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

[Mjbmonetarymetals]

http://www.bos.frb.org/education/pubs/wishes.pdf

Federal Reserve Bank of Boston-Wishes and Rainbows

Comic book children's story about the introduction of colored flowers into a town that has never seen color. Designed to stimulate students' imagination as they explore the economic problem of scarce resources, various methods of allocation, and how societies react to alleviate such problems.

Road to roota

Roota's flower = Bitcoin?

[1714699611]

1714699611

[1714699611]

1714699611

[1714699611]

1714699611

[paraipan]

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 !

+1

Take a look at Ripple if you still want to find the "elites" currency https://ripple.com

[Monster Tent]

I would steer clear of ripple.

[BitcoinAshley]

Lol no, absolutely not. The reason is that the "elites" are simply not competent enough to do something like this. When they want to make a "one world currency" they do something stupid like, the Euro. A one-region currency. Which is a big disaster, obviously.

Sure, the elites are going to try and hijack the currency. With the help of very large bitcoin businesses who (naturally, in an attempt to increase profits in the short term) will do things that aren't necessarily in consumers' best interest, like move all their USD accounts to the U.S., or in the future perhaps cooperating with gov't officials looking for account data to track tax evaders, etc, etc, etc. I'm not specifically poking fun at Mt. Gox but just saying that this kind of thing is bound to happen.

The only issue to overcome is really that a lot of people don't have the healthy level of skepticism required for a free market - bitcoin is kind of a free market microcosm trapped within the various socialist markets of the world. You don't need a tin-foil-hat level of skepticism, but when there are exchanges that boast of having 80% of trading volume, and when there are huge firms getting involved or large bitcoin-related companies starting to do things that seem a wee bit shady - rather than responding to concerned folks with "Lol its a good investment, you need to lay off the Alex Jones and stop calling for a big evil company boycott at the drop of a hat" we need to realize that, where Bitcoin is concerned there is NO government to protect us from our lack of healthy skepticism. (Not that governments do a good job protecting us from monopolies anyways, heck, they were implicit in creating the ones that exist currently.) Bitcoin consumers need to be more responsive in terms of ceasing to do business with irresponsible companies, rather than this expectation that nothing bad can really happen, it's Bitcoin, they're all good guys.

You'll noticed mixed doses of skepticism and enthusiasm in regards to Ripple. This is healthy. Ripple is new. Soon we'll find out what it's really about. However, some of the concepts behind Ripple are what is important. A p2p network that allows one to trade ANY asset - for instance, gold, USD, etc - over the internet instantly via a trust network. Even if one has one's doubts about the way it was initiated and the motivations behind its management, at the very least a competitor will arise with the same concept and more integrity. Or, the consumers will decide that Ripple is to be trusted, for now. We'll see!

[whitenight639]

The problem is that people are so easily controlled through even mere threats of court or state violence, so in 20yrs time when bitcoin is massively established people running exchanges or trading in bitcoin can be cohersed into paying excessive taxes and giving up the economic liberties that bitcoin gave them, already on this forum you see questions like, how do i declare my income from bitcoin and such, I'm not a tin foil hat wearing type but there is an elite of glabalists that seek to re-create feudal times and have us as economic slaves, they've been doing a damm good job at it too considering most people leave school or college now not knowing anything about economics or how money is created or even how to balance a cheque book.

So IMO Bitcoin can be a massive force for good if we resist the attempts of governments and monopolies to subvert it, It could be an orwellian nightmare if people give in too easily.


I would love to be able to buy my coffee direct from a brazillian grower online in bitcoin in the next few years, Or send money to a poor african farmer directly for machinery etc.
I'd love to be able to print 3d parts for a home server or solar panel that had been created in an opensource project and funded by bitcoin crowd sourcing in some way, the enabling aspects of technology are amazing a and we can potentially do away with big governments, monopolies and central banks - I really hope that Bitcoin stays as a force for good.   

[RodeoX]

It is not in the interest of economic elites to support bitcoin. They became the elites by excluding you from the market. There is no way they want a bunch of poor people trading in ways they can't profit from.
Also, the new world order is fringe element wet dream. No one is at the helm, which is just as disquieting. 

[tvbcof]

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...

My thought is that many things of this general nature remain valid hypotheses.  In other words, as observations continue to roll in they should be mapped against such possibilities as well as many others.

In terms of conspiracies, my sense is that a lot of things are not really that well planned by 'the powers that be.'  Certain things, like the uprising in Egypt to use an example, sort of catch everyone by surprise.  But said 'powers that be' have the resources to analyze and shape future events to make the most of the situation.  My best guess at this point is that Bitcoin falls into this general category.

[johnyj]

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.

The bank's power come from that they could get loan from FED endlessly. But with bitcoin they could not get more if they want, and once bitcoin leave their hand, it will disappear from their vault forever (with fiat, it eventually deposited back into another bank), so it is not a very interesting business, maybe pension fund are more interested

[axus]

[...]
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.

The "elites" can produce more hashing power than you can.

[markm]

Yes but they turn up their nose at more than half of the extant coin types, even those that can be merged-mined.

So for each new altcoin, the small fry have lots of time to get themselves some long before the big guys jump on and claim all the rest, at which point the small folk can simply move on to yet another that is "so small as to be beneath notice, no one takes it seriously" and so on.

-MarkM-

[joecooin]

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

Aha.

Van Eck phreaking to obtain private keys.

That is a rather funny idea to obtain private keys via electromagnetic surveillance.

Please learn about Van Eck phreaking and the resources needed to attack this way and I am sure you will reconsider your statement.

Joe

[WinVery.com]

I believe standard drawing rights are it, not bitcoins.

[Bit_Happy]

Don't fear The NewBit World Order, there are some things you do not need to know right now.   

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

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.

Probably because
1. He (or they) is afraid of the global elites (and he/they should be).
2. He (or they) wants to have a normal life
3. He (or they) wants to do other project independently

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?

No.

could hardware wallets become implantable RFIDs?

No.

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

No.

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

No.

Your thoughts please...

I hope i my thoughts helped.

[Monster Tent]

Once 80% of all bitcoin transactions are going through 1 exchange located in the US it makes network analysis a whole lot easier. Especially when you cross match it with the bitcoin foundation data which can be accessed by the same people.

People should take steps to avoid this the same way they move from deepbit when it gets close to 50% of the network.

[WiW]

I still have questions about this Satoshi guy and why he would be so illusive whilst other early developers are open.

I actually think it's most likely this Satoshi guy kept his identity secret exactly because the "elites" can't quite do most of what you envision. If I were the writer of such a competitive currency potentially capable of overthrowing not only governments, but whole forms of government, I would seriously consider never identifying myself ever again.

[tvbcof]

I still have questions about this Satoshi guy and why he would be so illusive whilst other early developers are open.

I actually think it's most likely this Satoshi guy kept his identity secret exactly because the "elites" can't quite do most of what you envision. If I were the writer of such a competitive currency potentially capable of overthrowing not only governments, but whole forms of government, I would seriously consider never identifying myself ever again.

I think it pretty unlikely that the security apparatus of the US would not able to identify Satoshi (or plural as the case may be) rather trivially.  And I bet that the guy is (or guys are) pretty aware of that.

[Elwar]

We will be the new elites.

Then what will happen? Some crazy alien shit.

[Mike Christ]

*puts on tinfoil hat*

In NWO conspiracy theories, the big bank, THE bank, mother bank, World Bank, Bank of Earth, will want us to adopt their money that they issue for the entire world to use.  They will have full control over it and the world will be indebted to them, and everyone will slave away to earn it and spend it.  This is the ultimate centralized currency, the one you should fear, and the one you reference in the OP.

Bitcoin is the exact opposite.  It's the ultimate decentralized currency, and this is the one we need to get popular, not fiat.  If ever there is a centralized world currency, I would avoid it like plague.

[Shad3dOne]

Repent!!

The end is rear!!!