Has anarchism ever degenerated into totalitarian rule? The two examples of anarchist societies I can think of were toppled by external forces - by the Red Army in the Ukraine, and by the Spanish Communist Party and it's allies in Spain. Apologies if that was your point, it just seemed you were suggesting degeneration was a result of anarchism itself, rather than its opponents.
i don't know the examples you mention. I know of a few conscious attempts at anarchic communes going back to the middle ages, but all of them small and toppled by external forces. Anarchy on a larger scale often arises involuntarily after the collapse of a centralized government with a complex administrative infrastructure; and in that case it is often succeeded by a domestic tyranny. The French and Russian revolutions may be examples of the latter. I don't know of any example, anytime or anywhere, of an urbanized society that survived without government for more than a few months. (Although I gather that achaeologists have yet to find signs of a government at Çatal Höyök, "the very first city"). The past is not always a good indicator of the bananas (see what I did there  ) |
|
|
|
or 3) They get out maneuvered by Mark Zuckerberg , who just out of spite and with great timing and much fanfare launches an app that intergrates Bitcoin and pushes Bitcoin adoption more than anything to date, and the ETF is a flop in comparison.. Wasn't there an announcement, a month or so ago, of a facebook app that would allow tipping in a dozen cryptos, EXCLUDING bitcoin? and ? And nothing, but it could be a way of getting even, too. ahh got you! |
|
|
|
or 3) They get out maneuvered by Mark Zuckerberg , who just out of spite and with great timing and much fanfare launches an app that intergrates Bitcoin and pushes Bitcoin adoption more than anything to date, and the ETF is a flop in comparison.. Wasn't there an announcement, a month or so ago, of a facebook app that would allow tipping in a dozen cryptos, EXCLUDING bitcoin? and ? |
|
|
|
Monkey is bullish intraday, for at least 3 hours forward, considers 614 a significant bottom.
Monkey keeps flip-flopping on the daily scale, considers 444 support, 635 has some residual but declining resistance potential.
Monkey remains steadfastly bullish on weekly and longer scales.
Basically, monkey is stuck in the same posture lo the past couple of weeks, and could use some yoga or something.
 |
|
|
|
!! I see GIANT GREEN DILDOS EVERYWHERE!!!!
oh no scrap that I am in a supermarket and they are courgettes and cucumbers...
My bad ... sorry
grumble grumble
 ("If you watch this show.... and I hope you do") It must be a sign.... Colber' is god... (something about anselm's ontological argument (of which SC is somewhat of a fan) Therefore the pope fud is hereby null and void - and we must be going up. Still going short on Donkeys though |
|
|
|
Yes it is unleashing a huge stash of the Winklevoss' coins.. but NOT TO MARKET. Only to customers of the ETF. = No effect on the market.
Not until the sell all shares and need more coins to satisfy demand,, will we see an effect.
At least, that is my take on it anyway. I stand to be correct if wrong.
Guys and girls - this situation is going to resolve itself just like the situation in the 400s. We bounced around high to low and mid to low 400s for many weeks. Finally, there just were no more sellers. None. And once that happened, the bulls ran wild.
Well, that is what we are seeing again. No buying, but less and less selling. So unless sellers start selling more soon, then the selling will eventually slow to a crawl again. At that time, our only way forward will be up.
Now this could take another week or so or more - who knows - its all just "speculation" that we love.
But, me, I'm watching the sellers, not the buyers, for clues on how low this goes and where the local bottom really is. Yeah I think there are just too many bulls expecting a bubble, can't go up when everyone is a bull unless there is a huge influx of new people getting into bitcoin. That's going to happen eventually but not as fast as people are thinking. Some impatient buyers have already sold and I see the number of bears increase again which is positive because we need them as fuel for the price to go up. I don't expect a bubble any time soon but I do see 800-850 in the cards. there will be no bubble this summer. in september (or whenever etf gets approved) a steady bull run will start. it may lead into another bubble in q4. july and august will stay boring... Will the Winklevoss etf mean people are buying new bitcoin though? Won't they just be buying bitcoin the Winklevii bought years ago? (this sounds wrong but I'm too tired to work out why). I mean, where currently someone would have to buy bitcoin on an exchange, with the etf, they will be able to buy from via the etf (which doesn't have to buy any more coins). So the etf would have a negative effect on market demand (for the current markets) by this logic. i.e. essentially it is unleashing a huge supply of the Winklevoss coins. Let's think hard here. I mean REALLY stretch our brains. The Winklevoss have spent LOTS of time and money creating an ETF. Why did they do ths? Because if this ETF is anything like GLD, it could dramatically increase the price of BTC over a few years. So the Winklevoss could: 1. Sell their coins to ETF purchasers, which will leave the BTC exchange rate more or less unchanged and result in the Winklevoss owning no coins. At that point the BTC exchange rate will start rising but the Winklevoss will not benefit b/c they own no coins. 2. Keep their coins, forcing ETF purchases to eventually hit the open market pushing up the BTC exchange rate and making their stash much more valuable. Hmm... which will it be?  or 3) They get out maneuvered by Mark Zuckerberg , who just out of spite and with great timing and much fanfare launches an app that intergrates Bitcoin and pushes Bitcoin adoption more than anything to date, and the ETF is a flop in comparison.. n.b - I am joking Would be funny though... If I were MZ I would do it just for kicks |
|
|
|
 !! I see GIANT GREEN DILDOS EVERYWHERE!!!! oh no scrap that I am in a supermarket and they are courgettes and cucumbers... My bad ... sorry grumble grumble |
|
|
|
Would not surprise me if we go down to 614 - I will be paying attention if we go towards/past the 609 fib/SMA20
I am bullish from a daily, and even ore so on a weekly/monthly point of view though, not so sure on lower timeframes
Low volume.
Monkey? Is that you? How did you....nah. |
|
|
|
First we waited for the downtrend to end. Then we waited for the rally to start, according to the calendar.  Then we were waiting for the auction. What are we waiting for now?  A train  |
|
|
|
if you mark the last local top with a 3 you're implying the price is going down right?
We have already come down a little so I guess it depends where the minor wave ends  646/52 637 632 P 623 614 609 600 We have touched the top of a slightly narrowing bollinger band and come down Would not surprise me if we go down to 614 - I will be paying attention if we go towards/past the 609 fib/SMA20 I am bullish from a daily, and even ore so on a weekly/monthly point of view though, not so sure on lower timeframes Low volume. "down" to 614. I would call that flat. You were asking what I thought was going to happen in next count from the top of the minor count 3 at 656 ish I do not know for sure and I am not claiming I do.... but that was the pivot 623 (or faint redline - 622.9 on earlier graph) and those are the next support levels as far as 600 and res levels up to 650 as I see them, and 614 was next on the list which is why I commented on it. I see major support 540 and 435 The other way I think if we break 650-670 on any decent volume then we are a go... |
|
|
|
if you mark the last local top with a 3 you're implying the price is going down right?
We have already come down a little so I guess it depends where the minor wave ends RS 646/52 637 632 623 614 609 600 SP We have touched the top of a slightly narrowing bollinger band and come down Would not surprise me if we go down to 614 - I will be paying attention if we go towards/past the 609 fib/SMA20 I am bullish from a daily, and even ore so on a weekly/monthly point of view though, not so sure on lower timeframes Low volume. |
|
|
|
chart
Very interesting - whose chart it is on TV? One of mine but - I do not publish my charts on tradingview though normally.. or here |
|
|
|
Spot on comment
Just to pick a nit, something Much like the internet Bitcoin will become a completely different thing politically, socially, economically. The goal of bitcoin as a technology is to be a global network allowing p2p payments between pseudonymous arbitrary parties without a trusted intermediary and without a central controlling authority. Take away any of those goals, and the solution described by "Satoshi" does not make any technical sense. But I don't see how it possible to achieve those goals, without also
allowing payments that governments ( and banks, which can be conflated with them) can see cannot see, but not block, divert, or undo. And that seems to be the conclusion of a fair few bitcoin supporters, too. FTFY |
|
|
|
What do you think crypto is intended to do? and by whom?
Cryptocurrencies are meant to allow payments that governments (and banks, which can be conflated with them) cannot see, block, divert, or undo. That is not explicit in Satoshi's paper, but seems to have been a basic assumption by most of the crypto fans, especially the most ardent ones. (Reducing credit card fees is not something that would get people that excited about, is it?). Most cryptocoins seem to be designed and supported with that goal in mind. Some bitcoiners are even adopting other coins because they do not see bitcoin as sufficiently robust in that regard. Few coins, if any (Ripple perhaps? I don't know about it) are designed to allow the same level of control that governments now have on bank transfers. it looks like some connections to the central banks get it: http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/pboc-official-sovereignty-bitcoin-internet-age-will-change-china-around-world/2014/07/07 Bitcoin is not about facilitating illicit activities, it’s about subverting them. Ireland central bank official warns virtual currencies ‘can challenge sovereignty of states’ http://www.pfhub.com/ireland-central-bank-official-warns-virtual-currencies-can-challenge-sovereignty-of-states-909/This just made me think of this..... http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/inside-anglo-the-secret-recordings-29366837.html
http://youtu.be/8pJ_b_zN5nk" Mr Bowe is asked by Mr Fitzgerald how they had come up with the figure of €7bn. He laughs as he is taped saying: "Just, as Drummer (then-CEO David Drumm) would say, 'picked it out of my arse'." " |
|
|
|
The truth is if the US decides to be hostile towards BTC, most other countries would follow for fear of economic sanctions etc. This may not be true in the future, but it is the reality today.
Now say you want to purchase a car, a house etc with your wealth stored in BTC. What incentive does the merchant have to accept your illegal BTC instead of legal USD? Maybe you can persuade him by paying more... What benefit does BTC offer him over USD for him to risk confiscation, prison etc?
Truth is they won't decide to. |
|
|
|
What do you think crypto is intended to do? and by whom?
Cryptocurrencies are meant to allow payments that governments (and banks, which can be conflated with them) cannot see, block, divert, or undo. That is not explicit in Satoshi's paper, but seems to have been a basic assumption by most of the crypto fans, especially the most ardent ones. (Reducing credit card fees is not something that would get people that excited about, is it?). Most cryptocoins seem to be designed and supported with that goal in mind. Some bitcoiners are even adopting other coins because they do not see bitcoin as sufficiently robust in that regard. Few coins, if any (Ripple perhaps? I don't know about it) are designed to allow the same level of control that governments now have on bank transfers. facepalm... you walked straight into that one.  |
|
|
|
|
I do not think there will be a war even... I think that they will figure how to leverage it for their own means... looks to me like it is being embraced...sure there are concerns... but recently russia even on the U turn, and China both stating that there is a place for crypto.... California and UK and Isle of man , all seem quite gun-ho, Switzerland neutral , there is a surprise.
By Jorge's logic the government would ban the internet.... think of the massive security threat that the internet is to the governments... and an aid in all sorts of terrorism, crime, child porn, money laundering, anti government movements, 3d printed weapons etc etc.. but basically it is not going to happen... the internet is not going to get banned, and it never was going to be , because it is technologically superior to what came before it (telephones and faxes and televisions, books) and because it is highly beneficial to society, and because the genie is out of the bottle.. it brings more good to the table than bad.. but as we know the NSA et al have their mits all over it as much as they can... at many of the on ramps and off ramps..
The government are concerned, but not concerned enough to switch off the internet.
|
|
|
|
.
But the HSBC case went miles beyond the usual paper-pushing, keypad-punching sort-of crime, committed by geeks in ties, normally associated with Wall Street. In this case, the bank literally got away with murder – well, aiding and abetting it, anyway."
Apples and oranges. Would you really want to carry around a piece of paper worth millions of dollars?
Sigh, the standard knee-jerk responses... They miss the point. The point is not "I don't like bitcoin because it helps criminals" nor "XXX is better than bitcoin". The point is that governments will stamp out crypto, like they got rid of BSCs, if they perceive that crypto is actually going to do what it was intended to do. It is a big IF, Bitcoin does not make laundering money any easier... Also Bitcoin is merely a medium of exchange in the context of money laundering, the thing that is being laundered is the fiat £$, there are many methods of laundering money involving many different things gold, silver, contracts, shops, art, diamonds,real estate, to name but a few... and none of which are banned, or will be banned... the blockchain if anything makes money laundering on a large scale risky. Since BTC is pseudonymous not anonymous and there are on and off ramps for fiat, I suspect that is where the attention will be placed. What do you think crypto is intended to do? and by who? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
