Would a miner be able to sell bitcoins that he/she mined for gold/silver and not be considered a money transmitter?
Shameless plug: we have the lowest premium silver pieces available for bitcoin. (closest to bullion spot price) And unlike American Eagles, not governed by CFTC so not considered required reporting to IRS. http://www.coinworld.com/Articles/ViewArticle/what-coins-are-reportable(Not to be construed as tax advice) |
|
|
|
Is there a precedent for the victims being able to recoup any of their money during these sorts of things?
Yes, if there is anything left it goes to victims. There is also precedent for clawing back payments he made to insiders/friends to re-compensate victims. To the extent that evidence in the block chain can assist justice for the victims, this case can highlight the transparency aspects of Bitcoin as well as the anonymity. |
|
|
|
In today's age, with existing technology, I'm against the draft.
Instituting a draft is the quickest way to end a war. A democratic population will stop the war when folks have to fight against their will. just an observation, not advocating either way. |
|
|
|
This is why the price has been raised in addition to limited supply of them to be in circulation ever.
I suspect that none of these will ever be circulated. They are more collector pieces, and not so much for pocket change. |
|
|
|
So, when someone claims that modern fiat is "backed by the legislation of the issuer", or "backed by state coercion", these are false statements. Redeeming the equivalent quantity of legislation or coercion in exchange for your fiat is also a physical/logical impossibility. Does any modern state run a redeemable fiat system these days?
No, none are backed by anything more than debt (full faith and credit). The US$ was the last and ended with Nixon. Arguably there are some nations that could... maybe... http://www.businessinsider.com/are-there-any-currencies-backed-by-gold-2012-3But BASEL III takes us further away rather than closer. (It classifies the best risk-free asset as other countries money and reduces the ranking of physical assets) |
|
|
|
Do they have the right to fail themselves? Is that what you're asking? Why don't you ask yourself that question and provide the answer?
If the metric of "fail themselves" is disagreement with you, then yes, they have the right to disagree with you, and "fail themselves". And where does that leave them, in the end? Free? Civilized behavior does not arise magically. It arrives through sharing of knowledge and cooperation. There are better examples in this world. Or at least ideas which can be merged.
You do not seek to know them or cooperate with them, you seek to bend them to your will, and to tell them how to be. Yes, you could set a better example of civilisation. Your current example reeks of supercilious condemnation and dictatorial imperialism. How tiring. Are you sixteen, and carrying the torch of rebellion because you want a cause as bad as you want to lose your virginity? That's how you sound, honestly. You have no interest in an improved society. You just want to cry out how wronged you feel, as you bask in amenities realized by your government while others have less. And yet you deny what could be, for you probably crave a fight, fantasizing about taking up arms with your fellow rebels, until half your face is blown off. Ew. This digression into your fantasies of the sexual desires of your imagined 16yr old is very much out of place, especially with you ending your fantasy in such a bloody way. Seek therapy. Or Self reflection. Consider that you are looking to influence a foreign group that disagree with your version of the ideal homogeneous authoritarian submission. You picked this fight, no one is trying to convince you to change, so long as you can contain your personal perversity to the consenting. |
|
|
|
Do they have the right to fail themselves? Is that what you're asking? Why don't you ask yourself that question and provide the answer?
If the metric of "fail themselves" is disagreement with you, then yes, they have the right to disagree with you, and "fail themselves". And where does that leave them, in the end? Free? Civilized behavior does not arise magically. It arrives through sharing of knowledge and cooperation. There are better examples in this world. Or at least ideas which can be merged.
You do not seek to know them or cooperate with them, you seek to bend them to your will, and to tell them how to be. Yes, you could set a better example of civilisation. Your current example reeks of supercilious condemnation and dictatorial imperialism. |
|
|
|
Do they have the right to fail themselves? Is that what you're asking? Why don't you ask yourself that question and provide the answer?
If the metric of "fail themselves" is disagreement with you, then yes, they have the right to disagree with you, and "fail themselves". |
|
|
|
Well, there's at least half a dozen suggestion in this thread, and I'm inclined to agree with most of them. So, Bitcoin has a multitude of backings:
- Market value (supply v.s. demand)
- Utility/Acceptance
- Design
- Infrastructure
- The most common commodity that it is used to purchase (the consensus appears to be marijuana, but that's just a straw poll!)
Sounds like some fairly powerful winds in our sails! Just need to improve the utility/acceptance factor that little bit more...
These are all examples of elements supporting bitcoin value, none of these are backing. Backing is for redeemable currencies. If a currency is a promise from an institution that issued it, that the institution would give the holder of the currency a specific amount of a specific good from the institution's stockpile, then it is redeemable, and backed by that quantity of goods. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the info. All that tells me, though, is that things are much more complicated.
I wish there was some comparable set of data/countries/regions where cultures were the same, and guns were the only difference. I thought maybe Canada and US (both have similar gun restrictions, but vastly different crime rates), but even that isn't very adequate.
Things are complicated. But maybe, just maybe, you could let go of your insistence that guns are great for a moment, and realize that maybe the numbers are telling you something. If I put a gun in one room, and no guns in the other, step out, and close the door, the number of crimes in that room will be the same: 0. I didn't know that Switzerland had strict gun regulations for instance, and always believed that Switzerland has few, even requiring almost everyone to have a gun. The main variable, though, is people, and whatever that involves. Sure, guns make it easier to kill from a distance, but they also make it easier to stop others from killing. And that's why I was hoping that there was some set of data to compare things to, where the culture isn't much of a variable. Obviously the culture in USA is total shit in some places, especially compared to Europe, and in Japan it's even more respectful of others than in Europe. I wouldn't be surprised that, if we were to give a gun to every single person in Japan, their murder and crime rate would still be lower than in places in US where guns are totally banned. Likewise, how can you tell is banning guns is due to cultural reaction to mitigate violence, or if it's cultural agreement that is simply an extension of an already non-violent culture? The Australia experiment might show something as it controls for "people and culture", over the last 15 years. Australia passed the National Firearms Agreement, banning all semiautomatic rifles and semiautomatic and pump-action shotguns and imposing a more restrictive licensing system on other firearms. The government also launched a forced buyback scheme to remove thousands of firearms from private hands. Between Oct. 1, 1996, and Sept. 30, 1997, the government purchased and destroyed more than 631,000 of the banned guns at a cost of $500 million. the Brookings Institution, found homicides "continued a modest decline" since 1997. They concluded that the impact of the National Firearms Agreement was "relatively small," with the daily rate of firearms homicides declining 3.2%. According to their study, the use of handguns rather than long guns (rifles and shotguns) went up sharply, but only one out of 117 gun homicides in the two years following the 1996 National Firearms Agreement used a registered gun. Suicides with firearms went down but suicides by other means went up. They reported "a modest reduction in the severity" of massacres (four or more indiscriminate homicides) in the five years since the government weapons buyback. These involved knives, gas and arson rather than firearms. In 2008, the Australian Institute of Criminology reported a decrease of 9% in homicides and a one-third decrease in armed robbery since the 1990s, but an increase of over 40% in assaults and 20% in sexual assaults. ... "Gun violence" went down, but "violent crime" went up more. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html |
|
|
|
I was hinting at the Patriots Act, Protect America Act and what have you not by now, stripping the American populace of basic rights.
But Kluge raises an important point, where were the protests when all that shit went down?
Where? All over. There was a very vocal minority of protests. https://www.google.com/search?q=protest+patriot+act&tbm=ischThe Vietnam war protests were also a vocal minority. Post Snowden? who knows... |
|
|
|
...
Fractional reserve is a confidence game. Why else do banks build such impressive structures? They want your confidence. I'm not saying it can't be done, or even that you can't do it. If it will work anywhere, it will probably work in a high-trust society like USA.
Are you saying that my Bitcoin fractional reserve lending is no better than the fiat lending we know & love? I agree. All i wanted to show is fractional reserve lending could be done without inflationary currency -- what did you think i was trying to prove?  I just want to see your magic trick. I have x bitcoins. I issue you & 10 other people letters of credit for x/9. Magic.  We both know how the trick is performed long before we started this dialog, it was done with gold (inflationary only in geologic time). So don't need proof, just a performance. Show me the rubes that will sign on for accepting the debt (!bitcoin) of fractional reserve lending of Bitcoin, as a payment for something. I'm sure they are out there, it is a ancient and brilliant con. I want to meet these marks, these rubes, and to see you do the trick. I am also curious to discover what they think after they learn the secret of the trick. When the illusion is revealed and they realize that the emperor never had any clothes, nor do any of the other emperors, and they aren't wearing much themselves either. When their exposure is exposed, they just may want to buy some of my bitcoins, or my precious metals (but I won't be taking any of their !bitcoin for that). Or if it is too much work, just point me to someone else that is doing it, and I can have my fun. |
|
|
|
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.
You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard? We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies! As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint: when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?) The trick you will have to solve in order to have this paragraph make sense, is how to get someone to accept a fractionally reserve borrowed "~bitcoin" as payment. I have x bitcoins. I issue you & 10 other people letters of credit for x/9. Magic. OK, next you are going to have to solve the problem of how to get someone to accept a letter of credit for Bitcoin. Or in other words, the same thing I wrote in the last challenge to this scheme. You've done no magic yet. It is ~bitcoin, or !bitcoin if you prefer... Who accepts it? The same person who accepts anything more interesting than a pawnshop/payday loan. Unless you're used to asking for your loans in used, nonsequential twenties, you're familiar with one piece of paper representing another. Edit: Think "line of credit." If it seems inconceivable to you, figure out how the fractional reserve system come into being -- there's no need to "print" all the monyz you lend Edit2 (tangent): I will also issue Crumblets, paper promissory notes denominated in bitcoins. As tangible currency, requiring no internet access or gizmos, this folding money will become more popular than Bitcoin itself. Paper is paper. The old game is not the new game, we're talking bitcoin crypto-currency, so you need to improve your trick. So you don't know anyone who would either take the bait either? And now you want me to do this magic trick for you? I am well aware of how the fractional reserve system came into being. The problems which were solved by the creation of fractional reserve (carrying heavy gold and silver from place to place) are not problems of bitcoin, it moves faster than most cash equivalents and is lighter than a feather. To perform your magic trick, you are going to have to find "marks" and "patsys" with whom to trade your "letters of credit" !bitcoins. The trick will be on those that accept !bitcoins for payment for anything rather than asking for bitcoins. I may have a few bridges to sell to your customers, but I am not going to be accepting the !bitcoins for them. But hey, you are so confidant in this scheme, maybe you are that patsy? Would you like to buy an online wallet account that has !bitcoin in it for the privilege paying interest on it in bitcoin? I have been told the seller promises that they won't sell the bitcoin backing it to more than 10 other people and that they won't take the bitcoins out of it suddenly. It is just as good as bitcoin, really it is.  We can call it !ripple if you like. If you are going to do this scam, you are going to need a bunch of shills who are going to offer to accept your !bitcoin from your mark after the mark gets !bitcoin from you. Fractional reserve is a confidence game. Why else do banks build such impressive structures? They want your confidence. I'm not saying it can't be done, or even that you can't do it. If it will work anywhere, it will probably work in a high-trust society like USA. We are way off the topic of MtGox walls. My apologies to the rest, if anyone objects, we'll start a fractional reserve bitcoin thread in a more appropriate place. |
|
|
|
Someone need to put a coin up for sale on eBay so we can see how much the 1st batch pure silver coins can fetch. I would guess $200+ for sure.
Probably just standard retail considering they're still available (correct me if I'm wrong on that though). You can only get 2, so I probably would order one with a slight premium if it was possible Also, payment is only in BTC/LTC and some people really have no clue or don't want to do this. Wonders me however who would buy a physical Litecoin if they don't own LTC  Coin collectors. You might be surprised how many. |
|
|
|
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.
You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard? We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies! As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint: when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?) The trick you will have to solve in order to have this paragraph make sense, is how to get someone to accept a fractionally reserve borrowed "~bitcoin" as payment. I have x bitcoins. I issue you & 10 other people letters of credit for x/9. Magic. OK, next you are going to have to solve the problem of how to get someone to accept a letter of credit for Bitcoin. Or in other words, the same thing I wrote in the last challenge to this scheme. You've done no magic yet. It is ~bitcoin, or !bitcoin if you prefer... Who accepts it? |
|
|
|
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.
You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard? We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies! As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint: when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?) The trick you will have to solve in order to have this paragraph make sense, is how to get someone to accept a fractionally reserve borrowed "~bitcoin" as payment. |
|
|
|
|
It is still too early. Need more cross-over geekdom for this still.
I went to last years BGG in TX, but will miss this year I suspect.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
