|
As hash power aggregates toward mining pools, the pool owners bear the risk of being coerced.
The pool owner may be entirely honorable, but may not be able to withstand coercion by TPTB. Princess Leia watcher her homeworld be obliterated rather than give up the rebel plans.
Any large pool owner that is not concerned about this, maybe just already has been coerced.
If there is one thing "they" are good at, its the protection racket. When you own all the guns, jails, courts, and money, you can get away with just about anything.
The ghash.io PR piece does not read to me to be sufficiently concerned with the problem they have created for themselves to keep me from being concerned about them. I wish them safety, and wish they were more concerned about it themselves. As it is, they are presenting their pool as being the single largest threat to the existence of bitcoin today.
I am less worried about ghash.io being the assassin against bitcoin, than them being the gun used by others that just can find where and how to leverage the trigger. Keep your children safe, team ghash, for all our sake.
|
|
|
|
Yes, I suspect the photograph was designed to maximize the appearance of the gold. Good delivery bars are not necessarily the same mass, but usually 400 troy ounces. They do have to be marked whatever they are. In order for a bar to be considered Good Delivery it must fulfill the following requirements: 1Needs to have a fineness of at least 99.5% Must have certain inscriptions: serial number(s), refiner’s logo or mark, exact fineness level, and year it was produced Must be at least 350 ounces but cannot exceed 430 ounces Length must be between 210 and 290 mm Must have a width between 55 and 85 mm Must be 25 to 45 mm tall |
|
|
|
FTFY, the value has yet to be realized in the form of computer chips and door stops.
About 78% of the gold consumed each year is used in the manufacture of jewelry. 1 |
|
|
|
|
20,000 bars for all the bitcoins?
|
|
|
|
I haven't seen that advert, but it is likely not to far away. Next bubble for sure.
Sorry I wasn't clear: I haven't seen such ads for Bitcoin yet (except here in this thread 8-). what would you see as the right message to be giving in regards Bitcoin?
It is hard to answer, since I am still skeptical about the chances of success - for cryptocoins in general, and for Bitcoin in particular. One essential thing that cannot do harm is to convince more merchants to accept international payments in cryptocoins. (I do not see any advantage for domestic payments, except perhaps for very small amounts.) However that will require efficient, reliable and trustworthy exchanges. It is not helpful if a merchant has to wait 3 months to get the money out of MtGOX, ou get his bitcoins snatched by the FBI. That in turn will require regulation by the local governments, disclosure and independent auditing, just as in stock markets. Beware that credit card charges are usually a small part of the extra cost of international purchases. The main item, at least here in Brazil, are the customs taxes (like 40% or more depending on the item). Not to mention the delay and hassle of having to fetch the merchandise through customs, warranty limitations, risk of item being stolen, etc.. For these reasons, I suspect that most people will continue buying imported goods in the domestic market, rather than make direct purchases. A pretty good answer to an admittedly hard question. Any reasonable person ought be skeptical about the chances of success of a novel notion, especially one that is bound to be on the receiving end of significant barricades by entrenched powers. Consider however: From the merchant's perspective, every bitcoin transaction is beneficial. It lowers the cost of sale vis-a-vis credit, debit, or any other form of electronic funds transfer with the exception of point-of-sale cash (which has a different set of costs in regards to physical security roughly equivalent to the digital security needs of bitcoin commerce. The assumption of required regulations is not universally accepted. A Caveat Emptor solution is equally viable. There is no necessary state interest in regulation for regulation's sake. There is no state backing, and no state liability for loss. Bitcoin can fail and there is no political cost, so no state has a need to protect it or its users. Consumer protection ought not be enforced where it is neither needed nor wanted. To do otherwise creates a "protection racket". |
|
|
|
I really hope that Bitcoin gore dev team stays against about privacy violations or if not I hope all miners reject all plans supporting this kind of development lines possibly planned for.
This is not a change to the Bitcoin Protocol, miners (or just people running fully-validating wallet and relay nodes) cannot affect this move. Although some kind of protocol integration will no doubt be proposed by someone or other. People can choose which version they run / install and in the worst case Bitcoin will be forged / split in two versions. Privacy violating and altered new which sure will arise. However, it could be also end of bitcoin. I hope this craziness will be taken seriously and whole community will stand against this kind of changes. Im not sure where the biggest pools are located, they will have the power to choose. But that's not what this is. In some ways, this is worse than a client/blockchain fork. At least the differing market price for Bitcoin and TaintCoin would help to settle the fight. Any Bitcoin based business would then have to choose which of the coins to support, and watch how much custom they receive from each if they choose both. This CoinValidation group is the beginnings of a way to gradually force customers to disclose their identities, not via the protocol, but by good old fashioned legislation. This would be weird. One could own two companies, one that accepts only tainted coins and one that accepts only untainted. The two companies could trade with each other to do inventory management, using off-block-chain settlement (such as fiat, gold, ledger entries, whatever). The burden would be an additional company registration and some overhead, but why not address both markets? And. Should we expect a company to arise that automates this dual-company approach? Might it be owned by one of these coin-tainters? |
|
|
|
What is the Bitcoin foundation?
The more I read about the entities that are getting involved with Bitcoin the muddier my picture of Bitcoin gets.
You say Bitcoin is decentralized? It is not and will never be as long as there's someone pulling the strings behind the scenes.
Whether it's an entity within the network (a large pool), a shady wall-street investor or the big brother foundation...
Where is the long term plan posted? Where is the list of planned features? Where do I send my feature suggestions? Where is the open discussion?
Where are the miners in all of this? Are we just dumb, cheap labor?
So long as the strings are held by enough people, that is decentralization. Where they get tied into ropes are the problems. If you have a private key and a mining rig, you have an untangled string. Most your questions have been adequately and repeatedly answered. If you can read code, even better than google, hop on github. Feature suggestion - pull request. Most people aren't in the group that can be useful there. Consequently the "Very Open Discussion".... most of which is more open than is useful, as incredible amounts of time are used by people-that-know-stuff explaining to people-that-don't-know-how-to-find-answers. There is some utility to this VOD process at this stage of the project (which is still beta) because the "issue identifiers" (complainers) are still giving enough useful input to the "issue resolvers" (people that make things) to be of some valuable guidance. And there are plenty of us around the edges that can talk to both. When you are at the point of identifying a novel issue that hasn't been addressed, you get tremendous acclaim and hatred. The automatic and persistent KYC proposals are in that category. There is a problem, some solutions to that problem may make it worse, and so it will be hotly debated. |
|
|
|
I consider Napster is a good partial comparison.
It's a disruptive technology, there's been a lot of them. How many thousands of years did man use horses/carts/whatever to move stuff? Cars and trains changed all of that, presumably for the better.
The internet? I've been online since 1981, but only since the turn of the millennium or so has it done these things (America-centric view):
Nearly killed the postal service via email. There's been a postal service in USA longer than there's been a USA.
Newspapers and magazines? Adapt or die.
Greedy record companies? Ten years ago they were screaming that 'digital downloads' will kill the record industry. Now Walmart and Amazon have 99 cent music downloads.
Greedy movie companies? They wailed about piracy, but years later Netflix and Hulu are doing very well.
Bitcoin may not make Money 1.0 obsolete, but could very well change many parts of it forever.
Napster is one of the inspirations Satoshi Nakamoto drew upon in the formulation of the Bitcoin solution to the Byzantine General's problem. |
|
|
|
I'm trying to understand this. Off-putting, how?
Too much effort in convincing people to invest in Bitcoin, rather than to use it. "Look at how many millions you could make by investing bitcoins" instead of "Look at how many cents you could save by buying a toaster with bitcoins instead of a credit card." A sure sign that an investment is a scam is when its TV ad shows a smug man on a luxury boat with three girls on each side. Renting a storefront next to NYSE is not as bad, but is going in that direction, IMHO. I haven't seen that advert, but it is likely not to far away. Next bubble for sure. As for the storefront next to NYSE? Consider what a wise man once said: “Those who are well have no need of a physician..." I can think of few places with a higher concentration of "the sick" as regards bitcoin than next to the NYSE. It is a great place for an education facility. More often I find myself trying to convince people not to invest, but instead to accept. Let the Winklevoss and Second Market folks suggest investing. Most everyone I interact on the topic of Bitcoin is engaged in the same process, "accept not invest". The point where investment becomes a suggestion is when a newbie tells me that they want to start mining. That has to be offset against the opportunity cost of buying the bitcoin from someone or else there is no place to start a discussion of ROI from their fiat vs crypto position. I would be curious as to what you all think of as a good activity as regards the communication/education/marketing/advertising/propaganda spectrum. I suspect there may be some who might consider any mention of it as a bad thing? JorgeStolfi, what would you see as the right message to be giving in regards Bitcoin? |
|
|
|
if they are worth more when you use then than when you acquired them, you got them cheap.
The ETF slowly bleeds out coins in the form of fees and costs (most of which go to other Winklevoss family companies), so it is not entirely a bitcoin black hole investment vehicle. There is continuous residual dilution of coins in the EFT and as new purchases are apportioned by the assets held in the fund, this dilution never reverses and forms a type of constant debasement of the per share value over time.
That this small continuous dilution is expected to be more than offset by the improvement in value of the bitcoin held is assumed by most anyone and certainly by all who would invest in it.
Cheap when I can buy them, relative to when I can use them is the issue. Right. By this metric you can expect the fund to create many cheap coins. The fund is expected to be a net-buyer for a long time even though it will be selling some continuously for fees. The arb is to buy bitcoin and short the ETF. Poor carry unless it's levered super cheaply.
Yes, though with the current activity in the gold ETFs, you are likely to get a better/swifter payout there. Those are being bled out even now by redemption. |
|
|
|
Nobody asks for delivery....
Did you mean to say that more ask for it, than get it? |
|
|
|
If a company hoards, they will drive up the price. Ok, so how is that bad?
I can't get them cheap. Is bad, very very bad. There really isn't such a thing as cheap coins. They are worth whatever they are worth when you use them. If you never use them it never matters what they are worth. So from your perspective, if they are worth more when you use then than when you acquired them, you got them cheap. The ETF slowly bleeds out coins in the form of fees and costs (most of which go to other Winklevoss family companies), so it is not entirely a bitcoin black hole investment vehicle. There is continuous residual dilution of coins in the EFT and as new purchases are apportioned by the assets held in the fund, this dilution never reverses and forms a type of constant debasement of the per share value over time. That this small continuous dilution is expected to be more than offset by the improvement in value of the bitcoin held is assumed by most anyone and certainly by all who would invest in it. |
|
|
|
Due to request, Czech Koruna added to fiat currencies on coldhardca.sh. |
|
|
|
... wouldn't there be more benefit purely for ease of transactions if a public company would have all of its assets in Bitcoin, and issue shares against it? Well done, you just described an exchange traded fund...  soo, thats just a parallel market with no use of the BTC involved and without the possibility of withdrawing?! im not sure whats the purpose here..  The purpose is to allow retail investors and pension funds to invest in bitcoins as an asset class and not have to worry about where to buy it, when to buy it, how to store it and when to sell it. The WBT will probably act as a one way trapdoor for Bitcoins, driving up the value of remaining Bitcoins on the market. And that is a very, very good thing. I would never trust such a legal monster. It's a paper market and once (if) established as a pricing mechanism for BTC, it may even present a nice attack surface for price manipulation. If you don't have exclusive access to the key, you don't own it. Price manipulation? How? An ETF established through a US Stock Exchange is an ETF, whether dividend paying stocks or Bitcoin. GLD is a super popular Gold ETF. If you own this ETF, gold bullion is stored for you in a vault in London. Not going to be much different owning this bitcoin ETF. Bitcoins will be stored for you somewhere. Price manipulation, yes. Imagine that. There are even some famous examples, but it happens daily. Hunt Brothers? GATA? Here's a quick primer from Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2010/07/23/gold-etfs-and-the-manipulation-game/ |
|
|
|
Realy, it sucks. Strong resistance upwards. Strong support downwards, resulting in tiny movements.
Finally the stability bitcoin needs to be used as a currency. LOL, keep in mind, some invoicing is NET 30. If we are still in this band for a couple 30 day periods in a row, we can call it stability. Even with the last few days, we have a beta that swamps any currency. |
|
|
|
edit2: you´re also usin the same info in your green shot analysis thread
Yeah but last time I did that analysis we moved up almost straight away! yeah i agree, that´s the whole purpose of this bot action, to trick people into buying or at least give a secure feelin. Last time there was enough motivation around to make it happen. Let´s see how it works this time. I have no i idea, but i´m kinda distracted by this kind of obvious market manipulation. Would you personally recommend to anyone of your friends to buy into BTC right now? Yes. Why? If Bitcoin will not be stopped or destroyed somehow, it won't matter if you bought at 600 or 800. I would say them it is the best gamble bet ever - you win nothing or in few years you will maybe become milionare. And now...you wrote it will be on stamp 400-500...you have balls to back it with 1 BTC bet (i already asked and you ignore it)or are you just another troll waiting to get on ignore lists? Can fonzie provide an example of an investment that is not "manipulated"? The DOW index has been pumped by the FED for the last handful of years at the expense of the treasury, and don't even start with bonds. Real Estate? Gold? What isn't manipulated? If bots doing microtrades is scary, stay away from every equity on any stock exchange. The high speed trading algos used there would burn MTGOX to the ground. |
|
|
|
The 247 million indonesians probably care. Then they'll find their way! Or so I hope! An Newton cares, (the price violates the law of gravity). |
|
|
|
This "capitulation" has got absolutely no conviction. And as the days countdown to 31 January and nothing happens, people wanting to buy in but waiting for the China crash are going to start getting twitchy!  any action is more likely to be during the week of Feb 10. Great, that will move the Bitcoin 1K party into the spring when it is warmer. |
|
|
|
There is an overstock of coins right now. It's going to be interesting to find out if overstock are able to hedge against the volatility. If they are able to, then maybe there's hope for a larger adoption of bitcoin. If not, and they end up with a significant loss, instead of the small gains they expected, the signal will be bearish. You are aware they are selling their coins, right? They ought to. They have to pay their suppliers with fiat money; what else could they do? I strongly believe though that they don't give up all their income in btc... It's not wise, nor profitable. Bitpay gets the coins, Overstock gets the lower transaction cost. And Bitpay they are better suited to manage the risk of hodling or dupming. Wait for the volume, don't buy until you see the whites of their eyes. (or at least until after my limit orders all hit) |
|
|
|
On other news: eBay UK to Allow Sale of Virtual Currency from 10th FebruaryEmily Spaven (@emilyspaven) | Published on January 16, 2014 at 21:36 GMT | Companies, Merchants, News ebay eBay is launching a dedicated Virtual Currency category on eBay Classifieds in the UK on 10th February. The Classified Ads category will allow for the sale of all types of digital currency, including bitcoin and litecoin, eBay representatives have confirmed. eBay Classifieds, which lists posts throughout the site, serves as the site’s answer to Craigslist. eBay provides the free platform for local buyers and sellers to connect, but does not participate in the transactions. http://www.coindesk.com/ebay-uk-virtual-currency-february/I think that kills localbitcoins with their 1% fees Localbitcoin is free if you don't care about the escrow and ratings. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
