I think everybody knows that in a free market the big players control the prices.  The question is, why would these big players pay any attention to Max, the Foundation, or some idiots posting on this forum?  :D