Is Bitcoin the "one world currency" the elites want us to adopt?

[whitenight639]

Obviously some of us here may be familiar with such conspiracy theories as the New world order and such like, and as a n00b I still have questions about this Satoshi guy and why he would be so illusive whilst other early developers are open.

So what do you think about the long term future of Bitcoin, could it be subverted from a utopian currency system into a dystopian one with draconian laws imposed upon it by government?

could hardware wallets become implantable RFIDs? could the mining pools centralise and become the new Bank for International settlements? as all transactions are transparent could the legislators make creating new public key addresses illegal and could they enforce that?


Your thoughts please...

[1715174355]

1715174355

[1715174355]

1715174355

[1715174355]

1715174355

[1715174355]

1715174355

[Rothgar]

Yes, next question.

[knight22]

No.
Central banks are loosing the power of issueing money with bitcoin plus bitcoin is free of dept. No sane banks would have created this kind of currency.

[whitenight639]

No.
Central banks are loosing the power of issueing money with bitcoin plus bitcoin is free of dept. No sane banks would have created this kind of currency.

ok but what if they do not need to issue debt based slave currency, what if they can control you through all of your interactions, for example these smart meteres going into peoples homes (UN agenda 21) they are / will be capable of charging you by usage of appliance instead of by total electrical consumption,

what if they charge you for every mile you drive and cup of tea you drink, everytime you turn on a reading light or toaster, they will have the transparency to see your financial transactions at all times with the public blockchain and tax accordingly (assuming you can't generate new addresses or mask your activities).
Is this not enslavement, can an electronic currency not aid their objective?

[hazek]

No.
Central banks are loosing the power of issueing money with bitcoin plus bitcoin is free of dept. No sane banks would have created this kind of currency.

ok but what if

No.

[solex]

No!
Bitcoin is the ultimate democratization of currency, precisely the opposite of what any "elite"/controlling group would want.
 

[Timo Y]

[...]
So what do you think about the long term future of Bitcoin, could it be subverted from a utopian currency system into a dystopian one with draconian laws imposed upon it by government?
[...]

If draconian laws were imposed on the bitcoin protocol, in violation of community consensus, the result would almost certainly be a fork. 

Then there would be 2 bitcoins:  heavily regulated Bitcoin1, accepted by government-sanctioned businesses, and decentralized Bitcoin2, rejected by government-sanctioned businesses but accepted by system D businesses and dissenting users.

Joe Average would probably end up using both: Bitcoin1 for paying his utility bills and Bitcoin2 for getting a haircut.

If the rules got too draconian for Bitcoin1, eg. if there was a 50% tax on every Bitcoin1 transaction, people would abandon Bitcoin1 en masse, move their savings in Bitcoin2, and only use Bitcoin1 when absolutely necessary.

Then government would have to start subverting Bitcoin2, causing it to fork into Bitcoin3 and Bitcoin4. 

And so on.

[grondilu]

could hardware wallets become implantable RFIDs?

If nobody forces me to wear one, and if they are fully open-source, I'm not sure why it would be a bad thing.

could the mining pools centralise and become the new Bank for International settlements?

Instead of centralization, I'd rather talk about specialization.  The more difficult a task is, the less more specialized people do it.  It's a perfectly normal process that has existed pretty much since neolithics.   What matters is that everybody has the right to specialize in whatever field they want to invest their time/energy/brain in.

So as long as bitcoins remain a public and open-source protocol, there's nothing to worry about.

as all transactions are transparent could the legislators make creating new public key addresses illegal and could they enforce that?

If it was that simple to control bitcoin, Silk Road would have been shutted down long ago.

[Atruk]

Maybe elites want you to adopt bitcoin.

The important question is which elites? The ones you feared or new benevolent ones?

[Stardust]

Instead of centralization, I'd rather talk about specialization.  The more difficult a task is, the less more specialized people do it.  It's a perfectly normal process that has existed pretty much since neolithics.   What matters is that everybody has the right to specialize in whatever field they want to invest their time/energy/brain in.

But specialists never make it to the top.  It's the generalists that employ and use them.

So as long as bitcoins remain a public and open-source protocol, there's nothing to worry about.

I agree with this, and it's part of the solution.  Bitcoin brings more freedom and equality to specialists.  For example software engineers can stay independent/anonymous, and eschew enslavement by their employers.

[nwbitcoin]

I have been wondering about the single world currency issue and if it is bitcoin, its doomed to failure!

The Euro was a mini new world order currency, and it doesn't work because the world isn't set up to allow everyone to work, live and earn at the same level.  This is why bitcoin isn't going to become the huge dollar replacement the speculators imagine.

What does make sense though is an exchange system that allows various crypto currencies to exchange for practically nothing. That would give you your world currency, and your decentralization - a bit like ripple, but more so.

[grondilu]

I have been wondering about the single world currency issue and if it is bitcoin, its doomed to failure!

The Euro was a mini new world order currency, and it doesn't work because the world isn't set up to allow everyone to work, live and earn at the same level.  This is why bitcoin isn't going to become the huge dollar replacement the speculators imagine.

The difference is that bitcoin does not plan on being a unique world currency.  It's a liberal currency so it is supposed to compete in a free monetary market.

What does make sense though is an exchange system that allows various crypto currencies to exchange for practically nothing. That would give you your world currency, and your decentralization - a bit like ripple, but more so.

A decentralized exchange market would indeed be very much welcome, and Ripple seems to be a serious step in that direction.  I don't know why you say it would be a world currency though.

[nwbitcoin]

A decentralized exchange market would indeed be very much welcome, and Ripple seems to be a serious step in that direction.  I don't know why you say it would be a world currency though.

I am looking at this from a lay perspective.  A world currency is one where people don't have to think too hard.  Now, when you go from the US to Europe, you have to change your currency, and things are priced differently.  Its a hassle.  Its a noticeably different currency.

If everyone had a currency with the same name, you would be getting closer to a world currency, but you would still have the problem of the exchanges.  What bitcoin can and should do, is to make that cross currency transaction so easy that nobody notices that we are using different currencies. You can even keep your own name for your currency. You can do that if you have decentralized exchanges everywhere which cost nothing to operate.
That is when you will end up having a practical world currency that actually works!

This is something I would like to see happen, but I'm a bit lost at the moment in how big the whole idea is and how many feet you will tread on to make it work!

[grondilu]

If everyone had a currency with the same name, you would be getting closer to a world currency, but you would still have the problem of the exchanges.  What bitcoin can and should do, is to make that cross currency transaction so easy that nobody notices that we are using different currencies. You can even keep your own name for your currency. You can do that if you have decentralized exchanges everywhere which cost nothing to operate.
That is when you will end up having a practical world currency that actually works!

Then you don't talk about "world currency", rather about an efficient international exchange market.  And yes, it would be great and again, ripple is going in that direction.  But it's not something that bitcoin should do, since bitcoin is not designed to do that.  It is something that should be done by whoever/whatever can do it.

[Gabi]

You know a thread is fail when things like "implantable RFIDs" appears  

I have heard they will implant the hardware wallet via an anal probe  

[Zomdifros]

Well the whole New World Order crap is obvious bullshit, but here's a thought:

Is it possible Bitcoin was created by one of the large Wall Street firms? These guys, especially Goldman Sachs, have a reputation of hiring the best and the brightest fellows you could find. The whole point of these firms is to make obscene profits, usually by inventing complicated financial products such as Collateralized Debt Obligations, Credit Default Swaps and the like.

It would be conceivable some of these guys found out it was possible to create a digital decentralized currency and it was only a matter of time before someone eventually would. The creator of this currency would get a head-start in mining, thus accumulating enormous amounts of it. Only one digital currency would survive, due to the network effect. It is important then that the currency you are building is the most likely to become the favorite currency of the people. The creator, whether it be some lone programmer hiding under the name Satoshi Nakamoto or the experimental department at the Goldman Sachs Tower at 200 West Street, New York, could become the ruler of the world.

[DoomDumas]

No,

Bitcoins cant be controled, even legislation are ineffective.. It can be use at will, anonymously, by anyone.. The "One world currency" will not be similar to BTC, more like a new fiat !

[mccorvic]

As an active and due paying member of the Illuminati, Skull Masons, Stone and Bones Society, and Teamsters Local 455 I can assure that yes, yes it is.

[ralree]

The Illuminati already travelled back in time and implanted all of us with bitcoin wallet RFIDs.  Really.  See that bump on your ankle?  That's where they put it.

Now dig it out.

[MrVivaldi]

Why would they want to create Bitcoin?
Bitcoin allows for fast and simple transfers across the globe. This allows anyone with an internet connection to fund any group.

Bitcoin allows the powers that be to maintain their economic powers.

The government most probably have technological advances which we haven't heard of that probably is able to break the bitcoin system.
They can easily track, hack and steal bitcoins using exploits and other technologies not available to the common person. I.E Van Eck phreaking to obtain private keys.

Thesis: We need money decentralized money independent of governments.
Antithesis: Bitcoins.
Synthesis: Crash the market and have everyone beg for a world government.

To me I recognize it as a global control mechanism and I think it is of the beast system.
Now they even got an incentive to create the mark of the beast it would cause all the Christians who have bitcoins to sell them off in an instant.

This medium of exchange can be anonymous which makes it harder for governments opposed to this system to impose financial aggression in the form of taxes and so on.