Again I laugh. There may be a case for an alt. But certainly not one that is Bitcoin + tweaks. If Bitcoin will not work for pocket change, Litecoin certainly ain't up to the task.

If you need faster confirmation (an 'if' that I don't agree with, but let's use it for argument's sake), two and a half minutes plus variance is still too damn slow.

If you need more transactions per second, LTC fails the same criteria.

If you need smaller bandwith consumption or disk consumption, oh yeah, no better.

The _only_ conceivable scenario where Litecoin may be viewed as a differentiator from Bitcoin is if an exploit is found for SHA256.

As if.

Ha. haha. hahahahahaha.

Back when Ripple was unveiled with a large promo campaign, it soon rose to the point where it's market cap (as I pointed out above) was more than Bitcoin's. Where is it now? I can't be bothered to calculate it. But since my report of merely yesterday, Bitcoin's market cap -- as a percentage of all of crypto's market cap -- has inched up from 84.8% to 86.6%*.

Let us not forget that Ripple's 'market cap' includes that insanely huge 'premine'. Lessee... Ripple going from over 100% of Bitcoin's market cap to well under 10% of Bitcoin's market cap -- including premine.

Nope - your Ripple is on a negative trend. Sorry.

*
coinmarketcap.com now:
total crypto: $4,388,677,522
Bitcoin: $3,803,128,051
3803/4389~=0.866

Did your source doc list an arrival date? If so, was it on or after the presumed raid of Oct 14?


Why does this release lead you to believe that it's not BurtW? In our system of 'innocent until proven guilty', would it not be typical for release on bail?

So is your 'ONLY' something that is mandated by statute - i.e. there is law preventing its use as such, or is this merely Standard Operating Procedure?

In the last couple weeks, bitcoin's share of the entire crypto scene's market cap has risen from about 81% to 84.8%. While it would be foolish to predict the future from a week's worth of data, this little trend is at least suggestive that the world at large may be growing tired of shitcoins.

I note for emphasis that Ripple's market cap was at one time higher than Bitcoin's (though why, I have no idea).

mmhh hmmmm... so... open-ended speculation ...


If we had the report, it might substantiate that notion, or it might counterdict it.... But we don't have that report, now, do we?


Cases like what? Like your open ended flight of fancy you outline above?

I don't have to read the thread right. I know more than has been written in this thread.

That may be hard for you to accept. I don't care. I mean, I care, but I won't be moved from principle.

I know what I know, I have said less than the entirety of what I know. If you go spelunking through old threads, you may find out how it is that I might know. But for reasons I cannot yet divulge, I will not say more than I deem prudent at this time. Mostly, this limits me to repeating publicly-available information.

In this thread, I am just trying to tame wild-speculation-presented-as-fact. That is my sole mission here for now. I don't know the details of his case, but you can be damned sure the prosecution is monitoring this board. Please be circumspect about presenting speculation as if it were fact.

No, he doesn't live in Boulder. But a search of public records will show that he has a POBox in Boulder, so we can be fairly sure it is within commute distance.

Your assumption is not far from the mark, yet still wrong.


mmmhh hmm. You _used_to_ ski Breck (a good distance in time of travel, and much further in culture from Boulder - which is in turn a city in which Burt Wagner does not live), and you have 'family' in Boulder (which is in turn...).

Sorry - I am Questioning your Authority.

I live here. Nothing in the media. Not even a mention of his arrest, let alone how many agents were involved.

Actually, I'm not sure why I am arguing this point. I don't know how many agents were involved, and _you_ don't know how many agents were involved. I find the 35 figure plausible. You claim such a figure is... what was it?... as likely as flying donkeys - IOW, impossible.

Here in a metro where... umm ... "You can't take shit in Boulder without your hippie neighbors finding out and reporting it to the media", we have not even a mention of the arrest of a longtime, seemingly upstanding member of the community on notable charges. This might suggest that dissemination of this fact is being suppressed. 35 agents or two.

Anyone else been able to find any of the court proceedings other than the indictment?

Are you incapable of seeing that I am asking you to show your work supporting your 'analysis' of how much time he'll serve? OK, I'll play along. Allow me to quote from the indictment:


Again - from what criminal offense were these funds known by the defendant to have been derived from? The indictment clearly does not say. Unless you're making shit up again.

While case law has moved the bar (indeed, some time back, there was no crime of 'money laundering'), if the funds were not from criminal activity, most would agree that no moral transgression had occurred. Accordingly, the legal precedent still is likely that to prove money laundering, one element that must be proved is that -- indeed -- the defendant knew the funds were derived from a criminal offense.

So again I ask you - what was that criminal offense from whence the funds were derived? And how does that factor into your oh-so-scholarly assessment of sentencing?

You must be from the densely populated eastern urban corridor.

I'll expand. From the article:


The above paragraph can be attributed to Bruce Wagner. It cannot be attributed to Burt Wagner (BurtW), as they are two different people.

Stick around awhile, pay attention, and you may become acquainted with who is who 'round these parts.

Perhaps you missed upthread where I specifically mentioned the indictment. I note that it quite clearly says nothing about the supposed nature of the illegal activity that the accused is alleged to know that the funds were engaged in.

Unless, of course, you can make something up. How do you get from the info in the indictment to your 'analysis' of how much time you think he'll serve?


Yes, an article that not only discusses nothing about the circumstances of the actual arrest, search and seizure, but also so poorly-researched that it confused Burt Wagner with Bruce Wagner.

Yes, one would think that there would be significant media coverage. Nothing. I live in the same metro. Newspaper silence.

Yet I find the 35 agents figure completely plausible.

Oddly, a search on the docket number listed on the doc on scribed turns up nothing. Of course, IANAL - I have no idea how public such records usually are. We know the court and the Judge, but nothing much more.

I'm inclined to believe that you've completely missed the last quarter century of our benevolent federal overlords' ever-escalating 'kinder, gentler machine gun plan' (in the words of Neil Young).


If you knew Burt, you'd know how absurd your suggestion is.


Excellent legal analysis - thanks for that. So tell me ... what exactly are the charges? Exactly what has he been accused of? What are the elements of each charge? What is the evidence against him? Or or you just making stuff up?

"Crash"? Like, to what percentage do you think? And what do you think the Bitcoin faithful will do when faced with the prospect of incredibly cheap Bitcoin? Maybe buy? Maybe trending the price back up? Don't forget, any dump is only a one-time possibility.

ciao, man to the chaoman.

If in the right locale, nothing about bitcoin is an insurmountable difficulty.

Day 1: Point noob at a service such as Circle - the service will guide them within a few minutes to their first bitcoin acquisition.
Noob buys something from Dell, or Overstock, or Expedia, or...

At this point, they are using crypto. They've spent a grand total of well under an hour. They're either intrigued enough to start studying, or they're not ready.

----
responsible followup may include:

- Tell noob that, though Circle (or any such service) seems so far to be legit, there is always a risk in entrusting the private keys of more than a trivial amount of XBT to another has inherent risk.

- Introduce noob to Electrum or other SPV client. Show how transfers work.

- Get noob to spend an hour browsing bitcoin.it.

- Intro noob to this forum.

- Explain full node concept, install Bitcoin Core.

Or whatever.

----

But anyone that can create an account on (e.g.) gmail -- or even AOL -- can sign up with a service like Circle in a matter of minutes and be using crypto with minimal effort. And the example of Circle is just the first generation of what will be a succession of business layers simplifying the use of crypto for people for a fee.

What exactly do you mean that one can 'move litecoin around more easily than bitcoin'?


Are you claiming here that litecoin has a better core client than does bitcoin? Example, please?

---

My 'hate' for litecoin is nothing new. Years ago, I pointed out that the existence of even a single alt devalues a primary use case for driving bitcoin adoption - that of provable levels of currency inflation for crypto. The naysayers have a point that the existance of more than one cryptocurrency devalues the entire concept.

BurtW's business is something other than exchanging forms of money. Tru story dat.

As far as you know, or as far as you think you might have kinda maybe seen someone make a thinly veiled unsupported allegation of, though you cannot remember who, what, nor where?