 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »
|
for all of this. Nobody can get hurt or manipulated to do anything...  Exactly, the lack of a single entity to put pressure on is a huge advantage. There are many thousands of leaders in Bitcoin. ...each one leading in a thousand different directions, hence bitcoin doesn't get anywhere. |
|
|
|
Criminals constantly evolve ("innovate," claw out new rat holes), and law evolves alongside, plugging up those holes. Laundering IRL money was once trivial, as was selling junk securities, promoting ponzis, numbers rackets, etc., etc. Those rat holes were plugged up, until you gentlemen came up with beetscoins and uncorked them again. Nah, just on the contrary. Those rat holes were getting bigger and bigger before bitcoin. Just to mention one - the 50 (fifty) billion Madoff ponzi scheme! If those ratholes were actually getting bigger, why would the noble bitcorn extortionists resort to using beetcoins? Just to make their lives difficult? Or to shit things up for other righteous bibcoiners? As far as Madoff, he's doing time, thanks for statist thugs. The possibility of getting V& is a deterrent beetcoin sorely lacks. Bleetcoin thieves are only brought to justice when the jackboots you so abhor take pity & do it for you. |
|
|
|
But that's the point -- it would be incredibly difficult to do it in dollars, that's why dollars aren't used to extort hospitals & bitcoin is.
But yeah, if FOMC designed a financial instrument ideally suited for extorting hospitals (like BTC), and then proceeded to extort hospitals, that would be a totally dick move.
What are you going to do un-invent it? Whilst you're at it, expunge John Browning, Manhatten Project, etc. from history so we can all live with ponies singing Kum Bah Ya, My Lord. Why would we need to uninvent beadcoin? Did we have to uninvent ponzis? Bearer bonds? Heroin? Murder? Rape? Ban/regulate the shit out of it, works good 'nuff  |
|
|
|
.
Well no, they didn't. And actual IRL money has continuously evolved to make such asshattery more difficult.
And then along comes beedcoin and makes all the criminal shit that got burnt down ages ago fresh again: Ponzis, gambling, junk stock offerings, extortion, money laundering, etc., etc.
Oh, well, before bitcoin there were no ponzis, gambling, junk stock offerings, extortion, money laundering, etc., etc... From which planet are you coming, buddy? Where did you live before 2008? Lol, the boldface part, the stuff you expertly edited out. if it was a snake, it would'a bit you. Criminals constantly evolve ("innovate," claw out new rat holes), and law evolves alongside, plugging up those holes. Laundering IRL money was once trivial, as was selling junk securities, promoting ponzis, numbers rackets, etc., etc. Those rat holes were plugged up, until you gentlemen came up with beetscoins and uncorked them again. Of course, society is not going to regulate the shit out of beadcoins & let you proceed with your antics unmolested, because disruptive technology. And you wonder why you get no love from the press & banks refuse to deal with you  You're mostly inept criminals, that's why  |
|
|
|
It's a brave new world ... organisations who have become dependent upon mission critical IT infrastructure should pay for better IT security and if they don't even understand what that means they should pay someone who knows to help them out ... instead of playing victim after demonstrating willful negligence.
How about you scumbags just stop extorting hospitals before you get a jackboot up your ass, to demonstrate your willful negligence in securing it? How would that be? What if hospitals are extorted in dollars? Will you threaten Federal Open Market Committee getting a jackboot up their ass? How would that be, scumbag? But that's the point -- it would be incredibly difficult to do it in dollars, that's why dollars aren't used to extort hospitals & bitcoin is. But that's the point -- before bitcoins extortionists did that in dollars. It was incredibly difficult to do it in physical gold. That's why physical gold wasn't used to extort hospitals & dollars were. Well no, they didn't. And actual IRL money has continuously evolved to make such asshattery more difficult. And then along comes beedcoin and makes all the criminal shit that got burnt down ages ago fresh again: Ponzis, gambling, junk stock offerings, extortion, money laundering, etc., etc. Thanks guys! |
|
|
|
It's a brave new world ... organisations who have become dependent upon mission critical IT infrastructure should pay for better IT security and if they don't even understand what that means they should pay someone who knows to help them out ... instead of playing victim after demonstrating willful negligence.
How about you scumbags just stop extorting hospitals before you get a jackboot up your ass, to demonstrate your willful negligence in securing it? How would that be? What if hospitals are extorted in dollars? Will you threaten Federal Open Market Committee getting a jackboot up their ass? How would that be, scumbag? But that's the point -- it would be incredibly difficult to do it in dollars, that's why dollars aren't used to extort hospitals & bitcoin is. But yeah, if FOMC designed a financial instrument ideally suited for extorting hospitals (like BTC), and then proceeded to extort hospitals, that would be a totally dick move. |
|
|
|
It's a brave new world ... organisations who have become dependent upon mission critical IT infrastructure should pay for better IT security and if they don't even understand what that means they should pay someone who knows to help them out ... instead of playing victim after demonstrating willful negligence.
How about you scumbags just stop extorting hospitals before you get a jackboot up your ass, to demonstrate your willful negligence in securing it? You must be talking about these scumbags thugs? There are powerful, determined government intelligence agencies intentionally undermining computer systems security and wantonly leaving holes and 'backdoors' open for all kinds of nefarious actors to exploit so if hospitals/schools/police/city-hall/courts/etc haven't got their systems locked down tight and backed up they are going to fail in one way or another. No, I'm not talking about your inflamed paranoiac delusions of ev0l gubermints and lizard jews. I'm talking about sociopathic douchebags extorting hospitals, and, after getting paid, demanding more money. And you, the douche defending them by shifting the blame. That's what I'm talking about |
|
|
|
It's a brave new world ... organisations who have become dependent upon mission critical IT infrastructure should pay for better IT security and if they don't even understand what that means they should pay someone who knows to help them out ... instead of playing victim after demonstrating willful negligence.
How about you scumbags just stop extorting hospitals before you get a jackboot up your ass, to demonstrate your willful negligence in securing it? How would that be? |
|
|
|
bitcoin is not about public, nor transaction.
bitcoin is about privacy and holding up the only safe asset left in the world.
Sometimes bitcoin is about transactions. Here's an example of bitcoin entrepreneurs price-discovering the value of their disruptive services in free market space: Ransomware attackers refuse to decrypt hospital's files after being paid off"Negotiating with criminals doesn’t always work out, as Kansas Heart Hospital in Wichita learned last week. The hospital paid to get files back after falling victim to ransomware, but only got “partial access” and a demand for more money, Techspot is reporting. That’s right: the criminals got their ransom, and then decided they wanted more money. The hospital’s president, Dr. Greg Duick says the hospital is not paying up." https://www.yahoo.com/news/kansas-hospital-pays-ransomware-demand-235824773.html |
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs admits Bitcoin is ‘Ideal Vehicle’ for public transactions..but what happend with there GS-coin Lol, not quite: " The distributed ledger used for Bitcoin is a public ledger that can be read from or written to by anyone who wishes to transact, making it an ideal vehicle for public transactions between individuals" Nice try tho |
|
|
|
The bitcoin market is a dump that is full of scavengers who didn't get the memo, that it isn't 2013 anymore.
Yeah, wateva, ether shill! Bitcoin bull herd has broken free from Jewish meat packers (get your mind out of the gutter, statist stooge! I'm talking about the captive bolt terrorist genociding meat on the hoof sovereign cattle into delicious ground beef for their Saurian masters in bovine concentration camps). We're starting a stateless cow society. Under the sea! |
|
|
|
Are you all sleeping or what ?
DRING DRING BITCOIN FOMOING!!!
nobody cares anymore ... it will only wake up the trolls, this thread is such a dump now. What are you talking about, I CARE! We've broken through the $450 electrical fence, we're free, fellow cattle! |
|
|
|
POW makes the most sense. POS is the same retard concept we have with central banks today. Earning interest, just because you already own something? That doesn't make sense at all, since owning is no productive activity. Don't most bitcoiners hodl bitcoins, hoping to get rich "just because [they] already own something"? |
|
|
|
No offense but you are an economic illiterate (we have all weak spot, myself I am bad at computer science and coding).
What you are saying about supply moving along with demand makes no sense whatsoever in the context of the blocksize limit. You don't understand what perfectly inelastic means, it means fixed with no way to moving it. In order to learn you first need to understand what you know and what you don't know.
I might not be expressing myself very well, but I know economics sufficiently well, and actually I had done quite a bit of work around various economic ideas in the past... so you seem to be making wrong assumptions about me. Currently, I am attempting to use layman's expressions to describe that there is no problem rather than getting caught up in technicalities in which you are suggesting various technicalities without explaining what you mean, so instead of suggesting that I don't know what I am talking about possibly you need to explain what you perceive is the problem.. and explain the problem because you are the one suggesting that there is a problem and that we should be concerned about it. So the burden is on you to show the problem and to convince others about the problem that you perceive. Such burden is not on me to identify the problem that you perceive. I am suggesting that behavior is going to change with a shrinking supply that will allow for sufficient and acceptable adapting that will be sufficient to manage while seg wit and any other changes are being implemented that may not include a blocksize limit increase, and you are suggesting that some unacceptable results will occur if the block limit is not increased. Ultimately we disagree about impact and we also disagree about whether there is currently a problem... so it may not really matter whether I am using one term differently from you... because we are going to likely come to different conclusions. I think that many people in this space understand the issues sufficiently and disagree on the means forward, and XT/classic supporters are still arguing about a case they lost... but don't want to give up. On the Circle 1. Do not take offense at the following argument, for there is nothing offensive in it, unless one does not consider that the circle may be spoken of in a geometrical sense. If I say that the circle describes four identical radii, and you say: not four, but one, then we have a right to ask one another: why? But I don't want to talk about that kind of description of the circle, but of the perfect description of a circle. 2. The circle is the most perfect flat figure. I am not going to say why in particular that is so. But this fact arises of itself in our consciousness in any consideration of flat figures. 3. Nature is so created that the less noticeable the laws of formation, the more perfect the thing. 4. Nature is also so created that the more impenetrable a thing, the more perfect it is. 5. On perfection, I would say the following: perfection in things is a perfect thing. It is always possible to study a perfect thing or, in other words, in a perfect thing these is always something not studied. If a thing should prove to have been completely studied, then it would cease to be perfect, for only that which is incomplete is perfect -- that is to say the infinite. 6. A point is infinitely small and thereby attains perfection, but at the same time it remains inconceivable. Even the smallest conceivable point would not be perfect. 7. A straight line is perfect, for there is no reason for it not to be infinitely long on both sides, to have neither end nor beginning, and thereby be inconceivable. But by putting pressure on it and limiting it on both sides, we render it conceivable, but at the same time imperfect. If you believe this, then think on. 8. A straight line, broken at one point, forms an angle. But a straight line which is broken simultaneously at all its points is called a curve. A curve does not have to be of necessity infinitely long. It may be such that we can grasp it freely at a glance and yet at the same time remain inconceivable and infinite. I am talking about a closed curve, in which the beginning and the end are concealed. And the most regular, inconceivable, infinite and ideal curve will be a circle. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Yeah and fiat is the most popular currency and it has maximum number of users since its inception, and even bitcoin gets on the mainstream fiat will always be in demand.
Sorry, but what you say is pretty inaccurate. Fiat (= money without collateral) is a pretty new invention. "Fiat money originated in 11th century China,[11] and its use became widespread during the Yuan and Ming dynasties.[12]"--Wikipedia. So roughly 1,000 years. Definitely newer than fire tho, it's all relative. |
|
|
|
There are only about 250k-500k bitcoin users in the world; of those, only a few hundred users would consider paying btc for steam. Btc has become a speculative vehicle, not a medium of exchange or currency. Too many fools think btc will go to 1 Million Dollars soon. Sad, but true. As long as users HODL, not spend btc, it won't go up in value.
As long as users save their Bitcoin BTCeanie BTCabies, available supply will continue to be restrained and thus price must go up. Your economics is exactly backwards. Yeah, that reasoning works with everything--bitcoins, altcoins, BTCeanies--everything that's artificially scarce. The problem is it only works as long as users hoard their BTCeanies & never realize their profit (sell, cash out). |
|
|
|
|
Remember when BTC wasn't super depressing? Good times, good times...
|
|
|
|
MicroSD cards are really easy to hide lose.
Fixed. Now if there was a way to secure our bank accounts... jk, no need. Nobody wants that filthy fiat government scrip |
|
|
|
Dear Bulls: If you ever decide to start a deathmetal band (u no u wanna!), just thought of an ultimate name: CöwCatchör <==click |
|
|
|
|
