Discussions about digital currencies in some countries. What future for bitcoin?

[n2004al]

Rephrase this to 'digital tokens' because that's what they'll be.

Bitcoin is fundamentally different from any currency any country or bank (not that a retail bank has created a standalone currency, er, EVER, not that that stops people on here spouting off about such possibilities) will ever create.

There will never, ever, ever be anything like Bitcoin that comes from the regular suspects. It goes against every single thing that turns them on. A lot of folks here really don't seem capable of comprehending this.

Thanks for your thoughts.

In both the articles is told that they (the interested people) are studying the blockchain. If they will be able to clone it why do you think that they will be not able never to create a digital coin like bitcoin?

What is the difference between a "digital token" and a "digital coin" if the way they connected will be the clone of blockchain?

But even we will call those "digital tokens" what is the importance of the name that we can give to their product? This product will be their national currency. What it will be with bitcoin if this example expanded in all the world? And if every (or most) of those ban bitcoin to protect their new digital based currency?

[gentlemand]

Thanks for your thoughts.

In both the articles is told that they (the interested people) are studying the blockchain. If they will be able to clone it why do you think that they will be not able never to create a digital coin like bitcoin?

What is the difference between a "digital token" and a "digital coin" if the way they connected will be the clone of blockchain?

Bitcoin is outside government control. Everything they have planned - is.

End of.

It doesn't matter what they come up with, what they call it, whether it uses a blockchain, whether it's irreversible, reversible, lives in a chip on your forehead or allows your dog to buy bones online, at heart it will still be debasable, corruptible, controlled, inflatable and it'll add the ability to confiscate your money, shut you down completely or impose negative interest rates.

It'll be infinitely worse than the current financial system with that inconvenient cash shit and hidden accounts in foreign countries that don't talk to each other in the same way an all digital currency would. They'd be able to tag transactions they don't like, totally prevent money arriving or departing or simply take it straight away from you.

Them integrating some of Bitcoin's features would make Bitcoin more relevant, desirable and needed than ever.

Why can't people comprehend this?

[RealBitcoin]

Governments creating their own digital currency is no different than printing fiat bullshit.

yes, is something like "lets change the toy to play with and let's continue with our scam..." i hope that this time people change his mind and start to understand what are they trying to do, again...

But please mister ,I like my currency devalued.

I cant imagine how my life would look like if I would not lose 99% of my purchasing power of my savings over 30 years.

Do you imagine how catastrophic would it be if people would not have to be debt slaves and instead buy their expenses with hard money....

Go away bitcoin, your black magic sorcery. I worship the printed money 

[Operand]

I really think that what governments should be doing is working together to make BTC an acceptable alternative form of payment, do they not care about one's financial freedom?

[gentlemand]

I really think that what governments should be doing is working together to make BTC an acceptable alternative form of payment, do they not care about one's financial freedom?

Funnily enough, no.

[countryfree]

I guess countries have more interest in blockchain technology than BTC. One country may eventually start a new cryptocurrency, making it legal tender, but that would only boost confidence in BTC, the original, because a national cryptocurrency would only be valueable within the borders of the nation which invented it.

[DooMAD]

Are there coins (if created) a risk for bitcoin? Can compete bitcoin with these coins which will be supported by the most important Authorities of every country?

They'll be about as much of a threat as Mintchip was.  We already use digital currencies supported by the authorities of every country, it's called having a bank account.  Whatever they end up creating will have literally no perceivable benefit to anyone beyond what we've already got today.  No system with an unlimited monetary supply, central points of failure, and inherent shortcomings with fungibility and censorship (which is exactly what they'll come up with) will look like it's worth anything compared to Bitcoin.  All they can do is create a pale and crippled imitation.  There's no contest.

[n2004al]

Thanks for your thoughts.

In both the articles is told that they (the interested people) are studying the blockchain. If they will be able to clone it why do you think that they will be not able never to create a digital coin like bitcoin?

What is the difference between a "digital token" and a "digital coin" if the way they connected will be the clone of blockchain?

Bitcoin is outside government control. Everything they have planned - is.

End of.

It doesn't matter what they come up with, what they call it, whether it uses a blockchain, whether it's irreversible, reversible, lives in a chip on your forehead or allows your dog to buy bones online, at heart it will still be debasable, corruptible, controlled, inflatable and it'll add the ability to confiscate your money, shut you down completely or impose negative interest rates.

It'll be infinitely worse than the current financial system with that inconvenient cash shit and hidden accounts in foreign countries that don't talk to each other in the same way an all digital currency would. They'd be able to tag transactions they don't like, totally prevent money arriving or departing or simply take it straight away from you.

Them integrating some of Bitcoin's features would make Bitcoin more relevant, desirable and needed than ever.

Why can't people comprehend this?

I see to much rage in your post rather arguments.   Are you sure that such thing don't obscures your reasoning? How do you know that their digital coin based currency will be "debasable, corruptible, controlled, inflatable" or "it will be infinitely worse than the current financial system"?

Maybe it will be true that they will "add the ability to confiscate your money, shut you down completely or impose negative interest rates." Maybe it will be true that "they'd be able to tag transactions they don't like, totally prevent money arriving or departing or simply take it straight away from you."

But if they (and the other countries like this country but with the same mentality about their new digital coin based currency) will ban bitcoin to protect this they "shit" digital coin based currency what will happen with the bitcoin?  If those countries are the most important of the world and there are every day more the others which will follow those (it is known that the other countries follow always the most developed ones)? If all those countries ban bitcoin what it will be with it? This is the main aim of this thread. Please give arguments in order that the simple people understand your idea and be with you.  

[n2004al]

Are there coins (if created) a risk for bitcoin? Can compete bitcoin with these coins which will be supported by the most important Authorities of every country?

They'll be about as much of a threat as Mintchip was.  We already use digital currencies supported by the authorities of every country, it's called having a bank account.  Whatever they end up creating will have literally no perceivable benefit to anyone beyond what we've already got today.  No system with an unlimited monetary supply, central points of failure, and inherent shortcomings with fungibility and censorship (which is exactly what they'll come up with) will look like it's worth anything compared to Bitcoin.  All they can do is create a pale and crippled imitation.  There's no contest.

Thanks for the comment.

Mintchip is not a digital coin and it is not conceived as a such kind of thing. According to the article given in your post "MintChip was not a digital currency akin to bitcoin, but rather a digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

While the idea given from the articles given in the main post suppose that the interested countries want to have a real digital coin and not a "digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

You pretend that nor the best scientist of USA (or England) and nor the best scientist of Russia will be able to understand and clone blockchain? Or to create a digital coin like or similar to bitcoin?

[Kakmakr]

If they create the digital version of their fiat currency, it will fail too. It will be built on the same principle of a failing system. The people will have no choice in the matter, because these countries will force them with laws to use their version.

Bitcoin will be banned, because it will be seen as the rival currency and it will be outlawed. Governments have the power to outlaw any fiat or digital equivalent, if they perceive it as a threat to their national currency.

This is why most countries want to ban Bitcoin use as a currency. They want to protect the currency they can control.  

[n2004al]

If they create the digital version of their fiat currency, it will fail too. It will be built on the same principle of a failing system. The people will have no choice in the matter, because these countries will force them with laws to use their version.

Bitcoin will be banned, because it will be seen as the rival currency and it will be outlawed. Governments have the power to outlaw any fiat or digital equivalent, if they perceive it as a threat to their national currency.

This is why most countries want to ban Bitcoin use as a currency. They want to protect the currency they can control.  

Thanks for the comment.

Clear words, full understanding (at least for me) of what you want to tell but not fully "correct"  with the main aim of this thread. What it will be with bitcoin if it will be banned (as you write in your post) from most of the countries (or the majority of those)? How and what it will be its future?

[DooMAD]

Are there coins (if created) a risk for bitcoin? Can compete bitcoin with these coins which will be supported by the most important Authorities of every country?

They'll be about as much of a threat as Mintchip was.  We already use digital currencies supported by the authorities of every country, it's called having a bank account.  Whatever they end up creating will have literally no perceivable benefit to anyone beyond what we've already got today.  No system with an unlimited monetary supply, central points of failure, and inherent shortcomings with fungibility and censorship (which is exactly what they'll come up with) will look like it's worth anything compared to Bitcoin.  All they can do is create a pale and crippled imitation.  There's no contest.

Thanks for the comment.

Mintchip is not a digital coin and it is not conceived as a such kind of thing. According to the article given in your post "MintChip was not a digital currency akin to bitcoin, but rather a digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

While the idea given from the articles given in the main post suppose that the interested countries want to have a real digital coin and not a "digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

You pretend that nor the best scientist of USA (or England) and nor the best scientist of Russia will be able to understand and clone blockchain? Or to create a digital coin like or similar to bitcoin?

I never said they can't create something similar, just that they won't be able to make something on par with Bitcoin, let alone better than.  Their interest is in building something that they can control.  That single, unwavering goal is their immediate downfall because it sends them in a direction that leads to a sub-par service/product.  They will create something that doesn't have has a fixed supply so they can keep printing money out of thin air.  They will create something that has a central point of failure and collects mountains of personal information which will be leaked or hacked at some point.  They will create something that can block or freeze transactions.  For example, something that permits us to donate to wikileaks is clearly not in their interest, so they're not going to allow that.  All of these things and more become an immediate downside compared to Bitcoin because they won't surrender control.  I don't care what they're going to make or how dissimilar it might be to Mintchip, because it's still going to be inferior in every way, shape and form.  There's no contest.

[RealBitcoin]

I really think that what governments should be doing is working together to make BTC an acceptable alternative form of payment, do they not care about one's financial freedom?

Does the wolf care about the sheep that it eats? Not really.

The governments only purpose is to achieve total control over the population, and they are doing a very good job about that, you have to admit.

[n2004al]

Are there coins (if created) a risk for bitcoin? Can compete bitcoin with these coins which will be supported by the most important Authorities of every country?

They'll be about as much of a threat as Mintchip was.  We already use digital currencies supported by the authorities of every country, it's called having a bank account.  Whatever they end up creating will have literally no perceivable benefit to anyone beyond what we've already got today.  No system with an unlimited monetary supply, central points of failure, and inherent shortcomings with fungibility and censorship (which is exactly what they'll come up with) will look like it's worth anything compared to Bitcoin.  All they can do is create a pale and crippled imitation.  There's no contest.

Thanks for the comment.

Mintchip is not a digital coin and it is not conceived as a such kind of thing. According to the article given in your post "MintChip was not a digital currency akin to bitcoin, but rather a digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

While the idea given from the articles given in the main post suppose that the interested countries want to have a real digital coin and not a "digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

You pretend that nor the best scientist of USA (or England) and nor the best scientist of Russia will be able to understand and clone blockchain? Or to create a digital coin like or similar to bitcoin?

I never said they can't create something similar, just that they won't be able to make something on par with Bitcoin, let alone better than.  Their interest is in building something that they can control.  That single, unwavering goal is their immediate downfall because it sends them in a direction that leads to a sub-par service/product.  They will create something that doesn't have has a fixed supply so they can keep printing money out of thin air.  They will create something that has a central point of failure and collects mountains of personal information which will be leaked or hacked at some point.  They will create something that can block or freeze transactions.  For example, something that permits us to donate to wikileaks is clearly not in their interest, so they're not going to allow that.  All of these things and more become an immediate downside compared to Bitcoin because they won't surrender control.  I don't care what they're going to make or how dissimilar it might be to Mintchip, because it's still going to be inferior in every way, shape and form.  There's no contest.

Everything clear what you want to tell. I want to know one last opinion from you. If those countries ban bitcoin to protect their national digital coin currency (and if this practice can be followed in time from most of the other countries; it is normal to be so because the other countries normally follow the countries named at the main post because those are the most developed and leaders in the world) what future can be for bitcoin?

[DooMAD]

Are there coins (if created) a risk for bitcoin? Can compete bitcoin with these coins which will be supported by the most important Authorities of every country?

They'll be about as much of a threat as Mintchip was.  We already use digital currencies supported by the authorities of every country, it's called having a bank account.  Whatever they end up creating will have literally no perceivable benefit to anyone beyond what we've already got today.  No system with an unlimited monetary supply, central points of failure, and inherent shortcomings with fungibility and censorship (which is exactly what they'll come up with) will look like it's worth anything compared to Bitcoin.  All they can do is create a pale and crippled imitation.  There's no contest.

Thanks for the comment.

Mintchip is not a digital coin and it is not conceived as a such kind of thing. According to the article given in your post "MintChip was not a digital currency akin to bitcoin, but rather a digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

While the idea given from the articles given in the main post suppose that the interested countries want to have a real digital coin and not a "digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

You pretend that nor the best scientist of USA (or England) and nor the best scientist of Russia will be able to understand and clone blockchain? Or to create a digital coin like or similar to bitcoin?

I never said they can't create something similar, just that they won't be able to make something on par with Bitcoin, let alone better than.  Their interest is in building something that they can control.  That single, unwavering goal is their immediate downfall because it sends them in a direction that leads to a sub-par service/product.  They will create something that doesn't have has a fixed supply so they can keep printing money out of thin air.  They will create something that has a central point of failure and collects mountains of personal information which will be leaked or hacked at some point.  They will create something that can block or freeze transactions.  For example, something that permits us to donate to wikileaks is clearly not in their interest, so they're not going to allow that.  All of these things and more become an immediate downside compared to Bitcoin because they won't surrender control.  I don't care what they're going to make or how dissimilar it might be to Mintchip, because it's still going to be inferior in every way, shape and form.  There's no contest.

Everything clear what you want to tell. I want to know one last opinion from you. If those countries ban bitcoin to protect their national digital coin currency (and if this practice can be followed in time from most of the other countries; it is normal to be so because the other countries normally follow the countries named at the main post because those are the most developed and leaders in the world) what future can be for bitcoin?

It's a big "if", but if a large number of countries decided to ban Bitcoin, it would largely depend on what's happening in the economies of those countries.  If it's a strong economy and people feel secure in that system, it could potentially spell bad news for Bitcoin.  But the more likely scenario is that most nations continue with their current (stupid) trend of inflating the money supply in their hostile little race to the bottom and people become increasingly disillusioned with government controlled money and start looking for an alternative to protect their wealth.  If remaining within the confines of the law means you get wiped out financially, there's little incentive to obey.

The more the authorities prove themselves to be financially illiterate, the stronger the case for Bitcoin becomes.  The debt monster feeding charade won't last forever. 

[n2004al]

I really think that what governments should be doing is working together to make BTC an acceptable alternative form of payment, do they not care about one's financial freedom?

Does the wolf care about the sheep that it eats? Not really.

The governments only purpose is to achieve total control over the population, and they are doing a very good job about that, you have to admit.

First is not Government which have to do with the money but the Central Bank of the country or a similar Authority (which regulate and manage this regulation). But even if it will be Government the Authority which regulate and make the rules of the money you want to tell that in a normal and developed country there is no need to have at all control about the money?

[Mickeyb]

Are there coins (if created) a risk for bitcoin? Can compete bitcoin with these coins which will be supported by the most important Authorities of every country?

They'll be about as much of a threat as Mintchip was.  We already use digital currencies supported by the authorities of every country, it's called having a bank account.  Whatever they end up creating will have literally no perceivable benefit to anyone beyond what we've already got today.  No system with an unlimited monetary supply, central points of failure, and inherent shortcomings with fungibility and censorship (which is exactly what they'll come up with) will look like it's worth anything compared to Bitcoin.  All they can do is create a pale and crippled imitation.  There's no contest.

I completely agree with you. Let me add that banksters and governments are a bunch of greedy idiots. They will not stop. They will realize that their digital tokens give them much more possibility of control than paper money as we know it at the moment. When they realize this, they will go all in and they will make people complete slaves. If ever, people will realize at this moment that their governments are there only to rip the skin off of their backs.

[n2004al]

Are there coins (if created) a risk for bitcoin? Can compete bitcoin with these coins which will be supported by the most important Authorities of every country?

They'll be about as much of a threat as Mintchip was.  We already use digital currencies supported by the authorities of every country, it's called having a bank account.  Whatever they end up creating will have literally no perceivable benefit to anyone beyond what we've already got today.  No system with an unlimited monetary supply, central points of failure, and inherent shortcomings with fungibility and censorship (which is exactly what they'll come up with) will look like it's worth anything compared to Bitcoin.  All they can do is create a pale and crippled imitation.  There's no contest.

Thanks for the comment.

Mintchip is not a digital coin and it is not conceived as a such kind of thing. According to the article given in your post "MintChip was not a digital currency akin to bitcoin, but rather a digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

While the idea given from the articles given in the main post suppose that the interested countries want to have a real digital coin and not a "digital payment mechanism meant to function as an electronic cash that could be transferred between users."

You pretend that nor the best scientist of USA (or England) and nor the best scientist of Russia will be able to understand and clone blockchain? Or to create a digital coin like or similar to bitcoin?

I never said they can't create something similar, just that they won't be able to make something on par with Bitcoin, let alone better than.  Their interest is in building something that they can control.  That single, unwavering goal is their immediate downfall because it sends them in a direction that leads to a sub-par service/product.  They will create something that doesn't have has a fixed supply so they can keep printing money out of thin air.  They will create something that has a central point of failure and collects mountains of personal information which will be leaked or hacked at some point.  They will create something that can block or freeze transactions.  For example, something that permits us to donate to wikileaks is clearly not in their interest, so they're not going to allow that.  All of these things and more become an immediate downside compared to Bitcoin because they won't surrender control.  I don't care what they're going to make or how dissimilar it might be to Mintchip, because it's still going to be inferior in every way, shape and form.  There's no contest.

Everything clear what you want to tell. I want to know one last opinion from you. If those countries ban bitcoin to protect their national digital coin currency (and if this practice can be followed in time from most of the other countries; it is normal to be so because the other countries normally follow the countries named at the main post because those are the most developed and leaders in the world) what future can be for bitcoin?

It's a big "if", but if a large number of countries decided to ban Bitcoin, it would largely depend on what's happening in the economies of those countries.  If it's a strong economy and people feel secure in that system, it could potentially spell bad news for Bitcoin.  But the more likely scenario is that most nations continue with their current (stupid) trend of inflating the money supply in their hostile little race to the bottom and people become increasingly disillusioned with government controlled money and start looking for an alternative to protect their wealth.  If remaining within the confines of the law means you get wiped out financially, there's little incentive to obey.

The more the authorities prove themselves to be financially illiterate, the stronger the case for Bitcoin becomes.  The debt monster feeding charade won't last forever.  

Thanks for your thoughts. I invite you (if you find interesting) to continue your participation in this thread making free interpretations about the opinion of the others (or even mine).

[n2004al]

Are there coins (if created) a risk for bitcoin? Can compete bitcoin with these coins which will be supported by the most important Authorities of every country?

They'll be about as much of a threat as Mintchip was.  We already use digital currencies supported by the authorities of every country, it's called having a bank account.  Whatever they end up creating will have literally no perceivable benefit to anyone beyond what we've already got today.  No system with an unlimited monetary supply, central points of failure, and inherent shortcomings with fungibility and censorship (which is exactly what they'll come up with) will look like it's worth anything compared to Bitcoin.  All they can do is create a pale and crippled imitation.  There's no contest.

I completely agree with you. Let me add that banksters and governments are a bunch of greedy idiots. They will not stop. They will realize that their digital tokens give them much more possibility of control than paper money as we know it at the moment. When they realize this, they will go all in and they will make people complete slaves. If ever, people will realize at this moment that their governments are there only to rip the skin off of their backs.

MikeyB thank for your comments.

Before asking something to you I want to tell that I don't see the world such "black" as you.  Even I live in a country which is not to much developed. Our level of corruption here is very high and our politicians (according to me and with few exclusions) are probably the most irresponsible and corrupted people in the world. But I think again that there is good that our money are regulated by our Central Bank and the control of money exist, is managed and controlled by the Central Bank and with other Governmental Agencies. Otherwise all the "black" money will destroy everything here.

Anyhow, I wanted to know from you the answer of the main aim of this thread. What it would be the future of bitcoin if the countries of the main post (and other ones which might follow those in the future) will adopt as a national currency a digital based coin currency and will ban bitcoin to protect their new digital based coin money?

[Q7]

The ultra-advanced, superior technology of the digital currency Bitcoin and it's Blockchain public ledger system are in danger of being co-opted.

Taking a quote from your post, a true bitcoiner will be able to differentiate between a real crypto and something which is not, so I don't think in any way these cryptos (whatever they decide to name it) controlled by a central banks will ever become a threat. If centralization means anything, it has to be the first priority on why we chose to move away from fiat going to cryptocurrencies.