RE: Huge Opportunity That Bitcoin Is Perfectly Suited For - When you start to look beyond the traditional constraints of the existing grid and fuel transportation networks you will find that Bitcoin is perhaps one of the best suited technologies to leverage abundant energy resources that are hiding in plain site. Rather than spoil it by elaborating too soon I am curious to know if any of you smart people know what I am referring to. Anyone?
This may or may not be what you are looking for, but one option would be to take advantage of variable electric prices that are present in some places of the country. For example, the price of electricity is cheaper at night when people are sleeping as this is generally an off peak period for electric usage. You could only run your miners during this time if it would be unprofitable to run it during the day. Another potential option would likely not be something that an individual could do, but rather a public policy that an individual could attempt to change - to try to get more nuclear energy to be provided to the electric grid. |
|
|
|
If you look at the paragraph above the one you quoted The Rule requires that when you advertise merchandise, you must have a reasonable basis for stating or implying that you can ship within a certain time. If you make no shipment statement, you must have a reasonable basis for believing that you can ship within 30 days. That is why direct marketers sometimes call this the "30-day Rule." It appears that the 30 day rule only goes into effect if no statement is made as to when the product would ship. Do you honestly believe it's legal that if you promise to ship "someday" you can hold customer funds forever and never give a refund? No it is not legal to hold customer funds "forever" however if there are legit delays in producing the product that is being sold then as far as I can tell then would be acceptable in the eyes of the law. |
|
|
|
It's people's ambitions. This is very true. Sometimes people get blind with ambition and it's never a bad idea to have different views collaborating
Right, those who have ambition to get all the BTC they could get no matter what is a threat. Well, now I don't know about that. Could you elaborate a bit? I mean those who will scam/steal or willing to do anything just to get BTC. This is a big threat to the bitcoin economy as people will be afraid to deal in bitcoin with others as they are afraid they are going to be scammed. |
|
|
|
I made one posting and I got a buyer for 100BTC in 24 hours.
Nice to get actual cash for bitcoin.
For real? I know that you are smooth trader. I've lurked and learned. Seriously though; you got a buyer on craigslist for 100BTC? Recently? Someone handed you $60someoddthousand for 100BTC off craigslist? I follow most of what you post and would like to know more about this. I would say that this kind of post (on Craigslist) should be approached with extreme caution. You should really never deal in that large of amounts with a stranger. yeah that sounds spotty.. i don't want to give that info out to strangers, could get robbed/kidnapped. it's like putting a target on your back. Craigslist is really designed for smaller trades (I would say less then $1,000) anything above that would probably be too dangerous to be dealing with someone you don't know. Oh, no. I sell cars on CL all the time. Once sold a Rolls-Royce on CL for over USD $20K with no problems. Cars might be the exception to this rule as there are generally paper trails for both the buyer and seller if something were to go wrong, and if the buyer's check bounced for example then you could simply report the car as being stolen (as it would be). For things like jewelry, sports tickets, or other valuables it would be much more risky as these types of things are much harder to trace. |
|
|
|
I am guessing that the hacker is now watching this topic also - he should be advised to make sure he sends the rest of the funds he promised to send ASAP.
Most of us do not see any good reason for 36 days and so it would be in his best interests to make good on this as quickly as possible.
36 days time has been taken for a reason. He'll now mix the other coins using other mixers or alt coins. But as Klee has declared he is happy with 462 coins, no one will freeze his fund or trace him. He'll get enough time to cover his traces with multiple mixing. It shows again, we were close... very close. One complaint against Bitmixer could hunt him down... because, I firmly believe, he has accepted coins in a previously used address, where his identity is attached on some forum on the web. Even if the output address was not attached to his identity, if bitmixer were to give up the output address, it would effectively make mixing coins useless and would never be able to actually cash out. |
|
|
|
Most bitcoin wallets are open source. This means that anyone is able to inspect the code of the wallet to ensure that these types of attacks could not happen.
Even if the code itself is open source, what guarantees me that the build I'm getting was not compiled from a modified source which will take coins away? Especially on phone apps. I have no way to prove that the source code matches the app I see on Google Play or App Store? This is why I would rely only on a PGP signature. In theory, it can only be generated by the owner of the corresponding private key. So if you trust the developer (of say, Multibit or Electrum), the signature verifies the integrity of the file and shows that the key owner vouches for the file contents. That's pretty much as good as it gets. This is an important step to take if you truly want to be paranoid about your wallet. This would only prevent an attack if an attacker was able to get control over the domain, but not the dev's private PGP key, and the public PGP key is found somewhere outside of the domain. If a user finds the dev's public PGP key on the same website/domain that they are downloading the file from then the attacker could simply change the PGP key listed and sign a message saying that their (malicious) download is the most up to date and correct one. |
|
|
|
I made one posting and I got a buyer for 100BTC in 24 hours.
Nice to get actual cash for bitcoin.
For real? I know that you are smooth trader. I've lurked and learned. Seriously though; you got a buyer on craigslist for 100BTC? Recently? Someone handed you $60someoddthousand for 100BTC off craigslist? I follow most of what you post and would like to know more about this. I would say that this kind of post (on Craigslist) should be approached with extreme caution. You should really never deal in that large of amounts with a stranger. yeah that sounds spotty.. i don't want to give that info out to strangers, could get robbed/kidnapped. it's like putting a target on your back. Craigslist is really designed for smaller trades (I would say less then $1,000) anything above that would probably be too dangerous to be dealing with someone you don't know. |
|
|
|
The BTC has already been through a mixer (as was noted by the mixer service in Klee's topic) and supposedly all records that could have traced the mixing have already been deleted (so there is no way that they can trace the hacker without at least losing their credibility as a mixing service).
I do think that the stuff about having 36 days to return the 462 BTC amount doesn't look very legit (i.e. the hacker gains 1 month to "disappear to another country").
I would speculate that it would give him time to further mix the coins and let enough time for the logs on the mixing services to be deleted. If Klee was still looking for the thief then the mixing services may wish to retain the logs and give them to klee so the thief's identity could be discovered. If klee is openly saying that he has no further claim against the thief then the mixing services would have no reason to retain logs |
|
|
|
No its quite simple. Can it be done as simply as bitcoin, or cash actually yes if its in coin form. Gold has a fixed weight and a coin fixed dimensions so you have two elements of the equation to prove absolutely you have your gold there. What they used to do (obviously we stopped using coins of actual worth) is use fixed scales. So you put a gold coin into a set trap, it will only fit this coin regulated dimensions and then it has to equal perfectly the weight. Gold is a unique element so its really not possible to fake both weight and dimensions, so this quick test works and yes gold has worth as a transactional secure monetary thing!
To make sure you have authentic gold, you have to use dangerous acids and drill the material too. Alternatively you have to buy expensive gold testing equipment. Mind, I do value gold and other metals (that's why I have some), but it is useless unless there is a catastrophe rendering infrastructure not functioning. Neither of these ways allow you to cheaply and quickly verify that you are in fact dealing with gold. |
|
|
|
Considering the similarities between gold and Bitcoin, many expect Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies to take some of the market share of gold and other precious metals due to its superiority in ease of transport and a more convenient means of transfer. This new rush of gold companies into Bitcoin seems to validate these views. Leading to more professional companies taking over less secure, less organized, and worse managed bitcoin companies that dominated the early years of Bitcoin, paving the way for institutional and retail investors, as well as enticing further the ordinary man, to invest in Bitcoin. Most important and enlightening part of the article. Bring on the ETFs, the Gold Bugs, companies offering discounts for using Bitcoin and whatever else = market cap going^ I strongly agree! If bitcoin can take any meaningful amount of market share away from gold then it's price will go up, creating more interest in bitcoin, causing more merchants to wish to accept bitcoin, causing more people to start using bitcoin to purchase things. Sure, if bitcoin takes meaningful market share from any liquid market, it's price will rocket. But I don't quite understand how gold and bitcoin are similar. Is this just based on limited supply? They are similar in that they both are a hedge against inflation and both have some level of use that it can provide. |
|
|
|
Stability doesn't have anything to do with market cap, but the distribution of coins.
If the market cap is 1 trillion, but there are still whales with considerable amount of btc then they will be able to crash the markets.
I wouldn't say it doesn't have anything to do with market cap, but that both things are issues related to stability. The larger the market cap the more money it's going to take to move the market on a day to day basis. But yes, someone who holds a large percentage of coins will have the ability to crash the market in most cases unless the buy support is incredibly large. As the market cap increases, the large holders of bitcoin who were early adopters will have a greater chance of selling some of their holdings, making it so after the sale they would be able to have less of an impact on the price. |
|
|
|
But deposit accounts aren't necessary for bank to create credit. Savers aren't required for capital
Banks use the money that depositors have in their accounts to lend to borrowers. Banks need to keep a little bit of their own money (capital) on hand to protect their depositors in the event that they lose money on some of their loans. If banks solely used their capital to lend money then the amount they would earn would be small and not worth it for banks to lend (they need to use leverage in order for the loan to make sense to them). Banks needs both capital and money from depositors in order to lend money. You forgot about how modern banking system works. Nowadays loans create deposits, not the other way around. It means that the bank lends money (just creates it electronically) and puts it in a borrower's account, and then (usually at the end of the day) corrects its reserve balances. Without understanding these operational principles one cannot understand the whole monetary system. When banks loan money to companies the company does not need to deposit the funds from the loan at the same bank, the funds end up in the banking system, not the lending bank. |
|
|
|
This is technically true, however in order for this to materialize there needs to be demand for such loans, which there is not.
Precisely. Which is why we have not seen the hyper inflation in the US that many have predicted. Edit: This leads to my original point. Without an inflationary collapse of USD to save gold and other PMs, bitcoin could easily devastate the gold and other PM markets. Bitcoin could compete with other precious metals, but would not necessarily devastate them. Bitcoin like other PMs have their own uses which partially backs their value. |
|
|
|
As BTC are not consumed for direct use value (like gold or any other commodity) there is no risk of a deflation caused by an sudden increase of direct use value of the commodity.
The same pertains to pure fiat (not backed by anything). Actually, that was one of the reasons it came into existence and got universal acceptance (exclusion of externalities, such as finding a gold asteroid, for example). The correlation isn't as strong as it used to be when fiat was backed by gold, but I think that fiat is still essentially backed by the production capacity and assets of a country. That's more of an abstract concept, but the strength of a currency is generally based on the strength its country's economy, factoring in things like amount of debt, the ability to repay debt, trust in the country/currency, etc. Fiat like USD doesn't need to be backed by anything. Its legal tender so by law you have to pay your taxes in fiat. Its the only acceptable form of payment. The amount of taxes are correlated to GDP so you are correct. The price (compared to other currencies) fluctuate on economics Because its mandated that people have to pay taxes w fiat, the demand is always there. This guaranteed demand is what makes USD stable. As long as US economy is stable The US dollar is backed by the US economy. Which is why I invested in bitcoin  Bitcoin is very similar to the US Dollar, but instead of being backed by the US economy, bitcoin is backed by the bitcoin network aka the miners. |
|
|
|
From the Checkout page on the BFL website: accept the terms of the sale outlined on the product page and understand that all sales are final. This is a pre-order. Production and delivery of my order may take 3 months or more. Please note the "or more" part of the terms. As much as I dislike BFL and think that it is a horrible idea to pay for preorders as BFL's customers do, it appears that they are at least somewhat covered by not giving a hard upper bound timeframe as to when the machines will be ready and delivered. Fortunately there are laws against such tactics. It is not legal to never deliver a product nor a refund. http://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus02-business-guide-mail-and-telephone-order-merchandise-ruleIf, after taking the customer’s order, you learn that you cannot ship within the time you stated or within 30 days, you must seek the customer’s consent to the delayed shipment. If you cannot obtain the customer’s consent to the delay -- either because it is not a situation in which you are permitted to treat the customer’s silence as consent and the customer has not expressly consented to the delay, or because the customer has expressly refused to consent -- you must, without being asked, promptly refund all the money the customer paid you for the unshipped merchandise.
"or more" is not a certain time frame, and thus the 30-day rule comes into effect. If you look at the paragraph above the one you quoted The Rule requires that when you advertise merchandise, you must have a reasonable basis for stating or implying that you can ship within a certain time. If you make no shipment statement, you must have a reasonable basis for believing that you can ship within 30 days. That is why direct marketers sometimes call this the "30-day Rule." It appears that the 30 day rule only goes into effect if no statement is made as to when the product would ship. I do not at all advocate for what BFL has done but I think they are covered here. They have had massive delays before without legal consequence. If they were not covered by their disclaimer then the FTC would be all over them for their previous and current delays. |
|
|
|
The palistines are keeping their army mixed in with civilians forcing collateral damage when Israel tries to defend itself.
for the UN Gaza still an Egyptian territory, so hamas is not an army but a terrorist militia... Regardless of how you define hamas they are still mixing their "fighters" and weapons in with the civilian population. |
|
|
|
US ‘kidnaps’ Russian MP’s son to ‘exchange him for Snowden’http://rt.com/news/171188-russian-hacker-kidnapped-america/The US “kidnapped” the son of a Russian MP, possibly to exchange him for Edward Snowden, the father charged. The man was indicted with computer-related crimes by a Washington DC court and snatched from the Maldives.
Roman Seleznyov was detained on Saturday at Male international airport as he was returning to Russia, the Russian foreign ministry said on Tuesday in a statement. He was forced by agents of the US Secret Service to board a private plane to Guam to be later arrested, a move which the ministry called “a de-facto kidnapping.” Man the Americans think up the weirdest stuff I'll kidnap this guy and ask for a ransom What ever happened to we don't deal with terrorists but we will use their playbook when it is convenient to us. I call BS on this story. This is something that the likes of CNN would have reported on by now if it was true. LOL CNN. Seriously? People like you still exist? CNN may have political spin to their stories, but they have a lot of resources to be able to break news, and have a reputation to maintain so they will not report something that is outright false. |
|
|
|
Regardless, one participant did purchase all ~30k coins in the most recent auction without any major disruption to the market. The price did fall prior to the auction, however this was driven by speculators.
And even the 140k isnt that much. Well, at least compared to 650k still missing from Gox. So basicly like 5% of the coins in the hands of one crook or gang. How come there is no news on those? With log files and block chains you would expect some news by now. The lost gox coins, if it is true that they were lost with malleability then were lost to many of gox's customers over a long period of time, and it is likely that most of them were lost years ago when bitcoin was sub $5 per BTC. |
|
|
|
I think the FED uses the term "sequestered". They are expanding the money supply, but basically only banks get access to it.
The banks get the expanded money supply that is supplied by the Fed. The hope is that banks will increase lending so that more people will borrow money, stimulating the economy. Then why in the name of Timothy Geithner do they bribe the banks to deposit the funds in the Fed rather than releasing them out into the economy If you are asking about Geithner. What he did was use the Fed to finance JP Morgans acquisition of Bear Stearns, AIG bailout, and TARP. He wanted to avoid a stock market cra I thought you were talking about QE in the op The name Timmothy Geithner was merelplaced there for emphasis. My question, without the unnecessary exclamation, was "Then why do they bribe the banks to deposit the funds in the Fed rather than releasing them out into the economy." The simple answer is they're not allowed to. Congress has to do that via deficit spending What? They're not allowed to do what? If they really wanted banks to lend more money, they could easily do QE, while not lowering mortgage-tied rates and not offering any interest on funds held in reserve. Lower bond rates, no incentive to deposit unless you can't find anyone to lend to, and higher mortgage rates to boot. The current choices for a bank are currently: APY of 0.25% completely liquid "risk free" on deposit. APY of 3.35% locked for 30 years "risk free" in bonds. APY of 4.2% locked for 30 years in mortgage. Keep in mind that there's also a repo rate of 0.05% just TO THE FED if I'm not mistaken, not to mention the fact that the federal funds rate is lower than the rate on excess reserves! Check this out. Now I found some stats showing that as of 2012, BofA had about 11% of its residential mortgages in a state of delinquency. Why would you ever offer a mortgage in this environment? Oh I misunderstood your question. I thought you were asking why doesn't the Fed inject the money directly into the real economy instead of doing it through QE But w QE operations. The main purpose is to swap securities (Bonds or MBS) for reserves. The Fed is receiving MBS as asset and bank receives as liabilty. Think of it as liquidity swap. The Fed is swapping a liquid asset for an illiquid one. Inflation didn't occur because no new net assets were created. There is a myth the QE is "money printing" but its not. And you are correct about mortgages. QE is supposed to incentivize banks to create loans. (Which is how M2 money is created). Sounds good in theory but in a recession environment, there's no demand for loans. When loans are made to buy houses, start businesses, etc. At that time we should see inflation and some recovery You're missing the point. There's plenty of demand for loans, there's no supply, because the fed has manipulated rates lower than equilibrium, making there less supply for loans than demand, actually reducing the volume of loans. Moreover, they make sure the equilibrium remains higher through the bribe rate. That's why almost 1/3rd of all mortgage applications are rejected. The demand for loans are not from high quality borrowers, the demand is from people who will likely default on their loan. By lowering interest rates the fed has artificially lowered the price of loans, making demand artificially higher then it otherwise would be. |
|
|
|
How do people use paypal so much? Really, what is the reason? They are f-ing people over constantly. Both with their fees (try to convert currencies as a merchant) and account frezing..
Lack of awareness of viable alternatives next to Visa with merchants that accept it for trade That is changing though with Bitcoin and more merchants adopting it but it will still take some time I think it is really more the lack of alternatives. Prior to bitcoin there really were not any alternatives and bitcoin is still relatively new to the P2P transaction marketplace |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
