Bitcoin getting bought out?

[totaleclipseofthebank]

First Vessenes starts the Bitcoin Foundation, uniting the lead developers

Now his company is taking over Gox and bringing them to the US?

It's a little worrying when the primary exchange and the lead developers are controlled by the same people.

[knight22]

hmmm.. It will be a good idea to keep a close eye on them

[bbit]

good point all eyes should be on watch.

[Nagato]

I would think the lead developers still retain a mind of their own regardless of their involvement with the Foundation. Atleast thats still the case when you look at the Block Size issue.

I always hear the advice to store your gold outside of the US because the government will take it away. So im not sure if moving MtGox to the US is such a bright idea given the government's track record. It becomes very easy for the US government to confiscate the coins and dollars.

[tvbcof]

Sure.  Bitcoin is on a course to become a leader in the new space of virtual currencies.

Most of the primary developers and those leading successful businesses in Bitcoin-land are pretty up-front about their friendly posture towards mainstream economic players.  And the path of least resistance vis-a-vis scaling is to move toward large-scale deployments.

Anti-bank dead-enders are going to end up as road-kill 100 miles back.  Indeed, that process is actually well underway already.  These people were critical in bootstrapping the solution, but their participation is rapidly becoming unnecessary and, frankly, kind of embarrassing and detrimental to increased adoption.  Of course such people may also end up quite wealthy if they hold on to some secret keys.

[totaleclipseofthebank]

Sure.  Bitcoin is on a course to become a leader in the new space of virtual currencies.

Most of the primary developers and those leading successful businesses in Bitcoin-land are pretty up-front about their friendly posture towards mainstream economic players.  And the path of least resistance vis-a-vis scaling is to move toward large-scale deployments.

Anti-bank dead-enders are going to end up as road-kill 100 miles back.  Indeed, that process is actually well underway already.  These people were critical in bootstrapping the solution, but their participation is rapidly becoming unnecessary and, frankly, kind of embarrassing and detrimental to increased adoption.  Of course such people may also end up quite wealthy if they hold on to some secret keys.

so your idea of bitcoin would be that its like paypal? neat

meanwhile, others see that the true value of bitcoin stems from its decentralization, and lack of inhibiting regulation. bitcoin is fundamentally different than "other virtual currencies" in that it is not controlled by any central authority, and in that its characteristics are immutable (or should be).

In short, if bitcoin itself were somehow controlled by a central authority it would be worthless.

[bbit]

In short, if bitcoin itself were somehow controlled by a central authority it would be worthless.

+1

[knight22]

In short, if bitcoin itself were somehow controlled by a central authority it would be worthless.

+1

+ 21 000 000

[tvbcof]

Sure.  Bitcoin is on a course to become a leader in the new space of virtual currencies.

Most of the primary developers and those leading successful businesses in Bitcoin-land are pretty up-front about their friendly posture towards mainstream economic players.  And the path of least resistance vis-a-vis scaling is to move toward large-scale deployments.

Anti-bank dead-enders are going to end up as road-kill 100 miles back.  Indeed, that process is actually well underway already.  These people were critical in bootstrapping the solution, but their participation is rapidly becoming unnecessary and, frankly, kind of embarrassing and detrimental to increased adoption.  Of course such people may also end up quite wealthy if they hold on to some secret keys.

so your idea of bitcoin would be that its like paypal? neat

meanwhile, others see that the true value of bitcoin stems from its decentralization, and lack of inhibiting regulation. bitcoin is fundamentally different than "other virtual currencies" in that it is not controlled by any central authority, and in that its characteristics are immutable (or should be).

In short, if bitcoin itself were somehow controlled by a central authority it would be worthless.

Not 'my idea'.  I just call it like I see it.

The who 'fundamentally different' nature if Bitcoin is a great marketing ploy which could give it a giant leg up on it's competition.  Alas, it probably won't have much basis in reality.

Centralizing the control will depreciate it's value to you and me, but most people won't give a shit.  Indeed most people will welcome measures to stop criminals and tax cheats and I'm sure that this will be how it's marketed.

While I find the trajectory distasteful personally, it probably is my best hope to never have to work again in my life.  And the cat is out of the bag so I'm sure that there will be other solutions which match some of the features that I find important.

[Severian]

Anti-bank dead-enders are going to end up as road-kill 100 miles back.

Like that embarrassing Satoshi guy?

[totaleclipseofthebank]

Sure.  Bitcoin is on a course to become a leader in the new space of virtual currencies.

Most of the primary developers and those leading successful businesses in Bitcoin-land are pretty up-front about their friendly posture towards mainstream economic players.  And the path of least resistance vis-a-vis scaling is to move toward large-scale deployments.

Anti-bank dead-enders are going to end up as road-kill 100 miles back.  Indeed, that process is actually well underway already.  These people were critical in bootstrapping the solution, but their participation is rapidly becoming unnecessary and, frankly, kind of embarrassing and detrimental to increased adoption.  Of course such people may also end up quite wealthy if they hold on to some secret keys.

so your idea of bitcoin would be that its like paypal? neat

meanwhile, others see that the true value of bitcoin stems from its decentralization, and lack of inhibiting regulation. bitcoin is fundamentally different than "other virtual currencies" in that it is not controlled by any central authority, and in that its characteristics are immutable (or should be).

In short, if bitcoin itself were somehow controlled by a central authority it would be worthless.

Not 'my idea'.  I just call it like I see it.

The who 'fundamentally different' nature if Bitcoin is a great marketing ploy which could give it a giant leg up on it's competition.  Alas, it probably won't have much basis in reality.

Centralizing the control will depreciate it's value to you and me, but most people won't give a shit.  Indeed most people will welcome measures to stop criminals and tax cheats and I'm sure that this will be how it's marketed.

While I find the trajectory distasteful personally, it probably is my best hope to never have to work again in my life.  And the cat is out of the bag so I'm sure that there will be other solutions which match some of the features that I find important.

so what you're saying is that you're invested in bitcoin for your own personal profit, but hope that the core goal of the project ultimately fails so that everyone has to pay their taxes like good citizens, and you can enjoy your retirement?

social security recipient spotted

[bbit]

In short, if bitcoin itself were somehow controlled by a central authority it would be worthless.

+1

+ 21 000 000

I see what you did there

[ElectricMucus]

Anyway it's called sold out not bought out.

I recommend you stop complaining and face reality: As long as the infrastructure itself isn't decentralized these things are inevitable.
Problem is, every time somebody suggests building a decentralized exchange they get bullied out of it. It's the communities own fault.

[tvbcof]

Anti-bank dead-enders are going to end up as road-kill 100 miles back.

Like that embarrassing Satoshi guy?

Actually, from what I can see in the little bit of looking that I've done, yes.

[Severian]

A serious question: What good are banks now that Bitcoin is proving itself?

The idea of Bitcoin is obviously sound. When implementation and usage becomes easier and more widespread, I don't see much use for banks if their idea of money is so flawed compared to a better tool.

[tvbcof]

so what you're saying is that you're invested in bitcoin for your own personal profit, but hope that the core goal of the project ultimately fails so that everyone has to pay their taxes like good citizens, and you can enjoy your retirement?

social security recipient spotted

You have a fairly imaginative way of reading...and it translates into incorrect conclusions FWIW.

But yes, I made a highly speculative investment in Bitcoin in part because I could see various ways in which it could pay off.

It is true that I don't feel 'violently abused' by paying taxes since I don't tend to subscribe to Libertarian dogma without careful consideration.  I've never sucked off the government teat (like our dear friend Ms. Rand) yet, but I'd do it if I find myself in need at some point.  If I don't, great!

[totaleclipseofthebank]

so what you're saying is that you're invested in bitcoin for your own personal profit, but hope that the core goal of the project ultimately fails so that everyone has to pay their taxes like good citizens, and you can enjoy your retirement?

social security recipient spotted

You have a fairly imaginative way of reading...and it translates into incorrect conclusions FWIW.

But yes, I made a highly speculative investment in Bitcoin in part because I could see various ways in which it could pay off.

It is true that I don't feel 'violently abused' by paying taxes since I don't tend to subscribe to Libertarian dogma without careful consideration.  I've never sucked off the government teat (like our dear friend Ms. Rand) yet, but I'd do it if I find myself in need at some point.  If I don't, great!

the point of bitcoin's decentralization is not to avoid paying taxes -- the point is to decouple money storage and transmission from inflationary monetary policy and replace the outdated system we have of transferring money from a to b.

in a zero interest (for depositors) environment, what is the point of keeping your money in a bank? the technology exists to eliminate the need for this type of service. and yet everyone does it. Does that sound like an optimal solution to you?

[tvbcof]

the point of bitcoin's decentralization is not to avoid paying taxes -- the point is to decouple money storage and transmission from inflationary monetary policy and replace the outdated system we have of transferring money from a to b.

I would not call the current debt-based monetary systems or the providers which service the public under them 'outdated'.  They are tuned to a high level of perfection using the force of (what I consider fascist) government muscle and media propaganda to control the populations and extract the maximum amount from them.  Both from a monetary and privacy perspective.  And, of course, to transfer the proceeds to private individuals.

in a zero interest (for depositors) environment, what is the point of keeping your money in a bank? the technology exists to eliminate the need for this type of service. and yet everyone does it. Does that sound like an optimal solution to you?

I personally keep a fairly minimal amount of assets in the bank in the form of demand deposits, or in any paper form which has counter-party risk.  Indeed, seeking options was one of the driving forces which steered me toward Bitcoin in the first place.  It is also why I am kind of discouraged about the direction that Bitcoin seems to be going from a philosophical point of view.

I cannot speak for others.

[str4wm4n]

what ever happened to a p2p exchange?

[ElectricMucus]

what ever happened to a p2p exchange?

See above.
Paranoia aborted them.