|
Very nice! You may want to adjust the YouTube video settings so that it doesn't cue up another video after yours plays. When you leave it open like that you never know what will be shown to your prospects next. Am very interested in your service for several of my projects.
|
|
|
|
|
@lettucebee:
I love your handle!
|
|
|
|
There's a lot of people who think politicians have an incentive to win elections. A lot more who think they try to serve both (attracting votes while appealing to concentrated interests at the same time). So there isn't a need to be 'sure' he's being 'sarcastic'. It even sounds rude to assume that.
I was the one being sarcastic. I'm still surprised at how many people still believe in the political process and the "pagan faith" in the State. I don't mean offense - I simply suggest that people take a hard look at what the political process has produced. I like Rose Lane Wilder's observation that people have a misplaced faith in "external authority". Robert LeFevre discussed this as well in his great essay "A Way To Be Free": http://centerforselfrule.org/a-way-to-be-free/Okay, I'm done with my philosophizing. How do you protect yourself from those who wish to restrict your freedom of choice? |
|
|
|
Expect Anthony Freeman to be clueless for life  Did you read the article (and his previous articles)? He is merely pointing out how bitcoin is likely to succeed despite opposition from central planners. He is friend to bitcoin and individual freedom - not an enemy. |
|
|
|
how does a politician go about banning something that is good for 99.99% of the non-banker population?
Since when has a politician put the interests of the individual over the bankers and central planners? when his re-election depends on it. Surely you are being sarcastic because you cannot possibly be serious. The "new guy" is bought and paid for by the same people who controlled the "old guy". Here's an entertaining article that further illustrates this: Politics is a Scam - Why I Will Never Vote Again - by James Altucher http://www.jamesaltucher.com/2011/06/politics-is-a-scam-why-i-will-never-vote-again/ |
|
|
|
how does a politician go about banning something that is good for 99.99% of the non-banker population?
Since when has a politician put the interests of the individual ahead of the bankers and central planners? |
|
|
|
|
I think you bring up very valid points worth investigating. What you are essentially describing is what is called "counter-party risk" - which means you are at risk of the other party not honoring their obligation to you. This is one more reason to hold and store your bitcoin in your own "bank" (wallet) where no one owes you and no one can default on you.
|
|
|
|
Interesting article: Expect bitcoin to be "banned" - expect the ban to be ignoredby Anthony Freeman http://economicsandliberty.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/expect-bitcoin-to-be-%E2%80%9Cbanned%E2%80%9D-expect-the-ban-to-be-ignored/Man, by nature, wants to be free. He wants to choose how he lives his life. He wants to choose with whom he will associate. He wants to choose with whom he will trade. He wants to choose how his money is spent. Bitcoin gives him a greater ability to do all of these. In my previous posts (here, here, here and here) I point out the endearing features of bitcoin and the direct threat of bitcoin to governments and central banks. Because bitcoin has the potential to make these institutions obsolete, expect them to attempt to ban and restrict bitcoin anyway they can. The incentives to use bitcoin are too great. Yes, I expect bitcoin to be “banned” and restricted by central planners in many ways. I also expect these bans and restrictions to be ignored and circumvented. The incentives are too great. Man wants to be free. |
|
|
|
By hiding under your bed in the fetal possition.
LOL! Yes, that was my first thought but, assuming I was able to survive that and the subsequent fallout (pun intended), I would like to know that my bitcoin holdings were safe and secure. |
|
|
|
|
While thinking about the possible attacks against bitcoin holdings the threat of Electro-Magnetic Pulses popped up. So my questions are:
1. How susceptible are bitcoin holdings to Electro-Magnetic Pulses (whether they be highly targeted or a more generalized attack)?
and
2. What are some of the possible defenses?
Thanks,
Trader Steve
|
|
|
|
The confused view of Bitcoins as something of intrinsic value (deflationary and capped in amount) versus its infinite divisibility (representing a view of Bitcoins as currency) are directly in competition with each other. You lost me there. Why should those be in competition? They appear complementary to me. Infinite divisibility is what allows a deflating medium to still be able to serve as the Numéraire for small amounts of value. I partly sympathize with the OP's point. But I think there's an alternative hypothesis. Precious metals are not (normally) used in transactions yet retain use as a store of value. They support a rather large network of bullion and coin dealers, who exist by collecting a transaction fee when it is bought and sold. Reputable bullion dealers serve to give confidence against counterfeit coins and the like. Their function is similar to the function of miners in Bitcoin (conferring trust in the blockchain), who can likewise survive on transaction fees, post block-bounty. Even if Bitcoin's use as a transaction medium remains small, why can't Bitcoin serve the same store of value purpose? The miners collecting transaction fees would serve the same role as the dealers in the bullion realm. Bitcoin could survive as a capital asset. The market has already demonstrated a willingness to ascribe value to its money-like characteristics. I'm not arguing in any way against the desirability of Bitcoin-denominated trade of goods and services. I hope it flourishes. I'm merely arguing that there is a rationale for the survival of Bitcoin without commensurate growth in such trade. +1 Agreed, just look at gold's value and the fact that it is not currently used as a medium of exchange in any meaningful way. Imagine what the price of bitcoin can be if bitcoin simply assumes a similar role. I took some "back of the envelope" calculations and took the total ounces of gold in the world and divided them by the final total number of bitcoin and came up with 254 ounces per 1 BTC. With gold currently priced at approximately US$1,500 per ounce, the value of 1 bitcoin could ultimately be $381,000. This doesn't even account for the likely huge amounts of government money-printing in our near future. Math: 32150 troy ounces per tonne x 166000 existing tones of gold in the world (source: World Gold Council) = 5,336,900,000 oz / 21,000,000 ultimate total supply of bitcoin = 254 oz per 1 BTC or 254 x $1,500 gold = $381,000 per BTC |
|
|
|
I don't see the advantages of Bitcoin in its current form for consumers of hard goods (that aren't illicit). What are they?
I'm trying to do my part: offering gold & silver bullion in trade for bitcoin. Honestly, I think this goes along way to closing the loop. Gold and silver are arguably the hardest currency/good around. When you can get gold and bullion for bitcoin everything else will fall in line (of course I can't supply all the gold and silver by myself). Food and Gas are what need to be offered next. One can start by offering something like Safeway pre-paid cards - which do not cost anything (no $5 fee like the visa gift cards) and are good for gas and food at all of their different chain stores. These cards can be purchased up to $500. When merchants see that bitcoin is as "good as gold" - and that they can buy the necessities of life with it - the rest will follow. As others have said, the "ease of use" problem is the next great hurdle. I believe we are not far off. |
|
|
|
...and the knowledge that I own bitcoin gives me peace, comfort and serenity.  |
|
|
|
|
I'm not worried about people "hoarding" bitcoin (which is a fallacy anyway). At some point they will need to feed and clothe themselves - and they will spend their bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
(Who knows, maybe we virtual entities living in virtual worlds *do* have some "essential self" in some world somewhere; is that somewhere to be a "hell on earth" or an open universe of open minds and hearts and... mining opportunities?  -MarkM- +1 Yes, the free market of cyberspace allows one to exist where he cannot in meatspace. In cyberspace we can have multiple identities that allow us more freedom of expression without the common prejudices of meatspace. bitcoin helps further this freedom of expression. |
|
|
|
Frankly that's a couple depressing responses.
PS Does anyone else find it ironic that this forum considers the word bitcoin to be incorrectly spelt? +1  |
|
|
|
|
The beauty of the Free (bitcoin) Market...it's great to see these new ideas being discussed!
|
|
|
|
TIME to cancel my subscription...oh, wait - I never had one!  |
|
|
|
Inflation benefits the people that have more wealth because it props up their assets, while it goes against the people that earn a wage (usually the middle class and the poor) because it devaluates their wages. The basic mistake you are making is believing the wealthy keep their wealth in currency. They dont.
I don't care who will profit - rich or poor - from inflation currency. In order to have big enough lending activity people should be discouraged from storing value in currency for long term. If wealthy do not keep their wealth in currency - objective met. If they are running successful businesses - they have right to be wealthy. See: Bitcoin And The Virtue of Hoarding And Deflation http://economicsandliberty.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/bitcoin-and-the-virtue-of-hoarding-and-deflation/and What is Money? http://economicsandliberty.wordpress.com/what-is-money/ |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
