I'll just use the standard rule of when a story ends with a question mark, the answer is "No."

History isn't made by the meek and cowardly. It is written by those willing to take risks - including calling the current system on its bullshit and double-dealing. There's a new sheriff in town, and his name is Bitcoin. Currency bandits better clear out of town.

Worst case seems to be the high area of 2011, so 30's roughly.

We're "off plan" for the retrace playing out like 2011 though, we didn't get the massive rebound that they did, just the grind lower. I think we're in the "Second Grind Lower" part of this: http://pastebin.com/v6npykei

There is the possibility since we're not replaying the prior action identically that we don't slump below 64 - but of course, there's no guarantee.

These are the same people who took personal savings and credit lines to buy into the Facebook IPO, only to get shanked by the underwriters botching the whole thing.

Of course they don't like Bitcoin, figuring stuff out is hard, man!

If any alt-chain has features bitcoin should have, it is conceivable that we'll soft-fork to incorporate what works, and throw away what doesn't - invalidating the alt-coin in the process.

Also, convenient they left out the 51% attack on Feathercoin, eh? All alt-currencies are vulnerable to a much greater degree than Bitcoin is now.

Gizmodo has always hated Bitcoin, even way back. It isn't any surprise that if there isn't something to write about bitcoin that can be cast in a bad light, they won't be posting it.

Just part of the mouth-breather network they have, including Gawker, etc..

Now we just need a few "Bitcoin is dead" stories before the next big run-up

What everyone seems to forget is how more trading platforms just play into the long-term strategy that Satoshi most likely envisioned. Each trading center is merely a "bridge" to the bitcoin ecosystem. In the long run, we will depend less and less on these chokepoints as they conveniently convert all the flawed currencies into the cryptographically secure bitcoin.

They also serve as convenient temporary targets for the existing system to attack, so more of them equals more diluted effort from any centralized source, which mirrors Bitcoin's internal workings - having its resources distributed means resilience in the face of any serious effort to attack it.

This is why more trading platforms are better, and ultimately will only exist in very consolidated forms when fiat currencies are looked upon as the paper/plastic trading tokens they really are.

Just another step toward total BTC dominance.

Doesn't PRWeb function as a paid intermediary for releases? Its about as relevant as someone pimping their crafts on Etsy.

Mt. Gox may have the PR skills of a mentally deranged inmate, but they can't possibly be so stupid as to walk away from the firehose of trading fees like that. It is just one of their usual badly-choreographed moves to "improve" things that no real financial service would execute in the same manner.

Just the usual muppet-speculation on matters they have no real information on.

You know, business as usual in the forums.

Note to self: any article using "The Bitcoin" is usually written by someone who still doesn't understand the internet, or how mp3's can encode music.

Source:


Translation:

"People sick of our ineffective bungling have latched on to Bitcoin because of its decentralized nature and low fee structure. We haven't figured this out yet - but we're swimming in the tar pit as we speak, expecting a resurgence of traditional banking demand."

The amount of people trying to force (round) Bitcoin into a (square) regulatory hole is astounding. It's like they get paid to be completely and utterly as stupid as possible.

Any word on what they'll do when Litecoin suffers a 51% attack?

That should be illuminating. Provided of course, its still around when they finally add it.

Monetizing knowledge and having intermediaries profit off of the work of others (who "stood on the shoulders" of past achievements) is probably one of the most toxic and defeating things ever to come out of only-for-profit societies.

It impedes advancement in knowledge and ultimately hurts people more collectively than it helps. We'll look back upon this time far in the future and wonder how the hell we even got anything done, with all the patent trolling and companies telling people what they can do with ideas.

Its all 'effing ridiculous.

And yet they moved an article relevant to Bitcoin's infrastructure needs outside of a centralized company monopoly - the "Loon" project. Good luck with this one staying here.

Well, when your lifestyle is funded by those ignorant in math and statistics, you can afford to be a 'pillar of the community'. Wonder what happened to all those customers that lost funds on his site - are they better off for having forked over their bitcoins? Somehow I doubt it.

Because not everyone wets their pants at the mention of risk.

Maybe they should study the effect of pulling out the Heroin IV-Drip of $85 billion a month in debt monetization first.

Nah, they're not that smart.