|
political agenda's like everything else are ultimately based on thermodynamic agendas. AI's would also have thermodynamic agendas. They survive if the are more efficient at utilizing energy than other systems.
BTC's thermodyanmic driver is it can organize goods,services and humans a lot more efficient that central banks systems/tax systems of existing govt's/corps/banks. It essentially eliminates a lot of the need for them and their attendant parasitical effects. BTC has its own parasitical effects eg, mining and cost to maintain code base, but thats orders of magnitude less than central banking (inho).
As far as AI goes perhaps we are looking at it the wrong way. There is on such thing a 'I' no such thing as AI. Sentience, maybe just a very clever trick, we can perform, to internally pass a psuedo Turing test and so can believe we are self aware...and that all that is needed to bootstrap in everything from there.
sorry if this is a bit techno-babble, but its hard to express. All I can say is that at a macro level, thermodynamic underpins every system at the moment
|
|
|
|
Peercoin? Namecoin? I thought those were the major ones along with Litecoin of course.
These 2 only exist because they are on btc-e, without it, they would be gone by now. No community, no projects, no dedicated members Your kidding right PeerCoin has one of the best DEVs and communities, plus has no competition in the backbone currency space |
|
|
|
It is quite easy to pump a small cap asset (just look at penny stocks), but pumping a multibillion dollar cap asset is a lot harder and percentage gains will be a lot smaller.
Those previous astronomical patterns will not repeat in the same way.
not so sure, there is a lot more money ready to go into bitcoin now then before. We are no where near the top of the uptake curve. Sure there is on but we are back in 1985 email days. The paradox it BTC tech is moving faster than internet/email tech back then, becuae the net is here, ideas acan travel fast and BTC is open source. The uptake is slower though because the ideas are harder to grasp. Consider 99.9999999999% of people if not more would have written you off as a fringe lunatic to even have a discussion on FIAT currency in 2008 or before. They would have thought you a ultra nerd, possibly insane and not understand what you are talking about. Let alone a currency without a central bank / govt backing. Central banks would have written this of as dreamland. See people have been educated to think that money is valuable, intrinsically and not question that it is. Its not hard to see why. Our jobs are paid in money, houses food, material worth, cost of living, the political debate, taxation. No one dares to stand up and say, "but your money does not represent value", and "counterfeiting is good if you can do it" I e all money must be open to competition by whatever means. This way the flaws in the medium of exchange are demonstrated. Or rather any one should be free to issue any type of money. The state has had no serious competitor in money since....well along time. It has thus like any monopoly become soft and ripe for competition. the upshot being, we are in the really really early stages of BTC. |
|
|
|
|
Congrats
I love electrum it has so many features.
However the depth of features may not be apparent to the novice user. Some sort of UX change to bring some of the buttons like freeze etc to the fore front may be useful. Eg I like to control what addresses send and recieve what.
The only technical nag I have is as posited before....If repeated public spending from addresses some how builds up a picture of the original MPK and private key....which was answered no, but it some how sits in the back of my mind that there must be some sort of backwards linkage.
Apart from that I struggle to thing of anything I could even want electrum to do better....it does everything so well.
|
|
|
|
|
Consider:
If a person plays a gambling/slot machine, and eventually cashes out their winnings (if any) at what point could you call the electronic data in the machine yours either by assignment by the owner or lien or other relevant legal fiction and then when you convert to cash what is the form of transfer?
It would seem the particular state of that machine attributable to the gamblers input, money, time and [effort?] fits the property description of the IRS guideline. On the other hand you could argue they are generating a form of property sui generis. I don't think much turns on point either way as property could arguably be said to arise.
Eg. You pay for use of the machine and become the effective owner of the data/state of the machine, but that is not currency, it would appear to be a type of property according to the IRS. You then convert to cash or lose your cash for this property. If lost then it becomes perhaps tax deductible[sure the property is destroyed at the end of the game but that does not matter for this case.].
The upshot being it seems arguable that the IRS guidance has just captured a lot of the gambling market.
If I was a casino I would be potentially worried about the IRS position for making winning not as attractive, as property transfer is captured. However losses may be able to be used to offset other capital gains.
Also on that, note where the Slot machines are all linked up and some sort of wining jackpot occurs, this would seem to fall within the money transmitter guidance.
The Casio/Gambling lobby are going to have to weigh in on this in a big way or face huge changes to their industry via taxation and licensing requirements.
Unexpected help from and unexpected quarter.
USE:
[If Fincen or IRS officers use this information or any other commercial or governmental organization, the cost of presentation of information is 0.001 BTC per reproduction payable to 1MM3gGbW497y7Jb4Kk12ehZ7YDBSXEPdKe]
|
|
|
|
|
Heres a hint 1T is not that much money these days.
7 billion people spend 100$ thats close enough to 1T a day we burn through in this world, and $100 is a low estimate, and each year the wealth builds as you build on all histories preceding infrastructure.
21T is a bit, but not that much, good for about a month of spending for the world if that, and thats only needs, not investments etc.
So can BTC get to the value of 1 months spending for world, sure can.
|
|
|
|
I am wondering why people are making him a saint. Noone knows his true motive other than himself. Maybe he created the currency to enrich himself, even though it is desentrilized. He could have mined alot in the early days. Or he may not have, and creted it just as a "holy" motive. As I see, it the ones that came in early is the ones that got rich on this easy. All others, coming late in must really work hard with mining, trading or other. Even Jesus had a motive to do what he did and belived in, if not he would not got true with it (he did unselfish, but had a agenda). To create a desentrilized currency can also be selfish. Anarchists for example, believe in chaos, and thereby want to create it, and if they believe in it truly, its a kind of selfish to create it and "force" it on others that not want it.
Whatever a human does do, is most often based on selfishness, agenda or what other expects from you somehow true believe. So to glorify a person to almost holy I will never be into; if its my mom, the president or other.
I think satoshi is playing the long game, his motive was likely, go down in history, solve a cardinal problem no else had, make 1 trillion $. Some english guy in the 1500's or so was worth over a Trillion in today's money....so theres precedent for that. Satoshi has planned this out some years in advance, and is sticking to the plan If you have ever read Wells the sleeper wakes it has some interesting ideas as to what happens if the money is left then used later.....when satoshi wakes. Its also telling that Satoshi may have broken cover to get dorian of the Hook rather than crow about my invention just cracked $10B. Hi Satoshi, as you reading this now, your thinking 21T! Your not far wrong I agree at least that. |
|
|
|
Quite simply Satoshi realised if he was right, and he likely was, that he had to be anon. Can you imagine the target he painted on his back. Think it through [1] Near 1 million BTC, he could easily become the worlds most wealthy individual by some large margin. [2] Imagine the govs/corps after him + alphabet agencies. The guy just solved an a major problem, and the solution borders on genius, not saying its perfect, but it was original thought. [3] He/She/It planned this out for a long time and thought it through. They are not in it for the the short term. They planned out no going public [4] Avoid all the acolytes/nutcases. Satsoshi would have no life left if he revealed himself. I think satoshi see's bitcoin at 1 Mill a coin [at least], and this is the reason for the 10e^-8, 1 satoshi = 1 cent. "we" haven't done anything "wrong" that occurs in any system. We need a properly distributed exchange It might not be the truth and only but the truth but my speculation is that he became disgusted with the community since Gavin showed it off to CIA, and become even more disgusted when he saw how twisted we are with our overly speculative, wanna-get-rich-quick-while-jerking-off mentalities and such.
My impression is that he doesn't give a single shit on any of us and more tragically even about Bitcoin. If not a prank, his recent post on not being Dorian, clearly shows he stepped forward to defend a man that was in REAL danger of being killed for his supposed wealth/ worshiped to death by the bitcoin fanatics.
Moreover, Sathoshi gave everybody the instrument, a decentralized currency but we somehow started to do it wrong (see MyBitcoin, Bitcoinica, MtGox etc)
But don't worry, Bitcoin will not burn in hell, only we will! (in a max of 90 years or so, and even less for some of us). And lets a keep a toast for for MtGox - Bitcoinica incidents as we love people being scammed of off their life savings.
PS: Haven't lost any bitcoin with the Mtgox fiasco but I have lost faith in the community. Protocol still works though.
|
|
|
|
I'm giving an introductory presentation to a group of judges, lawyers, and political leaders next week. Although my presentation will give them all the necessary information to have a discussion, my plan is to open the floor to discussion.
During the discussion, I want to pose provocative questions.
"Should you accept bitcoin as a form of payment? If not, why?"
"How do think bitcoin should be regulated?"
"Will regulating bitcoin in the short-term, reduce innovation in the long run?'
I was hoping you guys could help me get a list of provocative questions that could be tailored to lawyers, judges, and government officials.
Any help is deeply appreciated.
Sorry about the spelling grammar in advance...don't have a lot of time. A rather interesting outcome of BTC, Legaly speaking is that it will arbitrage jurisdictions by according capital and business/entrepreneurs to the most favorable jurisdictions. While this is done for Tax and Company purposes already, the scale and speed at which BTC can do this is unmatched, as the funds can simply flow, regardless of the counter jurisdictions requirement for BTC not flow. I.e. there is no capital out flow control for BTC. A second point is BTC tech offers a new form of corporate entity, the DAC (google it) this it doesn't rely on state sanction, nor the usual formal office holders being appointed. The common goal is bound by the tech eg block chain. Eg many of us are marketing dept, educational, manufacture, supply chain, regunaltions, Dev, graphics, art, apologetics, etc etc. The reason people are bound in is becuase BTC offers a better return to a certin sgment of holders than competing activities. This DAC is very powerful, because it [1] is amorphous, very hard to attack or stop [2] very adaptable, because only open source is fully trustable, the diametric opposite of copyright and trade secrets. This fact make the development go ahead at light spee versus may other techs. Advances can be adopted quickly in BTC or by other chains/coins [3] Engages alot of people. The number of people DEV ing part time / full time etc could be or the order that a largeish software house could not afford to employ [4] The "wallet/tech/BTC is unsiezable, immune to court or state intervention. Eg firstly you have to prove a person has BTC, they may not, then you have to get the private keys out of them, and even if you could they can set up a coin eater or some other such service. Even if you can find flaws in BTC tech, there are man other coins, eg anoncoin that are set up to be much harder to track down. Eg the destruction of BTC would only lead to better coins just waiting for the opportunity. Take a look at the rate of evolution in alts if you don't believe. it. In legal speak, BTC is immune, to writ, seizure, bankrupty, liens, court orders in general. In fact it is the first time in history that an individual can hold wealth and not have it taken from him by force. Eg before no matter what form of wealth you had others could always force it from you. The exception being perhaps buried gold/treasure but that's really hard to use. Conversely BTC make some forms of crime uneconomic. Eg robbing people for their money isn't economically viable with BTC anymore, for the same reason the state faces. To encapsulate BTC, it could be said it is about elision of sovereignty from the state to the individual, and BTC is the first viable model to do that in a complex society, the DAC aspect of BTC which is perhaps its most powerful is a means to regorganise the allocation of capital and production, why? because it makes is near impossible for people to cheat each other while unifying them in a common [self] interest. The contact and register nature of BTC is also there, eg, it can function as an absolute record of tittle eg land titles, without central or state organization. Etherium, NXT, master-coin and others are starting to make headway in using this type of feature. Churchill's famous dictum: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947) , has been answered. We now have a less worse form of organization. The DAC/Blockchain. This coupled with the fact people have see $>10 Billion of buying power on the table so far (the market cap of BTC) and this could easily go to $100B, they are not about to forget. And remember this is buying power. Its not like Apple, who hold say $400B but then can actually spend it all. The BTC can not be "all spent" the power just sits there, in alienable [from itself, tautology]. The Judges won't like a lot of this or will find it confronting, because you saying they are more or less out of a job and powerless |
|
|
|
what is the algo they use to do this, how does the consensus work....it seems fast.
centralization. Trade Your back!!!! when did this happen.... |
|
|
|
|
bump
software ready. see first post
|
|
|
|
As the title states. Do you take the loss or move it into different investments that would still have a good BTC ratio? I think I'll put all of my BTC into Ripple for these reasons: - It has strong financial backing (Google, Andreessen Horowitz etc) - Disruptive technology without the Gov't heat (Bitcoin exchanges in China are closing, while Ripple gateways in China are opening) - The technology is everything bitcoin but more (faster, more secure, more functions etc) - From the above reasons, a high likely-hood of success/ price rise (therefore, making back my losses) Have you been tricked into thinking Ripple is a scam? http://crypt.la/2014/01/22/unexposing-the-ripple-scam-rebutting-ripplescam-org/Anyway, those are my reasons. What's your end game? be in there buying every last BTC I can afford |
|
|
|
US investors are... lurking in the wings.  Even if this is true, this is the number one reason, Bitcoin will fail as a currency. Average people need to buy it and spend it. Investors just pumping the price up means nothing toward usefulness. It's a temporary and artificial valuation. no they don't the average person hold the least wealth, the wealth is held by the few |
|
|
|
The scene with Matthew McConaughey at the table from The Wolf of Wall Street comes to mind when reading some of these posts.
It's all a fugazi, you know what a fugazi is?
Nothing is real until you cash out, or spend the Bitcoins, right?
um, no, you see its not like that, not the cash out part. See the "Wolf of Wall Street" had no choice he did not have access to BTC so had to be in the fiat pool. The pool is closed. Bitcoin becomes a harder currency than fiat, the point is you "don't cash out" of BTC, Society cash's out of FIAT . Eventually like with email from post. BTC / CC's will become the way business is done and payments are made. Nothing is real until you cash out of old cash and into new cash BTC BTC = cash/wealth 2.0 no gov can confiscate, tax it, stop you sending, tell you have it, sieze it, inflate it. sure you can choose to self report in/ to various jurisdictions that say you have to and be taxed etc. But you don't have to and they have no way of making you. BTC and maths is jurisdiction agnostic & government agnostic |
|
|
|
Uptrend starts today or tomorrow, from there to 10 000$
Where do you come up with this? Bitcoin has been in a steady downtrend for 3 months now. I love bitcoin and I hope it works, but the prices are still only where they are because of rampant speculation. This market can still drop quite a bit before it starts heading back up again. I don't disagree with this excepting, speculation. Speculation is not bad, nor does it inflate price. I'm not sure their is any activity that is not speculation. |
|
|
|
|
The best recommendation yet is that CNY and other Governments try to tax or ban BTC. Think of CNY as the merely some one with extra Loud FUD capabilities. BTC is going to hit 10K then 100K and so many now will be buying back in much higher than they sold. Their Paper money systems are inflating out existence any wealth in them, as well as ever increasing taxation.
It amazes me that so many are so easily led, no wonder GOV's have maintained their foot stamping on your face for so long.
You have been handed the invisible shotgun to blow that foot clean off, but no you say please Sir, stamp a bit more.
The Chinese govt officials will be buying BTC like there is no tomorrow. How else can they get themselves a sizable amount of BTC without pushing the market way up. [Well I am sure there will be a few seizures ala. US]
I'm not sure the CNY Govt will survive the common people's wrath when they see they were locked out of the largest wealth transfer ever.
|
|
|
|
So why is the hashpower still rising?
Do the miners know something we don't?
chinese gov joined the mining game. |
|
|
|
|
what....you don't see how powerful BTC is that's it got the world powers running scared. The more Govs try to ban, hinder and tax BTC the brighter BTC's future and the more GOVs consign themselves to irrelevance.
and they can't ban BTC. Also there will be plenty of Chinese GOV officials buy BTC. Think of them as extra loud FUD.
|
|
|
|
|
...If the IRS calls BTC property, but FINCEN requires licensing for transmission, can both be held legally
I think maybe they can as courts love legal fictions, and may find that IRS & FINCEN has the power to make certain attribution of properties to BTC for the purposes of thier function under various acts.
Still it seem the two definitions are somewhat at logger heads with each other. It would be some serious grounds to raise in court a ruling that says BTC is property so I don't need a FINCEN license as I was disposing of it as property and taxed accordingly. OR turn around to the IRS and say I was using it as currency or similar under the FINCEN money transmitting rules so at that time, it was not used as property.
Any comments?
There may quite a bit of intergovernmental fighting about BTC and CC's as each dept wants to get its advantage, eg tax/control it somehow, but this will be at the expense of other agencies. In fact this maybe something that causes BTC to overtake regulation attempt or stem govt intervention as they will end up fighting themselves for years internally.
On of the aspect of BTC is that its a little like looking at a 4d object from 3d space, it looks fundamentally different from where you stand.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
