|
I honestly am curious, do you all think the accent and the bouncy-ball were the biggest issue, or did he actually say something dumb? It seemed okay to me. I thought he came off as an eccentric geek who is cautiously optimistic about Bitcoin and who answered the interviewers questions as best he could.
|
|
|
|
As a founding member of THE BITCOIN FOUNDATION, INC. he may have signed the by-laws. In the interest of full transparency THE BITCOIN FOUNDATION, INC. should post a scan of the original by-laws or provide us with an explanation why he was appointed without his consent.
Agree. |
|
|
|
As long as renewable energy is more expensive than fossil and nuclear energy, I consider excessive energy use as being bad because real costs are externalized.
Repeat after me: it's only more expensive in fiat. |
|
|
|
|
Okay, I read through some of this. And it just seems like a lot of words without much substance. Is it basically just re-hashing Libor? Gold and silver? Is there nothing new? I don't think anyone who's paying attention ever thought the banks would be punished for rigging Libor.
But what I wanted to know is, has Matt Taibbi ever said a single unkind word with regard to the biggest banks of all, central banks, fixing interest rates? Somehow he wants to convince us that this is only a problem, a "market flaw" as he puts it, when JP Morgan does it. But when Ben Bernanke does it, he's a hero to the people? It's not credible. And the lack of original reporting or research in this article pretty much confirms my belief that this guy is just pushing a flimsy political agenda.
|
|
|
|
It wasn't the Federal reserve it was the NSA he claimed was running him.
Why did he work in the private sector? Ultimately the Federal Reserve paid his salary. |
|
|
|
I've pretty much given up hope on Bitcoin itself achieving anything particularly world-changing beyond demonstrating a proof of concept. A secondary fall-back hope of mine has always been that there is an outside possibility that they'll make me rich though, and this is more promising than ever.
We know. You mention this in every thread. Do you think, instead of this defeatist monologue, you might want to actually do anything to change this outcome? |
|
|
|
Renewable energy IS CHEAP
maybe the calculation shouldn't be based on current electricity costs in USD.
This is an excellent point Renewable energy is fairly cheap. What is expensive is moving that renewable energy from where it is produced to where the money is printed. Centralized, fiat currencies don't create homogenous prices. They create price disparity that makes resources (nominally) cheap at the periphery and expensive at the center, yet (due to money printing) relatively abundant at the center and scarce at the periphery, when, without this centralization, the opposite would be true. |
|
|
|
Operation: Bitcoin Down" is already underway....probably has been for a while. At least since summer of '11, but yes probably longer. Bitcoin (and other cryptos) will ultimately lose as long as we all play their game. Not only did they write the freaking book on how to play, but they write new rules at their discretion. +1 Working on a defense only is certain death for Bitcoin. We all need to start brainstorming offensive moves. Obviously I don't mean violence of any kind....but, the media will be their battlefield...How could we beat them to it?
Hah, I've been trying to point out the next move for a year now. The media is their battlefield. We need to remain in our own. "Fight the enemy where they aren't" -Lao Tzu |
|
|
|
Just received the following phishing attempt on Reddit. Hopefully no one falls for it.  |
|
|
|
|
GE Capital is an irrelevant dinosaur completely dependent upon political favors at this point. I have a credit card from them that they told me was cancelled years ago, but actually isn't. They are the most incompetent boobs in the financial industry, and should have gone under long ago.
|
|
|
|
|
+1 to everyone recognizing that the purpose of a government-sanctioned Bitcoin "foundation" is to centralize and control and sell-out.
|
|
|
|
Specifically, I mean those trying to push up the price via regulation. It can only end badly.
Trying to push the price up via regulation? Yes. I'm surprised you don't recognize this. The US currency (the global reserve currency) is a centralized, money-printing extortion racket. Bitcoin only has value in terms of this racket if it can be controlled, and if it can be used to control others. The neckbeard morons at the Bitcoin Foundation and the shady venture capitalists controlling it have spent the last year trying to fit Bitcoin into this system, in the hopes that they can cash out once Bitcoin is totally controlled and the price in USD skyrockets. |
|
|
|
It's kind of hard to prosecute wars when they can't be financed. "It is no coincidence that the century of total war coincided with the century of central banking."
Good point. We might have to change the thread for this discussion. Still: Why do you think bitcoin can change this? The US still dictates in what currency US citizens have to pay their taxes. And even more: The USA are very good at evilizing what "they" don't like. Expect Bitcoiners to be treated like enemies of the state once Bitcoin really starts to weaken the States I do expect Bitcoin to be treated as terrorism or whatnot. Similar projects (Liberty Dollars) already are. And I am making plans for this eventuality. As for the influence of the US government over its citizens, in the current economic environment, after over a decade of failed wars and false flag terrorism, meh, we'll see. It certainly isn't going up. |
|
|
|
That is another problem with the bitcoin economy, it is hard to be fully immersed in the actual economy. The only way to solve that is as DeathAndTaxes said: More adoption, more services, and more merchants.
Or a local Bitcoin economy. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin and precious metals are complementary.
|
|
|
|
|
Basically I would go through the US Code and, any made-up sounding word or phrase used there, I would avoid.
|
|
|
|
The business accepted money for goods, this is fine under the guidelines.
The business then transmitted the BTC to an exchange.
There is absolutely no way this will ever fly. If Bitcoins are "convertible money" or "funds" or whatever for the purpose of sending them to an exchange, then the same standard applies to trading them for goods and services. Their whole so-called regulatory scheme is based on a distinction that doesn't actually exist. Let me tell you how this will actually go down. It will be done on a case by case basis, to people with specific circumstances that plausibly fit whatever obfuscated legal definition of cronyist, state-supported profit they come up with. But it will be made to seem like the regulations apply generally. It will be a total psy-op case, just like 'Wickard'. They will pick some small-time guy who took out a fiat loan and used it to buy Bitcoins, which then went up in value. They will make a huge deal about how he bought a tablet pc or something worthless at a Bitcoin store, but that this is fine because it's just "normal" everyday business. Then they will harp on how he "profited" by trading a bunch of those Bitcoins at an exchange, and how that's "speculating" and "money laundering" and "unlicensed trading" and whatnot. This will mostly happen in the media, of course. The actual court case will probably just be settled with a plea bargain. The important thing is that they will never once point out that the only reason they are prosecuting this guy is because he took advantage of the normal, everyday, licensed fraud that is the fiat money system. The whole point will be to sweep that under the rug, while setting a precedent in people's minds and deflecting blame to Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
