It used to be hard, but now Dwolla - > MtGox is as easy as could be.
1. You have to trust MtGox and be willing to send money to them. (which is not the case for a lot of people according to reaction on twitter) 2. You have to understand that you need to go through Dwolla (which isn't so famous). (Have you seen the number of people on IRC which don't even figure out how to get their BTC back from mtgox?) 3. You have to trust Dwolla or be willing to have an account 4. You've to live in the US. That's a lot of requirements for something "easy as it could be" Trust will be required in any exchange. The rest of your points stand. |
|
|
|
It used to be hard, but now Dwolla - > MtGox is as easy as could be In which countries Dwolla works? China, India, Brasilia or may be Russia ? Apparently it only works in the USA. Does anyone know if there are similar services from other countries? |
|
|
|
|
It used to be hard, but now Dwolla - > MtGox is as easy as could be.
The only drawback is that it takes a few days for your funds transferred from your bank account to become available on Dwolla. But three days isn't that unreasonable.
|
|
|
|
Good point. But how would you decide the value? Would that be up to each individual trader or what? Clearly this will not work in a global environment...
The same way the value of the dollar is decided. By buyers and sellers agreeing on prices. Clearly it does work. |
|
|
|
You will still be able to trade Bitcoins for dollars in the US. Barter is 100% legal.
But if governments prohibit the possession and selling of bitcoins (much like illegal drugs), would you still be able to trade them? (would they? I think so, seeing what bitcoins could be used for) I'm not quite sure how barter would work for bitcoins, but whatever. Prohibition on the possession of Bitcoins in the US is extremely, extremely unlikely. There is no reason they could outlaw Bitcoin that would not also apply to cash. Every Bitcoin transaction is barter from the government's perspective. |
|
|
|
|
When I bought from Madhatter, months ago, he made it clear that the deal was contingent on payment being postmarked by a day or two after we had talked.
|
|
|
|
Don't get me wrong, I love the idea, but...
I realize that governments wont be able to enforce a world wide ban to any great effect. However the can still make sure that bank transfers etc. cannot be made to buy/sell bitcoins. And if you can't buy/sell them for real currencies on a site like mtgox, whats the use of mtgox? If mtgox is shut down, something else will be available. Also, if bitcoins cannot be tied to a real currency, how would you know the value of it? How could anyone decide on what the value is without an exchange? Outlawing bank transfers for bitcoin in the US will not stop the exchange of bitcoins for dollars. It won't even make it illegal to exchange Bitcoins for dollars. You could still sell Bitcoins for cash/check/moneyorder or gift cards in the mail, or goods or services. So I could just set up an account in Switzerland and trade bitcoins legally? And then transfer them back to my home country? Somehow this sounds a bit like money laundering.
You will still be able to trade Bitcoins for dollars in the US. Barter is 100% legal.
|
|
|
|
From your post, I think you are asking these three questions: 1) Why is Bitcoin valuable? faq2) What work is being performed when mining? here. Miners perform a hash calculation on the set of data: (all previous transactions, plus a random number,) with the aim of finding a hash with a lower value than the current difficulty level. If the hash found is greater than the difficulty level, it changes the random number and tries again. It does this millions or billions of times per second. It is not currently cost or time effective to mine unless you have spent a few thousand dollars on high-end video cards. 3) Why do people deserve to get coins when they mine a block? Because it's the most equitable and practical way of distributing new coins, and it promotes security of the network. |
|
|
|
|
The three reasons people use banks are:
1. for safekeeping one's money
2. To earn money by lending it out, with the bank acting as an intermediary between lenders and borrowers
3. To act as a convenient clearinghouse for transactions (paycheck direct deposit, automatic water bill deduction, etc.)
Reasons 1 and 3 are, imho, unnecessary as they are already performed by the standard Bicoin software. I particularly don't see why anyone would pay you for 1. But these are legitimate services for which a bank would charge account-holders fees.
If you're acting as function #2, that is great, but those should be done with clearly identified separate accounts from the accounts used for 1 and 3, and the bank should pay the account holder, not the account holder paying the bank. With this type of account it should be clear to all parties involved that the money will not be available for withdrawal during the time it is being loaned out.
|
|
|
|
|
I highly doubt they will be flat-out illegal to possess or use. Barter is 100% legal in the United States. They will certainly never be illegal worldwide. In the US, at worst, they may become illegal to purchase or sell with bank transfers or credit cards, a la internet poker. Or, even more likely, you'll see people prosecuted for not paying taxes owed on Bitcoin income. But you will still have people willing to exchange goods and services for them.
|
|
|
|
The problem is the way bitcoin is presented. You guys all like it because you are libertarian types. But keep in mind that the vast majority of people in the world aren't. But bitcoin doesn't just appeal to libertarian types. All you need to say to promote it is: Bitcoin is a free paypal that anyone can use. Please leave the libertarian, going to replace all other currencies, take over the world stuff out of it. That just turns people off. The only important thing for people to know is that it is better than what people use now for online payments. If you don't explain to people that it's not dollar-denominated, that it is an entirely new currency that can increase or decrease in value relative to the dollar, you are misinforming them. |
|
|
|
There has to be a reason for the fall in demand no?
It could be as simple as people wanted bitcoins, they bought bitcoins, and now they don't want any more. |
|
|
|
|
It's not possible to know if something is a bubble before it pops, especially something anonymously traded like Bitcoin. It could be that new, enthusiastic people with lots of money to drop are discovering Bitcoin at the same rate the price is increasing.
|
|
|
|
Interesting. Do you think we've seen or will see price inflation merely from the act of increasing the monetary base, or will that only happen if the banks start lending the reserves? If the Fed had not increased the monetary base, we would have had deflation. I'm sure the increase in MB we've seen is responsible for the modest inflation we've seen so far. And in the future, the more banks start to lend, the more price inflation we will see. Also, wasn't the stated goal to give banks money for the express purpose of lending in order to stimulate the economy? That may have been the stated reason, but as the Fed is paying interest on excess reserves, I don't see how that could be the only reason. From what I understand the Fed hasn't always paid interest on excess bank reserves, so this sounds like a conscious choice to try to increase bank reserves. |
|
|
|
I can't believe one of these guys with 100k+ coins (which there are several I'm sure) hasn't decided "you know what I could use half a million dollars." and cash out. The market is so thin that only one can do it. So after that the price will smacked way the hell back down. It is like a game of chicken to see who will bolt first.
Perhaps they are concerned about attracting the attention of tax authorities, so they don't cash out (or they cash out very slowly) |
|
|
|
Do you have any insight to the reasoning behind the sharp increase in M0? What's the scenario in which steep inflation doesn't occur, the banks sit on their excess reserves (essentially raising the reserve requirement)? Isn't that unprofitable?
I believe it is part of the attempt to make the banks more solvent. More cash in reserves -> less likelihood they will run out, default, and cause further economic trouble. Banks are paid interest on reserves kept at the Fed, so it's not completely unprofitable for the banks. |
|
|
|
We do not need BTC to be even more US based than it already is, that would defeat the purpose of BTC
I agree, but the solution to this is to make Bitcoin more accessible to the Euro/GBP/CAD/whathaveyou, not to be concerned about being too accessible to the USD. |
|
|
|
. . . Or a place that sells Ron Paul stuff, like shirts, buttons, and blimps. It's kind of late to be thinking about, but he has a big money bomb the 5th for the first debates.
Sales of campaign merchandise that benefits the campaign must be legally treated the same as donations. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
