The strategy I rely on is to realize a 100% loss.


The strategy I hope for is:

 - recoup my speculative investment if/when the price gets to around $100/BTC.  This will leave me quite a significant stash.

 - if the price gets into the $1000's/BTC then I'll start drawing down the value in exchange for shit I want.


Along the way I may or may not use BTC as I have in the past or as I expected to when I got in:

 - donations to causes I believe in

 - things which do not benefit by the capability to issue charge-backs (esp, pay-as-you-go services like compute service leases.)

 - ratcheting in transactions in lu of relying on trust to keep parties near whole.


A fly in the ointment in terms of using BTC is that I don't like most of the more 'convenient' ways of getting fiat into Bitcoin and I don't like the alternative of leaving a large balance on the books of an exchange.  This is a limiting factor to buying BTC in real-time as needed to use for odds and ends.

There is latency getting fiat into exchanges which sometimes create slowdowns.  Temporary when interest (or desperation) is high.  Mistaken for tops by some unfortunate analysts.

Maybe anyone who uses the site for free advertising in their sig block?

The sad truth of the matter is that at this point I use the 'donator' tag to identify people who want to look earnest and upstanding (telling me that there is every liklihood that they are anything but.)  I use this site more than is healthy...at least when Bitcoin itself is behaving interestingly...like tonight for instance.  I really should ante up a pitance I suppose, but only if I don't get hit with the donator label.

It's only $28,000.  Opps....that was an hour ago...closer to $30,000 now.  Oh well...the price of counter-party risk I guess.

We may be vile but we're not stupid.  I suspect that the needing to dig into our own stash significantly will be the marker where we consider the cow to be dry and the time ripe to move on the the next monetary system.  Give or take a few years depending on election cycles, homeland security project progress, and other such considerations.

Glad to hear it.  No bull...although I have no idea why after you've been so mean to poor little me over the years

Cypherdoc...my friend and compadre...please tell me you are not going to be one of the ones victimized in this scam.  Not when things are starting to get interesting after such a long dry spell!

I would not expect the events to be equivalent.  In the block value drop case, fewer BTC are entering the market which changes the supply/demand curve.  If there is fiat entering the system hoping to find BTC when this event occurs I would anticipate that BTC values would rise when measured against fiat...unless the event is fully priced in by the time it happens at least.

I was talking about how the U.S. absorbed 3500 tons of Germany's gold and how they'll never see it again and are unlikely to say jack shit about it.  Such is the role of a vassal state before its' master.  Sorry if I was not clear.

I read a funny headline indicating that some wiener from Germany recently showed up to check up on their stash and make sure that Soviets hadn't gotten it yet and was told to take a hike.  Didn't read the story though.

Two 'Huh?'s do not a 'Bingo!' make.

Firstly, I have mentioned on this thread that I've no doubt that a fraction of persons will have no troubles using Bitcoin in almost any circumstance.  Just that a much larger fraction could, and that could change Bitcoin significantly (_if_ a decision to try to quash Bitcoin through restrictions is made.)

Secondly, they guy is clearly documenting a disavowment of any potential wrongdoing.  In case he get's hauled in before the people's court of bitcointalk.org ya think?  I doubt that and read this as a concern over possible future hassles complements of government (who he (and you) seem to be claiming are toothless.)  Me suspects that the guy is concerned that his rattlings are documented and analyzed...and me suspects that he is 100% correct to be.

Mine also FWIW.

You do sound a bit agitated for a person who has no concern about the government's ability to manage the internet related activities of it's citizens.  Just say'in...

I have not studied the cat-n-mouse game involving kiddie porn since the product is not an interest of mine.  I do know that in spite of a fair amount of time spent looking at internet porn I very rarely happen across it.  Basically never these days.  Thanks for the info on the subject though as it helps understand the game more generally which is useful.  A bit unnerving also as I suspect that it would not be terribly challenging to trick people into sending Bitcoin to an undercover entity.

As for what is possible and impossible, I suspect you may be mis-estimating.  This in light of the ability to execute citizens abroad (and other people nearby) without trial which would have seemed similarly impossible not long ago.  Also in light of focused efforts to enact 'internet kill switch' capabilities and development of the associated infrastructure.

It is relatively straightforward to limit utilization of certain things.  Kiddie porn is a good example.  While I agree that dedicated and knowledgeable (and brave and/or desperate) people would always have the capability of using Bitcoin, a clampdown would significantly modulate the makeup of the user-base and the count of said.  That, in turn, would dramatically change the direction and trajectory of the solution.

The substantive difference is that a huge number of people use and appreciate filesharing.  With Bitcoin, only a tiny fraction of people have even heard of it, and a majority of those who have have a pretty negative impression of it (which is likely no accident.)  So, obviously, the impact and 'marketing potential' of a crackdown would differ significantly between Bitcoin and various forms of filesharing.

Ya, I know...The truth tends to be particularly painful.  Why don't you people get a strong leadership like the Ecuadorian people did if you don't like being perceived as our tools?  Or just keep getting blown up in Afghanistan.  Your choice.

To answer your question even though I fail to see how it fit's into this particular conversation:  Not that I'm aware of or that anyone has mentioned to me.  My propensity to call it like I see it has been noted by others from time to time.

I don't see a mechanism by which your projections are the likely outcome of a dedicated crackdown on Bitcoin by the US.  Particularly because the European states are our vassals which will dance to whatever tune we call, and in the case of Venezuela we're going to need an excuse to go marching in at some point when we've finished up obtaining Iran's oil producing holdings.

I do theorize that a crackdown on Bitcoin would be good for my Bitcoin speculative investment in terms of long term payout but partly because my projections of what would likely happen in most other parts of the world are about 180 degrees from yours.

More importantly, I think such a crackdown would help Bitcoin achieve a certain very important utility which may or may not have been a goal of the designer.  That is to point out to the populations that there are monetary alternatives to ones which might otherwise be presented as the only possible solution (upon the collapse of our current fiat regimes.)

If you think Bitcoin might be going somewhere you might want to obtain them.  If you want to obtain them, you might want the price to be low.  If you want the price to be low, you might try your hand at FUDing the shit out of them.  I realize that this is a chain of reasoning which could throw a lot of people.

I always took that to be Nagle's game and I vaguely recall him admitting to have bought in at around $2.00 but could be remembering wrong.  If so, nicely done Nagle.  I figure Edward50 was somewhere in that category but not as good at it.  Don't recall BTCEconomist.  One way or another these are all probably sock puppets anyway and I suspect the folks are still among us.

Not an uncommon line of thinking...for paranoid folks with not much connection to reality at least.  I'd be pretty surprised if there were any paid trolls on this board at this time.  I actually never got the sense from the guy ('silverbox' who I mistakenly was commenting about) that he was particularly against Bitcoin but more that he was not about to exit his PM positions in trade.  Much like myself.