Dont u get VISA position? If is separable who runs the servers secure the chain? VISA of course. And they'll charge 2 to 5 pct per txn for the service. TBH a blockchain backend would be a lot better than a sql db to store financial txns... so it is not all bad.
Financial transaction DBs aren't typically SQL and are more often journaling DBs like the block chain already, but without PoW as they trust their systems. |
|
|
|
NewLibertyDollar.com gives me
This site is currently unavailable.
If you are the owner of this site, please contact us at 1-480-505-8855 at your earliest convenience.
Will it be coming back up or is just gone now.
This is temporary, it should be back shortly, the web host botched the DNS update when moving to their new server platform. So much for seamless transitions. I'm not pleased with their service. |
|
|
|
when you're swapping BTC for CC through the 2wp aren't you effectively "shorting" BTC and going "long" CC? No it's all Bitcoin if I understand the counter argument, you can change back 1:1 any time (or 1:10 and 10:1) Yes if you see value in CC. But as one SC proponent points out there won't be value there at least not with TC - apparently one should consider it a scam even it it does everything it says on the box, so it's not a good test case for SC. every time you trade your USD for BTC, you're effectively shorting USD and going long BTC. seems like the same here. seems like the peg only guarantees value for BTC<-->scBTC The way I read it: The scBTC is a token for BTC in the meaningful sense of the word token. To the extent that CC is a sort of digitally divisible token wallet, and it carries the scBTC, it isn't really shorting BTC. It is more of a coin within a coin, or more accurately a token for a coin within a digitally divisible crypto coin that acts as a wallet for scBTC. (if that makes any sense at all) To the extent that CC is diluted however, it is shorting BTC. Extra credit if you can distill that into 140 characters. |
|
|
|
I LOL'd at that one too. Share the same Market Cap? So kind of them to share that, lol. |
|
|
|
Royal Proclamation concerning the lot 1-C-A1, the proposed Noble Palace and King's Patience regarding its matters
We, rpietila, the King over all CryptoKingdom, Duke of the Very Ancient Duchy, Earl in more places than cares to be mentioned, Mayor of CryptoTown, CEO of the Most Ancient and Worshipful Town Hall Corporation and CEO of Grand Hotel Corporation, blessed with skills in business management and beaux arts, but hardly communication, etc.,
greet
The Marquess Joseph of New Liberty, Eldest of the Nobles, AOK-K, MG-5, GJB, FBB, TB, CB, etc.
Your Majesty, your wisdom is well matched with your patience. I am certain that Asenath would relish yet another redesign of the Noble Palace with all of these considerations, as she truly enjoys her efforts in this regard. It will be done as you suggest. The wall will be recycled, the Northern extent paved and the design will be reduced by one story to accommodate the height restrictions, but this will be more than recompensed by the additional opulence of the interiors, and the addition of joust viewing seating for the most discerning of spectators. With these considerations, the opportunity to all nobles is reopened for those that that have not yet sought shareholding of this magnificent structure and member-ownership of the Noble Palace Club, which may include premier accommodations for themselves and those they may cherish visiting from foreign realms within its august walls. Though there is no king as great as your majesty in all the lands, it may come to pass that foreign royalty may visit in order to pay tribute to his majesties glory and seek his favor, or to observe our mighty knights jousts and these shall need some comfortable places to take respite. It is with regard to the tastes and perquisites of these visitors that great care is given, as well as to display such works of grand art as may be inspired within the hearts of His Majesties loyal subjects. So also the call goes out to all artisans of repute to submit for review such works as may add to the luxuriousness of this abode to be displayed and curated within these galleries. With respect to His Majesties business advisement, some great minds do think alike it seems as Asenath had already begun on a design for "The Flophouse" with many bunks available for servant accommodations. |
|
|
|
The health care in US is better than most places, but health insurance/cost is far worse. So much more expensive mostly due to government intrusion through the FDA, insurance companies, and the US civil legal environment (lawsuits), and med schooling.
Yeah, well, that was what I intended but I didn't explain it. Health insurance is obscenely expensive in america, while in europe you have a completely different system. Of course in my country there aren't many advanced structures at all and they can't provide everything usa ones do (but we do have some excellent hospitals in some of the major cities and pretty advanced research and machines there), but the cost for average services is far more affordable, almost free for many things. By free, you mean tax supported, yes? The US system loses a lot of cost efficiency in the way the insurance has been perverted. Doctors are required to do weird things by their insurers to avoid lawsuits. |
|
|
|
in my Twitter conversation with @Truthcoin today, it's so clear that all he wants to do is tap into "mobile Bitcoin" for the value sapping. he doesn't care that the BTC converted to Cashcoin or whatever shitcoin is involved with Truthcoin is put at risk. he sees SC's as a way to exploit Bitcoin.
i suggest every other altcoin will attempt the same bolt on strategy.
I also have the feeling he is using the peg as a "risk-adverse" aspect when in fact he has no plan to peg 1:1. Oh well... fools.. money..parted I don't get the 1:1 thing. It doesn't really matter what the ratio is, so long as it is a ratio that is communicated clearly and is not alterable, yes? It could be 1:100, 1:2, or 10:1, and when you return to the MC it reverses. don't know but i suppose he could change it and trap ppl inside. the other thing he was making a big deal about is that he insists the transfer goes like this BTC-->CC as opposed to BTC-->scBTC-->CC. as if that makes a difference  but from a technical standpoint, i think it was notme who said there had to be essentially 2 tx's to accomplish the transformation to a new coin as in the latter example. anyone know? and as far as TC is concerned, it's not so much about the it being an altcoin, it's about the fact that most of the assets offered are speculative and subject to losses. I watched that twitter dialog. They sure got grumpy quickly. Only two chains are required. It can be more chains, and more transactions but the minimum would be: 1) a transaction on the MC locking the assets 2) a transaction on the SC whose inputs contain a cryptographic proof that the lock was done correctly (and thereby creating the SC asset). So, BTC--->scBTC --->CC is the correct way to think about it as we have consistently been doing here for the last 200 pages? That nomenclature is going to be new to them unless they read it here like you suggested to them, so their confusion is understandable. They are likely just thinking of it in terms of just the Bitcoin block chain and the Truthcoin block chain with the convertible asset created by the locking of the bitcoin being the CC. The nomenclature we are using here is a bit unusual. (we use MC for main chain, block stream uses "parent chain" and "child chain" or "sidechain"). The blockstream paper considers the sidechain as "also Bitcoin" which seems a bit disingenuous to me. Generally we can think of the parent chain as being Bitcoin and the sidechain as one of many other blockchains. Of course, sidechain coins could be transferred between sidechains, not just to and from Bitcoin; however, since any coin originally moved from Bitcoin could be moved back, it would nonetheless remain a bitcoin. I don't favor much of the language used in their paper. ("peg" being another example, but that is an old battle lost long ago) This 1:1 peg being used to mean "a static conversion rate at any ratio" also seems bizarre in that it includes a 1:10 with 10:1 return rate? |
|
|
|
Well, hasn't always be like that anyway? And it's not only in America, every european country has the same response, apart from the north europe which is anyway a decade in the future. Keep in mind though technology is becoming cheaper and cheaper, while access to many other things is now completely free. People may have less money, but there wasn't ever a time in history where we had such a connection with everything and access to almost everything we need. The only worse thing you americans have is probably the health care, which in my country (Italy) is really cheap for many things, yet people keep complaining.
The health care in US is better than most places, but health insurance/cost is far worse. So much more expensive mostly due to government intrusion through the FDA, insurance companies, and the US civil legal environment (lawsuits), and med schooling. But since the overgovernance has created a monster problem, the US does what it usually does. Give the problem to the folks that caused it, the government. So now the US Federal government has to pay people for surviving through a soon to be bankrupt social security program, and also pay for keeping people alive through "affordable care act". So since both are in the executive branch, they can likely sort out both at once. With enough government control of insurance, the government can decide when people die, thereby saving both costs. And if they don't, they can just tax people more, so problem solved. |
|
|
|
Actually, Americans are not getting poorer. They are simply remaining ignorant of their potential. The national debt is money owed Americans by the banks, not the other way around. And the banking system has created something over $200 trillion of debt around the world that is essentially owed by other countries to America. Start looking at things like the Uniform Commercial Code, and Accepted for Value (A$V, AFV).  Does anyone expect 200 trillion will be repaid? |
|
|
|
I don't get the 1:1 thing. It doesn't really matter what the ratio is, so long as it is a ratio that is communicated clearly and is not alterable, yes?
It could be 1:100, 1:2, or 10:1, and when you return to the MC it reverses.
don't know but i suppose he could change it and trap ppl inside. Oh yes, (developer + miner) integrity is needed. And there are a bajillion possible scams with new block chains, we've seen a lot of those in alt-land, but the ratio is immaterial to that. So... no reason it can't be 1BTC:100scBTC on the way in and 100scBTC:1BTC on the return. |
|
|
|
in my Twitter conversation with @Truthcoin today, it's so clear that all he wants to do is tap into "mobile Bitcoin" for the value sapping. he doesn't care that the BTC converted to Cashcoin or whatever shitcoin is involved with Truthcoin is put at risk. he sees SC's as a way to exploit Bitcoin.
i suggest every other altcoin will attempt the same bolt on strategy.
I also have the feeling he is using the peg as a "risk-adverse" aspect when in fact he has no plan to peg 1:1. Oh well... fools.. money..parted I don't get the 1:1 thing. It doesn't really matter what the ratio is, so long as it is a ratio that is communicated clearly and is not alterable, yes? It could be 1:100, 1:2, or 10:1, and when you return to the MC it reverses. don't know but i suppose he could change it and trap ppl inside. the other thing he was making a big deal about is that he insists the transfer goes like this BTC-->CC as opposed to BTC-->scBTC-->CC. as if that makes a difference but from a technical standpoint, i think it was notme who said there had to be essentially 2 tx's to accomplish the transformation to a new coin as in the latter example. anyone know? and as far as TC is concerned, it's not so much about the it being an altcoin, it's about the fact that most of the assets offered are speculative and subject to losses. I watched that twitter dialog. They sure got grumpy quickly. Only two chains are required. It can be more chains, and more transactions but the minimum would be: 1) a transaction on the MC locking the assets 2) a transaction on the SC whose inputs contain a cryptographic proof that the lock was done correctly (and thereby creating the SC asset). |
|
|
|
in my Twitter conversation with @Truthcoin today, it's so clear that all he wants to do is tap into "mobile Bitcoin" for the value sapping. he doesn't care that the BTC converted to Cashcoin or whatever shitcoin is involved with Truthcoin is put at risk. he sees SC's as a way to exploit Bitcoin.
i suggest every other altcoin will attempt the same bolt on strategy.
I also have the feeling he is using the peg as a "risk-adverse" aspect when in fact he has no plan to peg 1:1. Oh well... fools.. money..parted I don't get the 1:1 thing. It doesn't really matter what the ratio is, so long as it is a ratio that is communicated clearly and is not alterable, yes? It could be 1:100, 1:2, or 10:1, and when you return to the MC it reverses. |
|
|
|
|
I remember the digicash wallet, as I recall I bought $20 worth in the '90s to spend 15 and never used the rest after reading about it in Wired magazine, but ended up using cybercash instead to do credit card processing for my homebrew ISP.
|
|
|
|
The rising price hasn't lifted my spirits much at all. Still reeling from this bad news. (Bad for gold, bad for Bitcoin) http://news.goldseek.com/GATA/1415649749.php... http://www.gata.org/files/VonNotHausOrder-Nov-10-2014.pdfIn which Judge Voorhees writes about my friend Bernard von NotHaus, one of the inspirations for Satoshi... A quote from the previous horrible case Gellman v US: "The United States has the sole power to coin money under the Constitution, and if anyone, individual or
State, assumes to supplant the medium of exchange adopted by our Government,
or assumes to compete with the United States Government in this regard, a
violation of these statutes would follow. Undoubtedly, no one can interfere with
the monopoly which this Government has obtained by reason of the
Constitutional provisions without running afoul of these statutes"
...
Whether the rationale
set forth in Gellman is adopted or not, the Court finds that under the construction of Section 486
applied here, contemplating that if a coin is intended for use as current money then there is
necessarily a deceptive quality about its design, Defendant’s conviction on Count Three must be
upheld.
For the reasons set forth herein, the undersigned is of the opinion, and this Court so finds
as a matter of law, that Congress indeed possesses the power to criminalize an individual’s
minting of coinage, whether in resemblance of U.S. coins or of original design, that is intended
for use as current money. This... in contrast to several state's "lawful money" decisions (Calif), and even precious metal as Legal Tender laws (Utah) That's a ridiculous interpretation of Article I (am I missing some other constitutional commentary on currency issuance?). Seems a very unlikely attack vector against bitcoin unless additional explicit legislation is passed (and it would have to somehow deal only with bitcoin et al, lest they set precedent that any Chuck E Cheese franchise owner is running an illegal currency scheme). Believe it or not, this was from the court's decision. US Federal court. I'm flabbergasted. This is a political prosecution. There were no damages. No one lost money, no one was cheated, there was no ponzi scheme, or money laundering or any of that. In December he may become the first political prisoner in the USA for an alternative currency and questioning the Fed. A warehouse full of gold and silver belonging to the warehouse receipt bearers was seized by the Feds. The accounting was perfect, everything was there just as it was claimed to be. He's facing 22 years in federal prison, and is in his 70s. A brilliant man, he should be a national treasure, not a prisoner. It just doesn't make sense. The USA is not the US Dollar, just as no country is its currency. This is just wrong. |
|
|
|
The rising price hasn't lifted my spirits much at all. Still reeling from this bad news. (Bad for gold, bad for Bitcoin) http://news.goldseek.com/GATA/1415649749.php... http://www.gata.org/files/VonNotHausOrder-Nov-10-2014.pdfIn which Judge Voorhees writes about my friend Bernard von NotHaus, one of the inspirations for Satoshi... A quote from the previous horrible case Gellman v US: "The United States has the sole power to coin money under the Constitution, and if anyone, individual or
State, assumes to supplant the medium of exchange adopted by our Government,
or assumes to compete with the United States Government in this regard, a
violation of these statutes would follow. Undoubtedly, no one can interfere with
the monopoly which this Government has obtained by reason of the
Constitutional provisions without running afoul of these statutes"
...
Whether the rationale
set forth in Gellman is adopted or not, the Court finds that under the construction of Section 486
applied here, contemplating that if a coin is intended for use as current money then there is
necessarily a deceptive quality about its design, Defendant’s conviction on Count Three must be
upheld.
For the reasons set forth herein, the undersigned is of the opinion, and this Court so finds
as a matter of law, that Congress indeed possesses the power to criminalize an individual’s
minting of coinage, whether in resemblance of U.S. coins or of original design, that is intended
for use as current money. This... in contrast to several state's "lawful money" decisions (Calif), and even precious metal as Legal Tender laws (Utah) |
|
|
|
http://nakamotoinstitute.org/b-money/I am fascinated by Tim May's crypto-anarchy. Unlike the communities traditionally associated with the word "anarchy", in a crypto-anarchy the government is not temporarily destroyed but permanently forbidden and permanently unnecessary. It's a community where the threat of violence is impotent because violence is impossible, and violence is impossible because its participants cannot be linked to their true names or physical locations. The cypherpunks have been lining up for this shot for nearly three decades.  "The target area is only two meters wide. It's a small thermal exhaust port, right below the main port. The shaft leads directly to the reactor system." Yeppers, and those of us that saw that in the theaters when it first came out have been here lining up this shot all along. Someday, Justus, when we are alone, and I'm feeling good... I will tell you some stories about this and the cypherpunk connection that will absolutely blow your mind. Just be sure to remind me to do so when the time comes, so I don't get senile and start talking about sleds named rosebud or something.  edit: that looks like an image from the digital remake. |
|
|
|
The WHO hasn't published status reports for many days now. Anyway, no reliable data is available for both Liberia and Sierra Leone, where entire villages are being wiped out from the map due to Ebola.
This is because data is not available as these places do not have the reporting mechanisms that are available in the developed world. It is less because of a lack of reporting mechanisms and more a lack of reporting. The "reporting mechanisms" are OK. They even have mobile phones! FWIW, We are still getting data, but it has been a longer interval than usual (about a week). This could be a good thing. "The outbreaks of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in Senegal and Nigeria were declared over on 17 October and 19 October 2014, respectively. A national EVD outbreak is considered to be over when 42 days (double the 21-day incubation period of the Ebola virus) has elapsed since the last patient in isolation became laboratory negative for EVD." 4960 dead on the last count of 13268 cases (Nov 7) http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/case-counts.html |
|
|
|
I think moving all in wouldn't be the optimal play for me.
If there is another bubble, then afterwards you could be considered "all in" because that 50% will be closer to 90%. |
|
|
|
http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/content/en/mineweb-gold-news?oid=259165&sn=DetailThis article exposes the dirty little secret of why banks can not afford to let Bitcoin succeed without them. They either need to kill it or be in on it. The article is about the effects of gold backwardation. It goes into some detail on the mechanisms. From the point of view of banks vis a vis Bitcoin: Since there aren't these sorts of derivative plays (like Winklevoss ETP) available to banks currently, they either need to create them in order to play, or find a new way to be guaranteed to make money. tl;dr? (1) Basically, there exists a gold arbitrage for the bullion banks. (2) During periods of high physical gold demand (backwardation) – the arbitrage creates ever more “paper gold" (3) But the longer the backwardation continues, the more the market gets drained of physical gold and filled up with paper gold. (4) This can continue for a few years, but eventually the market becomes too unstable and the price soars looking for some physical gold. (5) But if physical gold never returns to the market, regardless of the price, it means that confidence has been lost in fiat currency - and the dollar collapses. (6) The bullion banks can delay this outcome, but they cannot stop it. This happened in the Nixon years, which led to stagflation.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
