That's the thing. It's a million times more simple to herd "retarded" sheep as you call them. Heck, even the ones who think they are in the know are just as mentally in the dark as everyone else.

Then you have the dozens of government intelligence agents that post on this very website day after day that implement their own agendas on behalf of their own "shepards" Heck this website sprang out of the blue days after bitcoins initial public release, so whom do you think is pulling the strings here? : )

Is bitcoin revolutionary? Yes, but for whom?

Alcohol was banned throughout the united states and criminalized by the "powers that be," yet today is one of the most profitable enterprises in the economy. Hint: tell them it's bad, and they will flock to it like flies to shit

Hint: the sentiment of the people is always anti government. So govt releases a new product and then tarnishes that same product in the media, in order to attract the flies If the govt says it's bad, it must be good ; )

So I'll throw this out there...

Let's say, 10 years from now (may seem like a lifetime away to a surf with no family heritage or lineage, but for the ruling elite that have been in power over the last 500 years is nothing) the federal reserve implements negative interest rates, meaning instead of the banks 'paying out' interest, they 'charge depositors' a fee on their overall deposits. This would OBVIOUSLY lead to a widespread run on the banks, as depositors all over the country rush to withdraw their savings. So what's the remedy? ...........A cashless society

No cash = no bank runs

Sweden is currently being used as a testing ground for this

Also I would like to point something out. The Federal Reserve is a subsidiary of The Bank of England, and here's what their chief economist Andy Haldane has to say about bitcoin

"One interesting solution, then, would be to maintain the principle of a government-backed currency, but have it issued in an electronic rather than paper form.  This would preserve the social convention of a state-issued unit of account and medium of exchange, albeit with currency now held in digital rather than physical wallets.  But it would allow negative interest rates to be levied on currency easily and speedily, so relaxing the ZLB constraint.  

Would such a monetary technology be feasible?  In one sense, there is nothing new about digital, state-issued money.  Bank deposits at the central bank are precisely that.  The technology underpinning digital or crypto-currencies has, however, changed rapidly over the past few years.  And it has done so for one very simple reason:  Bitcoin."

Here's another one

"Negative interest rates could be necessary to protect UK economy, says Bank of England chief economist"

Mr Haldane said, adding: "What I think is now reasonably clear is that the payment technology embodied in [digital currency] Bitcoin has real potential."

I'm not saying bitcoin is bad because of this, in fact those of us with 100 or more BTC will be incredibly wealthy in the future. However, those that think they are going against the banks and the government by adopting bitcoin are incredibly misinformed. The first bitcoin transaction emanated from the united kingdom, and the bank of england chief economist has nothing but praise for the technology. While in the US and in mainstream media the "sheep" are being fed the old "only drug dealers and child pornographers use bitcoin" (the same bad means good strategy used to promote THE INTERNET itself back in the early 90's)

So I'll leave you with this.

In society ALL major changes come from the top downwards, not from the bottom upwards.

I rarely interact with forum posters, but I find it interesting that the beliefs of these people stem from clichés and common beliefs of "the crowd."

First I must mention that "the crowd" is always wrong, hence the 1% vs 99% Rich/Poor ratio that exists in every country in the world. This ratio even appears in the amazonian tribes, and african villages. Wealth always concentrates in the hands of the few. The cream always rises to the top.

It all starts with the mind and how one perceives reality.

Let's say AAPL stock goes up 90% in a 12 month time span, is this because "traders" decided to buy apple stock en masse and drive up the price without even the thought of cashing out at a minor 12% profit (like most humans do, due to low self esteem and 'perceived' limitation). The short answer is HELL NO. Any stock that jumps 90%+ in a year only does so when Goldman Sachs (and etc) instructs their market makers to "buy the sell side." They push billions into the sell side over several months (sometimes several years), and then collect two times their money (or more) when they begin to sell onto the buy side over the following months/years.

If traders were honey bees, then VOLUME and paper profits = the honey.


Engrish?


Since you are obviously a fan of the common cliché, I'll give you one that you'd probably appreciate

Blue pill, or Red pill?

This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.

REVELATION: Supply and demand does not apply to trading.

The Banks are failing, Gold is plunging in price - why isn't there a big gold rally? How much money would it take for the price fixers to "buy the sell side" and push the price up? Billions?... Trillions?... Quadrillions? They don't have the mula...  

Why don't they have the mula? Because they have already done their buying

So, the price of gold is going down, what does this mean? is it the "traders" (commoners) that are selling because they are so wise that they are finally willing to go against "the crowd" and against the common cliche that dictates that when the banks are failing and interest rates are jumping, then gold "ALWAYS" goes to the moon?

Well no, actually "traders" are still placing their buy orders - because they have been programmed over the last ten years to "perceive" gold as a hedge against financial crisis. So they are actually trying to "get in cheap,"  but the price keeps on falling Why is this? Because Goldman and The London Gold Price Fixing Company etc have spent the last 10 years "buying the sell side" and putting trillions into pushing up the price. They are now taking their profits by selling onto the buy side, and will be doing so over the next several years - hence, BITCOIN dubbed "digital gold"

Everything is just a rich man's trick

REVELATION: Supply and demand does not apply to trading


Just because you "agree," doesn't make it factual

Idlers make decisions based on "consensus" because it prevents them from having to think.

With altcoins, no premine = no incentive for the dev to "buy the sell side" which equals no price increase, which = dead market.

You say premines are bad because you have been programmed to believe that.

You say that "traders" and "supply and demand" creates "value" because you have been programmed to believe that.

There are alt currencies with zero fan fare, that have incredible runs of high volume and continuous trading. How is this possible? It's because the DEV is wealthy enough to "buy the sell side" and then double up (or much more) when he sells onto the buy side in a controlled manner.

Everyone benefits, especially when the DEV returns and buys the sell side again which you guys, the profane as I like to call you, refer to as "pumping."

If you have ever made money trading an altcoin, then that money has come directly out of the pocket of a developer. Because he had the security of a premine that would allow him to make his money back in the future.

So I'll leave you with this.

A computer is very predictable. If I put bitcointalk.org into my google chrome address bar and then hit enter, I will end up at this forum. Well.. human beings are biological computers that operate in much the same way.  

I wonder how many posts until we get a response written in full Engrish

Thats the thing, why would I seek market based information from a forum full of words when there are exchanges that display performance in the form of NUMBERS.

Do you know why they say "talk is cheap," ? Because i can sit here all day typing nonsense untill im blue in the face, and it wont cost me a penny. BUT when it comes to moving a market, you need mula. Money talks and big bank always takes little bank

So i never seek the opinion of forum posters that just rattle off and regurgitate common clichès. I simply judge every coin on how much genuine volume the dev can deliver out of his own pocket.

People here bitch about premines because thats the ongoing clichè. Little do they know, if the dev doesnt make any money - then neither do they.

Its the coins without premines that should be avoided

But, people dont think. They just repeat and regurgitate. Then they log into some alternate account and start trolling in some engrish typing pattern . .

This place is a gift and a curse... depending on your perspective  

Burning question here guys . .

Why do posters here adopt this ridiculos broken engrish type writing style when they post from some alternate account of theirs?

Things like "no buy this one guys, we all know whats will happen here to this coin. Stay away!! only if you want lose money like a brainless then you should buy, but to me this is clear scam coin"

But you will see other posts in their history where they are using perfect english

This just a weird unspoken bitcointalk thing or what?

And why do people here refer to every alt as a scam? Dont they realise that when an alt suceeds, everyone makes money, even the latecomers?

Is an alt a scam because it has a premine? Well dont you realise that without a premine, the dev cannot do anything to push value into his market? Meaning if you are buying a coin without a premine, you're buying a DUD

There is not one coin without a premine that has had a substantial high volume trading day. WHY? Because without a premine the dev has NO INCENTIVE to dip into his own pocket to push BTC through his market and build its value

Also why is it that devs think that using alt accounts to troll the threads of other coins is an adequate promotion strategy? Coins that succeed only do so when the dev has deep enough pockets to establish genuine and consistent volume, it has nothing to do with public opinion

Will an Engrish speaking troll disrupt this thread before any of my questions are answered?

Bitcointalk aye, the only website that, on the one hand, attracts some of the most intelligent people in the world and then on ther other hand,  attracts the most mentally challenged people. Two extremes . . Quite the intrigue if you ask me