Bitcoin Forum

Obviously some of us here may be familiar with such conspiracy theories as the New world order and such like, and as a n00b I still have questions about this Satoshi guy and why he would be so illusive whilst other early developers are open.

So what do you think about the long term future of Bitcoin, could it be subverted from a utopian currency system into a dystopian one with draconian laws imposed upon it by government?

could hardware wallets become implantable RFIDs? could the mining pools centralise and become the new Bank for International settlements? as all transactions are transparent could the legislators make creating new public key addresses illegal and could they enforce that?


Your thoughts please...

Yes, next question.

No.
Central banks are loosing the power of issueing money with bitcoin plus bitcoin is free of dept. No sane banks would have created this kind of currency.

ok but what if they do not need to issue debt based slave currency, what if they can control you through all of your interactions, for example these smart meteres going into peoples homes (UN agenda 21) they are / will be capable of charging you by usage of appliance instead of by total electrical consumption,

what if they charge you for every mile you drive and cup of tea you drink, everytime you turn on a reading light or toaster, they will have the transparency to see your financial transactions at all times with the public blockchain and tax accordingly (assuming you can't generate new addresses or mask your activities).
Is this not enslavement, can an electronic currency not aid their objective?

No.

No!
Bitcoin is the ultimate democratization of currency, precisely the opposite of what any "elite"/controlling group would want.
 

If draconian laws were imposed on the bitcoin protocol, in violation of community consensus, the result would almost certainly be a fork. 

Then there would be 2 bitcoins:  heavily regulated Bitcoin1, accepted by government-sanctioned businesses, and decentralized Bitcoin2, rejected by government-sanctioned businesses but accepted by system D businesses and dissenting users.

Joe Average would probably end up using both: Bitcoin1 for paying his utility bills and Bitcoin2 for getting a haircut.

If the rules got too draconian for Bitcoin1, eg. if there was a 50% tax on every Bitcoin1 transaction, people would abandon Bitcoin1 en masse, move their savings in Bitcoin2, and only use Bitcoin1 when absolutely necessary.

Then government would have to start subverting Bitcoin2, causing it to fork into Bitcoin3 and Bitcoin4. 

And so on.

If nobody forces me to wear one, and if they are fully open-source, I'm not sure why it would be a bad thing.


Instead of centralization, I'd rather talk about specialization.  The more difficult a task is, the less more specialized people do it.  It's a perfectly normal process that has existed pretty much since neolithics.   What matters is that everybody has the right to specialize in whatever field they want to invest their time/energy/brain in.

So as long as bitcoins remain a public and open-source protocol, there's nothing to worry about.


If it was that simple to control bitcoin, Silk Road would have been shutted down long ago.

Maybe elites want you to adopt bitcoin.

The important question is which elites? The ones you feared or new benevolent ones?

But specialists never make it to the top.  It's the generalists that employ and use them.


I agree with this, and it's part of the solution.  Bitcoin brings more freedom and equality to specialists.  For example software engineers can stay independent/anonymous, and eschew enslavement by their employers.

I have been wondering about the single world currency issue and if it is bitcoin, its doomed to failure!

The Euro was a mini new world order currency, and it doesn't work because the world isn't set up to allow everyone to work, live and earn at the same level.  This is why bitcoin isn't going to become the huge dollar replacement the speculators imagine.

What does make sense though is an exchange system that allows various crypto currencies to exchange for practically nothing. That would give you your world currency, and your decentralization - a bit like ripple, but more so.

The difference is that bitcoin does not plan on being a unique world currency.  It's a liberal currency so it is supposed to compete in a free monetary market.


A decentralized exchange market would indeed be very much welcome, and Ripple seems to be a serious step in that direction.  I don't know why you say it would be a world currency though.

I am looking at this from a lay perspective.  A world currency is one where people don't have to think too hard.  Now, when you go from the US to Europe, you have to change your currency, and things are priced differently.  Its a hassle.  Its a noticeably different currency.

If everyone had a currency with the same name, you would be getting closer to a world currency, but you would still have the problem of the exchanges.  What bitcoin can and should do, is to make that cross currency transaction so easy that nobody notices that we are using different currencies. You can even keep your own name for your currency. You can do that if you have decentralized exchanges everywhere which cost nothing to operate.
That is when you will end up having a practical world currency that actually works! ;)

This is something I would like to see happen, but I'm a bit lost at the moment in how big the whole idea is and how many feet you will tread on to make it work!

Then you don't talk about "world currency", rather about an efficient international exchange market.  And yes, it would be great and again, ripple is going in that direction.  But it's not something that bitcoin should do, since bitcoin is not designed to do that.  It is something that should be done by whoever/whatever can do it.

You know a thread is fail when things like "implantable RFIDs" appears  :)

I have heard they will implant the hardware wallet via an anal probe  :o :o

Well the whole New World Order crap is obvious bullshit, but here's a thought:

Is it possible Bitcoin was created by one of the large Wall Street firms? These guys, especially Goldman Sachs, have a reputation of hiring the best and the brightest fellows you could find. The whole point of these firms is to make obscene profits, usually by inventing complicated financial products such as Collateralized Debt Obligations, Credit Default Swaps and the like.

It would be conceivable some of these guys found out it was possible to create a digital decentralized currency and it was only a matter of time before someone eventually would. The creator of this currency would get a head-start in mining, thus accumulating enormous amounts of it. Only one digital currency would survive, due to the network effect. It is important then that the currency you are building is the most likely to become the favorite currency of the people. The creator, whether it be some lone programmer hiding under the name Satoshi Nakamoto or the experimental department at the Goldman Sachs Tower at 200 West Street, New York, could become the ruler of the world.

No,

Bitcoins cant be controled, even legislation are ineffective.. It can be use at will, anonymously, by anyone.. The "One world currency" will not be similar to BTC, more like a new fiat !

As an active and due paying member of the Illuminati, Skull Masons, Stone and Bones Society, and Teamsters Local 455 I can assure that yes, yes it is.

The Illuminati already travelled back in time and implanted all of us with bitcoin wallet RFIDs.  Really.  See that bump on your ankle?  That's where they put it.

Now dig it out.

Why would they want to create Bitcoin?
Bitcoin allows for fast and simple transfers across the globe. This allows anyone with an internet connection to fund any group.

Bitcoin allows the powers that be to maintain their economic powers.

The government most probably have technological advances which we haven't heard of that probably is able to break the bitcoin system.
They can easily track, hack and steal bitcoins using exploits and other technologies not available to the common person. I.E Van Eck phreaking to obtain private keys.

Thesis: We need money decentralized money independent of governments.
Antithesis: Bitcoins.
Synthesis: Crash the market and have everyone beg for a world government.

To me I recognize it as a global control mechanism and I think it is of the beast system.
Now they even got an incentive to create the mark of the beast it would cause all the Christians who have bitcoins to sell them off in an instant.

This medium of exchange can be anonymous which makes it harder for governments opposed to this system to impose financial aggression in the form of taxes and so on.

http://www.bos.frb.org/education/pubs/wishes.pdf

Federal Reserve Bank of Boston-Wishes and Rainbows

Comic book children's story about the introduction of colored flowers into a town that has never seen color. Designed to stimulate students' imagination as they explore the economic problem of scarce resources, various methods of allocation, and how societies react to alleviate such problems.

Road to roota

Roota's flower = Bitcoin?


http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/1973mb1973/5343353f25e84dc9868466557c46eec9_zpsdb2e133d.jpg

+1

Take a look at Ripple if you still want to find the "elites" currency https://ripple.com

I would steer clear of ripple.

Lol no, absolutely not. The reason is that the "elites" are simply not competent enough to do something like this. When they want to make a "one world currency" they do something stupid like, the Euro. A one-region currency. Which is a big disaster, obviously.

Sure, the elites are going to try and hijack the currency. With the help of very large bitcoin businesses who (naturally, in an attempt to increase profits in the short term) will do things that aren't necessarily in consumers' best interest, like move all their USD accounts to the U.S., or in the future perhaps cooperating with gov't officials looking for account data to track tax evaders, etc, etc, etc. I'm not specifically poking fun at Mt. Gox but just saying that this kind of thing is bound to happen.

The only issue to overcome is really that a lot of people don't have the healthy level of skepticism required for a free market - bitcoin is kind of a free market microcosm trapped within the various socialist markets of the world. You don't need a tin-foil-hat level of skepticism, but when there are exchanges that boast of having 80% of trading volume, and when there are huge firms getting involved or large bitcoin-related companies starting to do things that seem a wee bit shady - rather than responding to concerned folks with "Lol its a good investment, you need to lay off the Alex Jones and stop calling for a big evil company boycott at the drop of a hat" we need to realize that, where Bitcoin is concerned there is NO government to protect us from our lack of healthy skepticism. (Not that governments do a good job protecting us from monopolies anyways, heck, they were implicit in creating the ones that exist currently.) Bitcoin consumers need to be more responsive in terms of ceasing to do business with irresponsible companies, rather than this expectation that nothing bad can really happen, it's Bitcoin, they're all good guys.

You'll noticed mixed doses of skepticism and enthusiasm in regards to Ripple. This is healthy. Ripple is new. Soon we'll find out what it's really about. However, some of the concepts behind Ripple are what is important. A p2p network that allows one to trade ANY asset - for instance, gold, USD, etc - over the internet instantly via a trust network. Even if one has one's doubts about the way it was initiated and the motivations behind its management, at the very least a competitor will arise with the same concept and more integrity. Or, the consumers will decide that Ripple is to be trusted, for now. We'll see!

The problem is that people are so easily controlled through even mere threats of court or state violence, so in 20yrs time when bitcoin is massively established people running exchanges or trading in bitcoin can be cohersed into paying excessive taxes and giving up the economic liberties that bitcoin gave them, already on this forum you see questions like, how do i declare my income from bitcoin and such, I'm not a tin foil hat wearing type but there is an elite of glabalists that seek to re-create feudal times and have us as economic slaves, they've been doing a damm good job at it too considering most people leave school or college now not knowing anything about economics or how money is created or even how to balance a cheque book.

So IMO Bitcoin can be a massive force for good if we resist the attempts of governments and monopolies to subvert it, It could be an orwellian nightmare if people give in too easily.


I would love to be able to buy my coffee direct from a brazillian grower online in bitcoin in the next few years, Or send money to a poor african farmer directly for machinery etc.
I'd love to be able to print 3d parts for a home server or solar panel that had been created in an opensource project and funded by bitcoin crowd sourcing in some way, the enabling aspects of technology are amazing a and we can potentially do away with big governments, monopolies and central banks - I really hope that Bitcoin stays as a force for good.   

It is not in the interest of economic elites to support bitcoin. They became the elites by excluding you from the market. There is no way they want a bunch of poor people trading in ways they can't profit from.
Also, the new world order is fringe element wet dream. No one is at the helm, which is just as disquieting.  :-[

My thought is that many things of this general nature remain valid hypotheses.  In other words, as observations continue to roll in they should be mapped against such possibilities as well as many others.

In terms of conspiracies, my sense is that a lot of things are not really that well planned by 'the powers that be.'  Certain things, like the uprising in Egypt to use an example, sort of catch everyone by surprise.  But said 'powers that be' have the resources to analyze and shape future events to make the most of the situation.  My best guess at this point is that Bitcoin falls into this general category.

The bank's power come from that they could get loan from FED endlessly. But with bitcoin they could not get more if they want, and once bitcoin leave their hand, it will disappear from their vault forever (with fiat, it eventually deposited back into another bank), so it is not a very interesting business, maybe pension fund are more interested

The "elites" can produce more hashing power than you can.

Yes but they turn up their nose at more than half of the extant coin types, even those that can be merged-mined.

So for each new altcoin, the small fry have lots of time to get themselves some long before the big guys jump on and claim all the rest, at which point the small folk can simply move on to yet another that is "so small as to be beneath notice, no one takes it seriously" and so on.

-MarkM-

Aha.


That is a rather funny idea to obtain private keys via electromagnetic surveillance.

Please learn about Van Eck phreaking and the resources needed to attack this way and I am sure you will reconsider your statement.

Joe

I believe standard drawing rights are it, not bitcoins.

Don't fear The NewBit World Order, there are some things you do not need to know right now.   :D

http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/347/f/d/The_Queen_in_reptilian_form_by_zucchinii.jpg

Probably because
1. He (or they) is afraid of the global elites (and he/they should be).
2. He (or they) wants to have a normal life
3. He (or they) wants to do other project independently


No.


No.


No.


No.


I hope i my thoughts helped.

Once 80% of all bitcoin transactions are going through 1 exchange located in the US it makes network analysis a whole lot easier. Especially when you cross match it with the bitcoin foundation data which can be accessed by the same people.

People should take steps to avoid this the same way they move from deepbit when it gets close to 50% of the network.

I actually think it's most likely this Satoshi guy kept his identity secret exactly because the "elites" can't quite do most of what you envision. If I were the writer of such a competitive currency potentially capable of overthrowing not only governments, but whole forms of government, I would seriously consider never identifying myself ever again.

I think it pretty unlikely that the security apparatus of the US would not able to identify Satoshi (or plural as the case may be) rather trivially.  And I bet that the guy is (or guys are) pretty aware of that.

We will be the new elites.

Then what will happen? Some crazy alien shit.

*puts on tinfoil hat*

In NWO conspiracy theories, the big bank, THE bank, mother bank, World Bank, Bank of Earth, will want us to adopt their money that they issue for the entire world to use.  They will have full control over it and the world will be indebted to them, and everyone will slave away to earn it and spend it.  This is the ultimate centralized currency, the one you should fear, and the one you reference in the OP.

Bitcoin is the exact opposite.  It's the ultimate decentralized currency, and this is the one we need to get popular, not fiat.  If ever there is a centralized world currency, I would avoid it like plague.

Repent!!

The end is rear!!!

... this question is maybe phrased in a rather unfortunate way but there is something to it, definitely.

Bitcoin is the accepted and generic term for a set of technologies, ideas and meanwhile institutions. Therefor, although it's for sure not the devilish plot of TPTB, we should be very well aware that parts of the Bitcoin ecosystem could support attempts to setup a one world currency quite well. Especially block-chaining and time stamping as "triple entry accounting" and a new way of "smart contracting" prohibiting double spending big scale, would contribute security and trust to a global currency. Consider also that mining (issuing ) of money doesn't have to happen decentralised and bound to hashing from a technological perspective. A not anonymous, centralised and controlled blockchain is a perfect mechanism for a global and suppressive tax regime. 

So, at least from my point of view Bitcoin technology could become a/the catalyst and enabler for a one world currency.

Nestor

I'm pretty sure I can post an article to the internet without leaving any trace. As good as your intel may be, what possible digital paper trail could you not avoid leaving behind?

For the purposes of planning, at least, I figure that the US has fairly complete logs of pretty much ever data communication made over the Internet and the telephone systems as well as and ocean of information on travel and spending by individuals.

Satoshi did not do one article.  He interacted with various developers in various ways and with the source code repository for a significant period of time and recently enough that the data collection systems were in full swing.

One probably could cheat the surveillance system with extreme skill and caution but it would be really hard to do for any complex project.

You also appear to be dyslexic