2017-02-23 CNBC extreamly positive on bitcoin (alltime high)

[notthematrix]

Very positive about BTC as golden standard when fiat fails.

http://player.cnbc.com/p/gZWlPC/cnbc_global?playertype=synd&byGuid=3000595410

Bitcoin is not fiat currency, with no backing from a government that issues it, and the space is volatile given its lack of regulation. This month alone, bitcoin has risen 25 percent after dipping nearly 5 percent in January. It has climbed nearly 22,000 percent in five years while the dollar is up 28 percent in the same time period.

"The big fear around bitcoin is just one day when the governments come out and say, 'We're no longer going to allow this,' and we're going to shut it down. But in a world of Armageddon, where the world ends, currencies will go by the way of the countries; bitcoin, like gold, will still have value because of the blockchain-ing that goes on behind it," Dennis Davitt, portfolio manager at Harvest Volatility Management, said Wednesday on "Trading Nation."

[cr1776]

Great segment there.  This is nice to see that mainstream analysts are "getting it".

[Papa Bear]

the government will not be that easy to remove from the bitcoin usage,  I believe in the future bitcoin and gold that will survive when the world experienced the economic slump and currency.

[Kprawn]

You know what, any government that wants to shut down Bitcoin will only dig a grave for themselves. Today Bitcoin is pseudo-anonymous and

if the government decides to ban Bitcoin, this whole technology will go underground and onto Black markets. People might not use Bitcoin, but

they might just use a more anonymous Alt coin, when Bitcoin goes down. So what is more provitable for governments? A more anonymous Alt

coin or a coin that can be traced and something that you can regulate and also siphon tax from? 

[notthematrix]

You know what, any government that wants to shut down Bitcoin will only dig a grave for themselves. Today Bitcoin is pseudo-anonymous and

if the government decides to ban Bitcoin, this whole technology will go underground and onto Black markets. People might not use Bitcoin, but

they might just use a more anonymous Alt coin, when Bitcoin goes down. So what is more provitable for governments? A more anonymous Alt

coin or a coin that can be traced and something that you can regulate and also siphon tax from? 

Bitcoin can not be traced if you want it not to be traced.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvLaDnQtdoM
Listen to the seminar about the financial system , and why bitcoin might simply be a better idea...
listin carfuly what the CNBC guys say (first post)  , they know if the fin system collapse it means war , unless there is something to take its place so the old system can die without damage.

[Astmalim]

the government will not be that easy to remove from the bitcoin usage,  I believe in the future bitcoin and gold that will survive when the world experienced the economic slump and currency.

It is very possible that the bitcoin will perform better than gold.

[Idrisu]

Great segment there.  This is nice to see that mainstream analysts are "getting it".

The reason why the mainstream analysts are getting it" is because they have studied the fundamental nature of bitcoin and one thing that I thought their have discovered is that bitcoin cannot be shut down by a country, company and individual. To me bitcoin is more value than gold because of that sigler nature.

[danieze]

Although there is nothing that can stop a government or central bank from banning Bitcoin (& a few have already done so), most would not go that far for two reasons:
The Streisand effect
In 2003, Barbra Streisand sued a photographer (for violation of privacy) for displaying a photograph of her Malibu, California , home in one of the photographers, 12,000 other photos of the California coastline that were taken to illustrate coastal erosion. The picture had at that point been downloaded a total of six times, two of which were by Streisand's lawyers. The suit had the
unintended consequence of drawing attention to the photograph, which suddenly became wildly popular and was rapidly copied to multiple
mirror sites outside the immediate reach of US law. Her $50 million lawsuit was eventually dismissed under the anti- SLAPP provisions of California law. As a result of the case, public knowledge of the picture increased substantially; more than 420,000 people visited the site over the following month.
Similarly, an attempt to ban Bitcoin by a government or a central bank can have the
unintended consequence of making it even more popular especially among a demographic that had previously never heard of Bitcoin
A ban on Bitcoin is difficult to enforce
Bitcoin has no centre to attack. There is no single organisation or person that controls Bitcoin and transactions don't go through a central clearing house there is really no way a regulator can stop people from downloading Bitcoin wallets and sending each other bitcoins. If there we to block all the websites that people can download Bitcoin wallets from, new ones will come up and some people will compile their own wallets from source code - Bitcoin is like Bittorrent is that respect. If they shut down the internet, people will
send each other Bitcoin via SMS and if they shut down the electricity supply, people will use solar and battery-powered solutions.
But of course it's also likely that a ban on Bitcoin in a country can have a negative effect on adoption in that country.

[cr1776]

Great segment there.  This is nice to see that mainstream analysts are "getting it".

The reason why the mainstream analysts are getting it" is because they have studied the fundamental nature of bitcoin and one thing that I thought their have discovered is that bitcoin cannot be shut down by a country, company and individual. To me bitcoin is more value than gold because of that sigler nature.

Agreed.  It just took them a very long time to wake up and do so 😀