Bitcoin is DEEPLY WATCHED.

[twolifeinexile]

Maybe bitcoin is not that popular yet, but it is definitely deeply watched, there are two articles coming up today.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-28/bitcoin-s-gains-may-fuel-central-bank-concerns-chart-of-the-day.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2013/01/28/government-ban-on-bitcoin-would-fail-miserably/

Seems a lot of people, significant or not, are watching the situation closely.

Bitcoin's is binary.

[1715065199]

1715065199

[1715065199]

1715065199

[flix]

Money talks.

[zoinky]

These articles are gonna be posted all over today  

[solex]

The use of language in the debate is important.

The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.

The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".

[Piper67]

The use of language in the debate is important.

The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.

The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".

Yes, the Bitcoin Foundation should have their ducks in a row, because any moment now the phone's going to start ringing and it will be journalists asking for quotes.

[cypherdoc]

The use of language in the debate is important.

The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.

that strategy is doomed to fail.  just look at the numerous articles out about major intl banks laundering billions.  dickheads.

The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".

+1

[World]

The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".

+1

+21 000 000 BTC

[marcus_of_augustus]

Best response to a dullard reporter asking if bitcoin is being used for "money-laundering" ...

.... hmmmm, ahhh, meh.

[cypherdoc]

The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".

+1

+21 000 000 BTC

is that all there ever is gonna be?

[solex]

Best response to a dullard reporter asking if bitcoin is being used for "money-laundering" ...

.... hmmmm, ahhh, meh.

Well. Has anyone ever heard of the US$ or euro being used by money-launderers?

[constitution]

Bitcoin is very watched, I see articles popping up everyday.

People realize Bitcoin has TONS of potential, especially for beginning adopters.

[westkybitcoins]

That Forbes article is on target!

Which brings us to the giddy, pro-banking-integration spokespeople for Bitcoin that tend towards full compliance because it’s required or, worse, preemptive compliance because they believe it to be safe. What happens to their rosy world when bitcoin exchanges can no longer operate in the open without fear of State retaliation? After all, they were patiently counting on ‘railroad tracks’ and connected links with existing financial institutions to grant Bitcoin a legitimacy mandate.

This, a thousand times over. If I hear from those insisting on "seeking compliance" about how "naive" the rest of us are one more time....

Also from that article:

Joel Bowman writing at The Daily Reckoning clearly recognizes that bitcoin’s future doesn’t depend on State legitimacy let alone low-cost sanctioned transactions:

In the end, bitcoin is a bet on the other side of The State’s coin; the free market side. It’s a bet that voluntary trade will, in the end, overcome neanderthalic force and coercion. It’s a wager that the conversation currently underway in the shadowy ‘black’ market is far more intriguing, far more complex, far more nuanced and exceedingly more interesting than the yip-yapping that distracts the undead, mainstream TV-consumer for an hour or so around feeding time every evening.

I would add that it’s also a bet on income and consumption privacy becoming the norm over ‘reportable earnings’ and invasive transaction tracking. It’s a bet that career mobility and independent contractor businesses will eventually outstrip the growth of the corporate wage-slave population. It’s a bet that the degree of an individual’s financial privacy is selected solely by the individual and not by what the State reluctantly permits.

Beautiful stuff.

[kiba]

Forbes usually have Jon Matonis writing about bitcoin, so Forbes magazine doesn't really count.

[lophie]

The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".

+1

+21 000 000 BTC

is that all there ever is gonna be?

21 000 000 8 10^8 if you consider every satoshi.

[Rob E]

The use of language in the debate is important.

The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.

The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".

Yes, the Bitcoin Foundation should have their ducks in a row, because any moment now the phone's going to start ringing and it will be journalists asking for quotes.

what ever the banks or journalist have to say about finances i don't think i's going to be believed anymore. People are gonna look into it themselves and make up their own mind. Forbes writes an article like that to me it's a strengthening of the position of bit coin.

[Bitcoinpro]

haha its just one story on bloomberg and the more exposure the better, thanks for the link much appreciated 

[Grinder]

Comparing it to the alcolhol prohibition like Matonis does, doesn't make sense because it's not like Bitcoins are the only money available. The only advantage of Bitcoins to normal people is that in some cases it is more convenient and cheaper than using banks. That advantage can easily be taken away by banning money transfers to entities who buy or sell Bitcoins. Banks would probably be very happy to comply and report anyone they suspect of doing it. If the only way to buy and sell them is through Localbitcoin and similar sites, the barrier to entry will be too high for most people.

[Gabi]

I don't agree, bitcoin is very different from any other money. And it doesn't need to be exchanged to work, once the bitcoin economy is big enough

[Grinder]

Unfortunately that's just wishful thinking, which there is a lot of here. It makes it easy to find safe bets on the Bitcoin betting sites, though.

[Mdex]

It's sure that it is deeply watched.