The value right now is only that it can be used in suspicious deals where i don´t wish to tell the banks (and by that the authorities) what i should use the money for, and who i give the money to. And of cause there is a speculative value in BTC.
As BTC cannot be created in the same way as fx USD, which is created every time a bank grant a loan, an increased number of transactions will increase the value of BTC.
All transactions are now treated as 'suspicious deals' by authorities (and banks) by default. It is the doctrine of presumption of guilt that was embraced implicitly by the West recently when it rejected presumption of innocence. So Bitcoin has major value for the foreseeable future based on your premises (although they are weak, limited and mostly contrived it seems). |
|
|
|
|
The increase in liquidity and legitimacy should be a boost ... but if it gets big it will become a centralised point for price ... with all the possibilities of manipulation and control that opens up.
And after all that people will not be buying an actual bitcoin (or possessing private keys) just a promise from Winklevi that they hold bitcoin in equal amounts somewhere to back their deposits ... what are the rules on taking delivery of btc? They probably couldn't do that without becoming a "money transmitter" ... what a thicket of laws and regulations surrounding some simple private keys ... lol, absurd when seen from a distance. Imagine if they did the same thing with PKI and GPG keys?
|
|
|
|
"There is a company in the UK that functions like a retail bank but just with Bitcoin. In the last 18 months it has amassed 330,000 retail customers. It's run by one employee with servers. That demonstrates how easy it is to scale in this new environment."
The fact that it can scale like this, and that it is so quick and easy to use whilst allowing users to retain their anonymity ("whenever I swipe my card I think about all the information I'm giving away -- that really resonates with people"), is really just the icing on the cake as far as Vessenes sees it. This is BS ... whilst being vociferous about calling for more regulation Vessenes is hypocritically trying to make out like those regulations will not incur, loss of anonymity costs, overheads and, yes, more and more useless bodies around filling out forms and compliance manifestos ... I really think he might lose his shirt in the whole sorry mess he is creating for himself. Sounds like he wants to have his cake, and the icing, and eat everything too. |
|
|
|
It doesn't matter if FED is privately owned or publicly owned, it's the way they create money problematic
The problem is the monopoly authority given to them to create money .... without competition, and backing of legal thuggery to coerce and compel sole use of their shit monetary product, the opportunities for racketeering are boundless, as witnessed. |
|
|
|
|
Deaths of dissident journalists in mysterious car cashes, money printing without end ... Mugabe? .... no Obama.
I'd say the end is not too far away given the parallel historical precedents.
|
|
|
|
another question:
if I use 192.0.0.1 as default and 178.32.31.41 as alt DNS, would this work?
like every request goes through 192, and .bit 178?
You need to use this : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=205026On linux, I use dnsmasq to do the same. tried it, but well, i couldn't make it happen. :< this stuff is just too complicated, if you want more adopters, it HAS to be much easier for casuals. Yes, it is all too complicated for you ... wait, didn't you say that already? |
|
|
|
Name, for the record, of the secret court Judge who signed off on the 4th amendment breaching espionage ... Kollar-Kotelly. On July 14, 2004, the surveillance court for the first time approved the gathering of information by the NSA, which created the equivalent of a digital vault to hold Internet metadata. Kollar-Kotelly’s order authorized the metadata program under a FISA provision known as the “pen register/trap and trace,” or PRTT.
The ruling was a secret not just to the public and most of Congress, but to all of Kollar-Kotelly’s surveillance court colleagues. Under orders from the president, none of the court’s other 10 members could be told about the Internet metadata program, which was one prong of a larger and highly classified data-gathering effort known as the President’s Surveillance Program, or PSP.
But the importance of her order — which approved the collection based on a 1986 law typically used for phone records — was hard to overstate.
“The order essentially gave NSA the same authority to collect bulk Internet metadata that it had under the PSP,” the inspector general’s report said, with some minor caveats including reducing the number of people who could access the records.
On May 24, 2006, Kollar-Kotelly signed another order, this one authorizing the bulk collection of phone metadata from U.S. phone companies, under a FISA provision known as Section 215, or the ”business records provision,” of the USA Patriot Act.
As with the PRTT order, the Justice Department and NSA “collaboratively designed the application, prepared declarations and responded to questions from court advisers,” the inspector general’s report said. “Their previous experience in drafting the PRTT order made this process more efficient.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/secret-court-judges-upset-at-portrayal-of-collaboration-with-government/2013/06/29/ed73fb68-e01b-11e2-b94a-452948b95ca8_print.htmlPretty clear cut ... round up the criminals. Time to clean out the stables. |
|
|
|
Email with PGP is already ridiculously easy to use, works with existing infrastructure and has been PROVEN to be secure.
-bm
This is an argument against Bitmessage in general. You should talk to Atheros about that. Also, email with PGP isn't truly anonymous nor is it decentralized. Your mail server could be seized or go down at any time. part of the value proposition with BitMessage was it was supposed to be easy to use. seems the only remaining value proposition is "I Haz A Blockchain". bitmessage is as easy to use if it's easy to use, why the startup? sounds like its for mobile devices ... didn't you read the OP either? ... you're just trolling again aren't ya blueman? and I think he means one-click easy to use as opposed to three CLI easy-to-use but hey you want to argue semantics you'll find something I'm sure ... in 1 - 2 - 3 ... and there he is |
|
|
|
|
Thanks cassini ... I just know that there are so many ways to get browsing .bit I cannot see how anybody could miss all of them ... maybe more spoon-feeding is necessary? Eventually all browsers/OS will be .bit enabled by default ...
|
|
|
|
There's pros and cons to both, but unregulated will always communicate "under the radar" to many legit businesses that want to deal with commercially regulated companies.
But the problem is: "How do you regulate an international currency nationally?" A government will regulate Bitcoin within its borders & as it interfaces with its currency and its citizens, no different from, say, kiddie pr0nz. It also may put pressure on other governments to regulate Bitcoin within their borders. Why a hot button like child pr0nz? Because like Bitcoin, its consumption seems impossible to regulate -- bunch of digitized data in da tubez, or on pedo's hard drives. But the party van shows up anyhow. Why kiddie porn? ... because you are obsessed by it and never fail to seize an opportunity to mention it ... maybe you should check in with a shrink? ... an obsession with kiddie porn, in any manner, is probably not a healthy signal. |
|
|
|
Email with PGP is already ridiculously easy to use, works with existing infrastructure and has been PROVEN to be secure.
-bm
This is an argument against Bitmessage in general. You should talk to Atheros about that. Also, email with PGP isn't truly anonymous nor is it decentralized. Your mail server could be seized or go down at any time. part of the value proposition with BitMessage was it was supposed to be easy to use. seems the only remaining value proposition is "I Haz A Blockchain". bitmessage is as easy to use as git clone https://github.com/Bitmessage/PyBitmessage.git
cd PyBitmessage/src
python bitmessagemain.py
.... how exactly could you manage to get confounded by that? bitmessage doesn't use a blockchain ... at least get your facts right if you are going to be the uber-critic ... btw, what have you done recently? PGP mails are a major pain in the ass to use in a properly secure way, particularly alongside regular plain-text mails in the same inbox and suffer from other security weaknesses ... and it is a kludge on top of an insecure layer so will never be a long term solution. Bitmessage might not be perfect, but it is a great start ... but has none of the problems you have pointed out. |
|
|
|
Don't throw me under the bus here.  You're under now ... srry.   |
|
|
|
.bit's would be really cool if it wasn't so damn hard to setup. there are no working browser apps and foxy proxy doesn't work either.
It really isn't that difficult ... if you want to trust this guy http://namecoin.com/ you can be browsing .bit domains in minutes ... if you don't trust him and want to set up your own it can be done. It is still in development ... no-one said it was going to be easy, put some money up if you must have the tools now ... or wait for the free stuff and mooch like everyone else. But please don't complain about free stuff not coming quick enough. Foxy proxy does work, I use it all the time. |
|
|
|
snailbrain : on linux namecoin-qt throws this error upon exiting ... terminate called after throwing an instance of 'boost::exception_detail::clone_impl<boost::exception_detail::error_info_injector<boost::lock_error> >'
what(): boost::lock_error
Aborted (core dumped) |
|
|
|
marcus_of_augustus if your bits have no value then please send them all to me. 13a9UjLbc5Su7VigVA9CFfubXqit1A2Ut5 Ah ha. "No" you say. Why? Because your bits have an equivalent value in real currency or acts as a substitute for real currency which is why the US Government treats digital currencies as "real" currency according to the recent FinCEN guidence. http://fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/html/FIN-2013-G001.htmlSo blather all you want. It is easy for you to anonymously post unsound arguments on an internet forum. I If you believe what you say then by all mean pleases send me all your worthless bits. You omitted the key word ... "transmission" ... prove to me any valuable bits have been transmitted. If they were someone would have grabbed them for themselves seeing how they were routed through many third party electronic devices, routers. The bits are demonstrably without value. You probably do not even understand how that number you posted (your bitcoin public address hash) is able to receive value do you? For example, precisely define, in legal terms, how I am meant to transmit valuable bits to that number you posted? Edify us. Edit: keep the personal attacks and slurs for another forum please. |
|
|
|
371k BTC were lost in the US Secret Service raid.
Wallet pc was searched and formatted, never backedup.
[citation needed]Not only do they seize and search, they FORMAT as an extra f-u. Like having your wallet turned in, it never has the cash in it. Cost of doing business? "The U.S. Justice Department said a federal grand jury in Nashville indicted Michael Mancil Brown, 34, of Franklin, and charged him with six counts of wire fraud and six counts of extortion." Seeya Doesn't say anything about the evidence ... sealed documents, secret courts I suppose? |
|
|
|
Frog is a great idea.
However I think for bitmessage to be a success there needs to evolve a market for pow, people are not going to want to drain mobile computing resources to send potentially 100s of benign msgs in 1 day. Or trade pow credits from other computing resources
Just my opinion but I think that is an important missing piece
You read my mind. I already have a "stamps" program planned. For about .3 mBTC, you will be able to purchase a credit (or "stamp") that gets your messages processed by powerful PoW servers will a lot of GPUs. This is how the service will pay for itself, and be usable on mobile devices. Interesting ... so people with lots of mBTC can afford to send junk mails I suppose ... can a receiver set his 'postage' high enough to discourage low-ball (i.e. low difficulty PoW" messages from arriving? |
|
|
|
|
Yes, blaming the tool is actually absolving some of the responsibility from the bad actor by diminishing their part.
It is as ludicrous as the perpetrator yelling "The Bitcoins made me do it!" There are lots of chemicals under your kitchen sink and other household items that can cause horrific damage and crimes with knowledge, foresight and sufficient malice. Are we going to proceed through a long list of technologies blaming them also, all the while diminishing the responsibility of the perpetrators?
"Someone" hacks a car management and control computer and causes an upstart journalist to die in a horrific fiery smash ... do we ban car management and control systems? Or the tools used to hack them?
|
|
|
|
This has got to be the most entertaining thread I have ever encountered. Please do go on!  Until the end? I think it is something like we can't define it, but you'll know it when you see it. |
|
|
|
You've just nailed my biggest fear exactly. If, due to lack of understanding, malice or unwillingness to learn, CA legislators found that the client is a basic tool of transmitting electronic funds which have the single purpose of converting to fiat then they could rule that everyone using a client is a money transmitter. Because of the high cost of entry (licensure) Bitcoin would become illegal for all but the wealthy. The EFT subset called ACH itself isn't fiat but it represents fiat as a system of credits and debits transmitted electronically. It only becomes fiat at the end of its journey at the other end of the transaction. What would happen if they look at the system and say, "well you have just invented another version of ACH and you need to be licensed for that. We believe that's stupid because we see the small economy and that we can buy something using only Bitcoin so it's distinct from a fiat transfer system but what will legislators believe. The bad news is that even this community values Bitcoin against the US dollar and is fixated on "what Bitcoin is worth today."
The fact is this may happen. I personally don't think it will but it might. We should prepare for it just in case. Ruling that Bitcoin client is illegal or whatever would result in the same as ruling BitTorrent clients are illegal or whatever. People would just laugh. Bittorent doesn't transmit money, it transmits files. If they want to they can rule * Anyone using bitcoin is a money transmitter * Anyone who mines a block assists in the transmission of money Bitcoin doesn't transmit money, just bits. They only turn into money at the other end when we choose to value them as money. For a long time they were worthless. Like PPcoin, Namecoin, BBQcoins ... all of which are transmitted in an exactly identical manner. Are those 'money transmitters' also? Or are you just picking out bitcoin for special attention? They can rule anything they like. The stupider the rulings the more they lose legitmacy. In fact, I welcome some very stupid bitcoin rulings and I'm positive that the USA 'legal' system will oblige. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
