Good, finally someone understand central banks' double spending game, let's see if someone could bring it to higher level. As claimed by Mike Maloney, this is unconstitutional

Preparing for the incoming fiat crash is one possibility, but I doubt if they really read the biggest scam in the history of mankind

Most of the companies more or less had met some limitation from banks, so bitcoin give them an alternative

A young man full of proud and hope in a top career, selected to end his life in such a horrible way, the only cause is woman 

Again the spirit of bitcoin shines: Trust a system instead of human

If lots of people were pushed to unemployment, and government don't provide them any kind of income, then they will form a small society and have their own economy, helping each other to produce food, cloth, housing etc...

Once they don't have any fiat money income, they will successfully get rid of the slavery of the existing fiat money system, they would start to use some community currency, bitcoin most likely

It just like kicking out Greece out of EU will make them stronger, I guess central banks would never allow that to happen

In fact the productivity is already enough high for most of the people to retire early, but due to the existance of money and exchange, this can not be done

Imagine an island with two people Bob and Alice. Bob is very smart and can produce 10 times more products per year than Alice. In today's monetary system, we suppose that Bob will earn 10 times more money than Alice (Money is used as a unit of value)

But that is simply not possible, because Bob's income can only come from his sale to Alice, and Alice have much less productivity thus much less income. As a result, Bob's income is limited by how much Alice can spend

The current solution is government charging heavy tax on Bob and give them to Alice so that she can buy more Bob's products. It also means that Alice get more income than her production, because of Bob's high productivity

Or, government take loan to run infrastructure projects, give Alice enough income to buy Bob's products

Anyway, the core of the problem is: High productivity people can not fully utilize their efficiency due to low demand from low productivity people. Unless they give up some of the productivity for free, there is no way to reach 20% employment

If Bob is not profit oriented, he can max out his production thus maximize the social wealth, but he won't have enough motivation to do so, since redistributing his products to Alice is more like a donation. Money is that motivation: If Bob can exchange all his production into money, he has some motivation to produce more, since money will store value and delay his consumption until a later time. Unfortunately, since Alice have little access to money, Bob can not make money by himself alone

Another thought: This imaginary concept (money is a standard unit of value) is unconsciously used by even the most famous economists throughout their works, all their formulas and calculations are based on this simple assumption, which is just a wishful thinking

Similarly, all the science is based on two unconsciously accepted prerequisites: Space and time. Without space and time, there is no science.

Without money, there is no economics. However, unlike space and time, which we can not remove as prerequisites for the world, money can be avoided. The true economy theory should not use the concept of money, that will make it much easier to see the truth behind all economy activities: Desire

True, automation require a lot of R&D, and when complexity raised above certain level, the cost will be higher than the gain. In a highly  complex system, a small bug will cause days of delay in automated system, which could trigger a chain of reaction.

But anyway that is the trend, maybe not 5%, but 20%, there should be a framework that can be adjusted based on how much labor is needed to re-allocate the resource to those redundant people. Current solution is printing lots of money to create lots of useless job just to make people get something to do, not a bad idea but far from efficient

That's an ideal situation, however, how much resource would allocate to you is the question. Based on today's model, government must heavily tax everyone who have some income to achieve a good welfare condition. Scandinavian countries for example have a tax rate of almost 50%. But with so high tax, companies will be reluctant to stay in the country and move the operation to other countries. Usually enterprises get the most income, they have many legal ways to avoid the tax. So the welfare condition purely depends on the income of the employees, which is constantly being outsourced to low cost countries

Bitfury or knc. When they dominate the efficiency war, they will be able to sell the hash rate by cloud based service

In free market, if the production cost of a coin is much lower than its exchange rate, then almost everyone will try to produce these coins and sell them, no one will buy. And true believer will not buy but mine. That is simple arbitraging, free money to take, people could constantly sink the exchange rate, and still make money on the way down. That happened during 2014

The cost consists of two parts: ASIC miners and space/electricity. Technology is cheap, material is cheap, once designed, ASIC miners can be produced in large scale with a very low cost, then the only thing that will prevent people from accumulating more and more ASIC miners is the difficulty and electricity cost

Once the mining cost is getting close to coin's market value, arbitraging will stop and more and more people will turn off their machine and buy bitcoins instead, this will increase the purchase support and decrease the sell pressure, make the exchange rate stable. So electricity cost basically decided bitcoin's exchange rate, and is also a good indicator for future bitcoin exchange rate

It can and it is on the right track

The world need one after another bubble to drive the economy forward. After IT bubble and Housing bubble, banks have run out of bubbles, they made a new bond bubble, which is not really working, since the majority of people are not participating in the bubble making

The bubble mechanism is to find something that everyone are interested, and provide loan for people to purchase them, drive up its price, and then the branch will have strong demand and create large amount of jobs, resulting in boom

After housing, the only thing people are interested is saving more money for early retirement. Bitcoin as a very promising long term saving medium, world currency, fits perfectly into the picture. With a bit of financing from banks, it will become the new bubble

The demand for house is limited, but the demand for money is unlimited, that will make the bitcoin bubble everlasting, solve the sustainability problem

The government is not some imaginary super power house, it consists of lots of normal people and most of them are not so clever. They must follow the procedure to auction forfeited assets. They simply don't understand the value in bitcoin and only after mainstream financial institutions join the game, they will start to take it more seriously

The blockchain design is flawless, electricity spent is not a waste but a must. It is a twisted view from today's fiat money system created this waste debate

Money is no different than any other well traded commodities like petroleum or electricity, in order to have value, it must have demand and limited supply and eventually the cost will decide its face value

It seems that fiat money is an exception: You don't need to waste any energy to create fiat money. But that's also the reason it should worth nothing. The reason fiat money still worth somthing is because its monopole: In order to give fiat money value, you must pass a law to make it the universal transaction medium in the country, and the cost to pass that law is a war

If war is not possible, then in a market of free currency competition, the currency that cost most to produce will have the most value: The cost is an indicator of public interest and the degree of competition

In free market, if a coin costs much lower than its face value, then almost everyone will try to produce these coins and sell them, until its face value get close to the cost

You can also implement a scheme like POS, preventing late comers to crash the price. But in free market, if the scheme unfairly benefit exiting holders, no one will join the game. Bitcoin does not unfairly benefit exiting holders, since every holder are exposed to large swings of exchange rate and have to take risk, many early adopters have sold their coins during a downfall just because they entered in a much higher price during a bubble

OP should file a Ruble scam claim to Putin

This kind of request typically comes from police, they traced some criminal activities and end up with this company's account. But tracing bitcoin is useless, as soon as they are sent to an exchange in another country, they will disappear, and police or tax authority have no rights over an exchange in another country

To be honest, there is such kind of possibility, due to now many speculative mining farm will blow up

Before, in GPU mining era, coins are distributed among millions of miners around the world, and most of them hold mined coin as a hobby or investment, so the market supply is very low and stable

But now, coins are concentrated on a group of industrial mining farms who want to make profit by mining bitcoin. These people are not the same as GPU bitcoin miners, their only target is to make fiat money profit, and bare a huge cost. They must sell coins constantly to deal with the cost, which makes the market supply higher than before. Finally, when it is no longer profitable, they will dump their operation at large scale and cause the hashrate to drop, this has not happened yet but might be on the way

Only when mining return to the hands of bitcoiners, the sell pressure on market would drop. And mining will be consolidated and move forward. Another way is a very mature cloud mining business model, which is not available yet

This is not a concern

Suppose each wallet holds 100 addresses, he need to create 200 wallets to hold those coins, and he must constantly check if those 100 addresses in a wallet is used up, difficult to maintain on multiple computers (I suppose that he set up a group of computers to simulate the P2P network), highly unlikely for a coin that worth nothing at that time. (I don't even remember where is the wallet of my first alt-coin which holds at least 400+ of those alt-coins, since they worth nothing during that year)

Even if he stored all those wallets, that is 1/21 of the total bitcoin money supply, it is still much less than banks holding of fiat money: 4/5 of the whole USD supply stored at FED and the scale keeps increasing through each QE. So still much better than banks today

If bitcoin is very successful, he will be holding billions or even trillions of dollars, no need to cash out any significant amount, he will have a large reserve that can be used to stabilize bitcoin exchange rate

If bitcoin is not successful, he can't cash out that amount of coin without being caught, and that will crash the price to cents, it does not make a lot of sense either. In fact, if he really want to cash out those coins, he can do it slowly, to make sure the price keeps going up due to reward halving every 4 years

It's amazing that they still have some time to care about bitcoin, and want to ban bitcoin accounts  

No, banks do not rob everyone through inflation, that is the old style. Now they rob everyone through QE, which is magnitudes larger than inflation. Take FED for example, they created 5x more money since 2008, that's 40 years of GDP increase at 4% per year. All that went into banker's pocket in 5 years, this scale of robbery was never seen in human history. By keeping those money in their pocket, they will easily avoid any kind of inflation

Similarly, ECB is going to use the same trick to rob whole European by 60 billion euro per month, all those money will belong to ECB. If Greece quit, other countries will be robbed, they might discover that the problem is not Greece, but a systematic one. So they must keep Greece in to cover the scheme and blame everything on PIGS countries

Greek people might understand these bank's scam much better than anyone else, so they go the same route as those banks, like those investment banks gambling with customer money and collapsing and asking for bailout, both opportunists

Actually many of today's employment have nothing to do with productivity, you employ people just to give them a job, although the same job can be done without them

In order to give people a job, it is important you have extra money to spare, so here fits the forever increasing national debt into the picture: Government borrow trillions of money to spend on construction projects and health care, creating lots of job

I have observed clearly how things developed during the latest 15 years, those high tech companies are continuously laying off workers and replace them with software or offshore workers, while those government aided branches get a boost. However, those works are typically welfare type of work, not market driven