It's fun to watch the numbers, but seriously - unless you're shoving money into Bitcoin that you can't afford to lose, there's no point in freaking out. This is going to happen.

To me, it looks like possibly a lot of accounts that had "collected dust" (small payments from faucets and free µBTC sites) and were transferred to a single address.

If Bitcoin fails to become widely accepted because some centralized agency doesn't exist to slam down the iron fist ... then it deserves to fail on its own merits.

I don't think it will.  Which is why I don't think it needs anything like this.  AT ALL.

Sounds like a terrific plan.   


What if that agency - which will have a lot of money at that point, and with money comes power - decides you don't get to break the contract? What if that agency decides that you're not worth the potential negative publicity that may result in additional customer attrition? What if that agency decides you might sleep best at the bottom of the river? A little corruption after all. Nothing big. 


You realize that what you're describing here is essentially a protection racket, right? Replacing one large corrupt Federal mafia for smaller mafias for hire.


You mean like the record industry managed to cope with copyright infringment by shutting down Bit Torrent completely? Your faith in cryptocurrency is weak, young Jedi.


It's just a little corruption, you know. As soon as the corruption spreads and the public becomes aware of it, they'll vote it out of offic- ... oh wait, that doesn't really work.

(Cheers!)

You might be able to buy Detroit with that. 

That's one handsome coin.

I've been using AirVPN as well. The only thing that sucks about it is that you can only run one instance on any device at any given time.

ProXPN allows you to run as many instances as you want, provided each is on a different VPN server - but I don't *think* they accept Bitcoin yet.

You could ... talk about your dick, um ... I got nothin'.

Extremely cool. Fair play to you!

I clicked the link.  Now the NSA thinks I'm planning to defect. Haha! Thanks.

Seriously, though - "Want to stop being an American? FUCK YOU, you're an American until WE say you're not. You're going to be a citizen of the Greatest Freedomocracy in the History of EVER, and you're going to like it."

Actually, the correct version of that quote is not quite as sunny:

"First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you."

"If you think I'm crazy, then let's have a little wager.

Let's wager one-tenth of a Bitcoin that, one year from now, I will be right about this.

If I'm wrong ... let's see here, one-tenth of a Bitcoin is roughly $20 right now - so, if I'm wrong, in a year, I'll pay you $20. Because obviously, if you're right and I'm wrong, then one-tenth of a Bitcoin will be worth less than that. So that'll be fair.

If you're wrong, however, one year from today you will pay me one-tenth of a Bitcoin.

Here, I know a notary public. Let's put this down on paper, just to be honest."

And when someone decides to force your assets onto the blacklist in retaliation, or some other perceived slight? Who will be the one providing oversight? And how will we trust them? Will it be a cabal of the 1% of Bitcoin owners? A coalition of government organizations? And what recourse will you have once someone declares your wallet full of fraudulent funds? What happens if the judgment of whatever "authority" deems your appeal invalid and your funds remain forever black-marked?

Do you really want to continue down this road? Sounds like there's more 'force' involved here than in neutrality.

Also, we'll have to have a look in your pocketbook.  Some of these notes might need to be blackmarked.

Seriously, though, feel free to create a whole new coin that integrates your ideas into it and let the market decide. I'm quite sure that "Confis-Coin" will be a huge success. 

Quite simply, adding blacklisting to the protocol will eventually cripple bitcoin, probably kill it. Human nature will guarantee that.

And that's why government(s) will almost certainly insist upon blacklisting in the protocol as a condition of acceptance as legal tender - whether it's by central authority or a decentralized system.

No. :-P

EDIT: Outcome was reversed. Situation resolved.

I'm a bit pissed. My bet was closed - incorrectly - as true:

http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=1738

This statement is closed.
Decision: True
The price of Bitcoin will be higher than $150 by October 15th 2013

The price of Bitcoin on BitcoinAverage.com will be higher than $150 at any point of the day on October the 15th 2013.

Info
Opening date: Sept. 5, 2013
Bet deadline: Oct. 13, 2013 end of day Eastern Time
Event date: Oct. 15, 2013 end of day Eastern Time



Actually, I watched it until midnight, EST.  It got extremely close but did not crack 150 once before midnight EST.

I realize I'm shouting at wind, but this actually bothers me a bit more than if it had not been closed at all.

I did find BitBet after BOBTC.

I might give it a try.

It looks like the last confirmed event on BOBTC was "Walter White dies in Breaking Bad".

 

It does. I won't have lost a terribly large sum of money, but it'd be nice to get it nonetheless.

Otherwise, stupid tax paid. 

Does anyone know anything about this site? If legit, does anyone have any idea what the average length of time is before an outcome can be decided and closed, and the bidders paid out?

Start a useful service and, if you have confidence in continuation of increasing value, sell it for less than presently worth.