Is this a coordinated attack?

[Herodes]

Seems like many of the people you talk about laugh about bitcoin.

The ECB said it was a threat.

No, they said that it could affect trust of people in the official system or similar things.

What about those that does not trust the official system, will their trust (or lack thereof) in the official system be affected? I'm kind of sad that they left out me and my pals in that report.

[Severian]

Seems like many of the people you talk about laugh about bitcoin.

The ECB said it was a threat.

No, they said that it could affect trust of people in the official system or similar things.

That's officialese for "threat". "

Virtual currencies “could have a negative impact on the reputation of central banks” if their use grows considerably, the Frankfurt-based ECB said in its research paper. “This risk should be considered when assessing the overall risk situation of central banks.”

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

[hlynur]

I believe it is coordinated and on purpose.. to break confidence.  Bitcoin Is a brilliant new idea that is dangerous to some powerful people who have virtually unlimited resources.  If Bitcoin is successful (and It would be without this purposeful interference), It will begin a new paradigm that has these people  veery fearful.  They won't control it.

I'm not really sure if they wan't to destroy bitcoin, it would be much better opportunity to milk the market like a cow with their the pump&dump-bots.
For them it's more like doing the same shit like on the regular market

If I would be some big taxcheating player just the imagination of fast laundering my money via bitcoins would get me horny.
much simpler than blurring the transfers to tax havens
imo bitcoin is the perfect instrument for them.
only question is if they let the little man participate in the whole game.

very difficult to to look into the future. ECB, russian oligarchs, FED...who's the fucker involved? (putting tinfoilhat on)

that's the big question:
Destruction or Regulation (=Manipulation).

[afbitcoins]

I'm convinced the world controllers will be or already are attacking bitcoin.

I think they've used market manipulation to paint a fake top. Have written about it here.
http://afbitcoins.wordpress.com/2013/04/12/fake-top/

[steamboat]

ya ya yah How many out there felt it was gonna drop hard when you saw it reach 235 dollars? I think its NOT controlled at all and the old saying give them enough rope to hang them selves is the scenario here.

It went up way to fast and the crash happened just for that reason no strong hand all fluffy speculation. It takes skill like bernaki to be able to milk a currency for 40 years. They let us fuck it up.

Now there's plenty of media for bitcoin.

I believe we were rising way too fast, though that doesn't explain what's been happening. Everything about this recent runup and sell-off screams manipulation with nefarious intent to me.

[Luckybit]

I've been thinking for a while now about possible scenarios where those that stand to lose the most by bitcoins success would attack it. I find it hard to believe the world powers are dumb enough to not recognize the implications of bitcoin succeeding, and have been watching with a keen eye since before the '11 bubble. At the very least, the FBI and ECB papers give an estimate on when they began to monitor it. So I thought to myself, what would be the most efficient way to destroy bitcoin?

51% attack: This would require extensive infrastructure, even for an attack when we were at 21th/s. this would be expensive and time consuming; and while there certainly are ways to hide it, would increase the attack footprint with specialists required to set up and maintain the cluster, which runs the risk of a leak, giving bitcoin more credibility. they would also, as I understand it, need to amass a significant amount of old coins in order to continue the attack, which would only last as long as their reserves of coin.

Attack on companies offering bitcoin related services: persistent, coordinated attacks on web sites offering bitcoin services would reduce confidence in the sites, making it seem like they are run by a bunch of amateurs, reflecting poorly on the bitcoin marketplace.

Propoganda: This one is fairly obvious, and doesn't really need to be actively funded. The world governments and CBs have already invested countless dollars and man hours into brainwashing the masses. The media coverage of bitcoin is a shining example of how difficult it is for the general public to comprehend the idea of a free market and monetary system. People I have great respect for surprise me time and time again with their views of what money is.

Market manipulation: The bitcoin market is brand new, small, and fragile. It would not take much money, money they can (and do) print by the truckload every day, to orchestrate a massive pump n dump to shatter consumer confidence. The beauty of this attack is its difficulty to detect. The community would be so focused on the growth of the market and increased value they wouldn't notice the slow accumulation of wealth spread over multiple accounts. All it would take is a sudden dump of all the coins amassed to tank the value, destroying confidence in the market.

Illegal: this ones tricky due to the nature of bitcoin. It would take an unprecedented amount of coordination to make it illegal in every country, which would at best only slow adoption. History shows how difficult it is for governments to eradicate something if society demands it.

Regulation: this is a better alternative to making bitcoin illegal, though difficult given the nature of bitcoin. The easiest way would be to regulate the exchange into and out of bitcoin and fiat currencies. Vendors that accept bitcoin could be taxed on all purchases made with coins. I'm sure the government can come up with creative ways to ensure they get a slice of every pie we buy.

I believe we are currently under attack by a mix of these approaches combined to be the most effective. Who stands to gain by DDOSing bitcoin services? Who has the money to buy million dollar plus market value chunks over and over again? Greed, fear, and the inability of the current market to sustain the level of trading certainly had a large part to play in the recent crash/correction/whatever you want to call it, but what if it was something deliberate? What if someone knew the gox trading engine was maxed and they could cause a panic sell by lagging it out? How difficult would it be to spend $100 million in fiat to pump n dump the economy. Not to make a profit, but purely to destroy it? Do I have my tinfoil hat on too tight?

I suspect you could be right, but whether you are right or not it's still the community and mtGox to blame for not expecting these attacks and building it into the design from the start. Satoshi knew this was coming and designed Bitcoin to be resistant and resilient.  mtGox was not properly designed.

[alexh]

Definitely coordinated, i have the feeling it is just a small group of speculators who are causing all this.

[Luckybit]

I have to agree. It's an attack.

In 2009, Liberty Dollar was taken down, with extreme prejudice, by the Bankster Protectiong Group...I mean, the US government.

There were ~250,000 users of the currency. It totaled around $20 million in valuation. It was the second most used currency in the US.

Of course they're attacking Bitcoin. It's being attacked by the very people it was made to circumvent - banks and governments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Dollar

I was a user of E-gold before it was taken down. The only reason I wasn't an early adopter of Bitcoin in 2009 is because honestly I thought it would end up like E-gold. I'm surprised that Bitcoin turned out to be a success because I expected it to be crushed.

The way they'll attack Bitcoin is by labeling the most prominent users and developers as sex offenders, pedophiles, rapists. Bitcoin will be associated with child pornography and they'd be able to ban it that way because child pornography short circuits all reasoning, rationality, and logical thinking. Also it doesn't help that there really is a dark net with child porn on it to help them make these kinds of cases.


But yeah, there are people who will not like Bitcoin and there is a reason why Satoshi had to remain anonymous.

[Luckybit]

It's possible that Bitcoin itself is a pet project of the bankers. Its volatility, association with SR, and general shakiness is a good way to establish to the public that currencies only work in the hands of a centralized entity, to destroy the public's confidence in any sort of decentralized currency. It's also a very clever way to disclose the opinions of the public, sort of like detecting thought-crime. Just one theory. So who knows.

Not likely. The bankers don't support libertarian technology as pet projects and if it was one of theirs you'd see hints of their mindset in the design of the project itself. It would reek of centralization and centralized power.

[noedaRDH]

It's possible that Bitcoin itself is a pet project of the bankers. Its volatility, association with SR, and general shakiness is a good way to establish to the public that currencies only work in the hands of a centralized entity, to destroy the public's confidence in any sort of decentralized currency. It's also a very clever way to disclose the opinions of the public, sort of like detecting thought-crime. Just one theory. So who knows.

Not likely. The bankers don't support libertarian technology as pet projects and if it was one of theirs you'd see hints of their mindset in the design of the project itself. It would reek of centralization and centralized power.

There was a new Bitcoin video that popped up on Youtube recently. All computer graphics, much of which have a lot of Masonic symbolism in it. Just saying.

[Severian]

The bankers don't support libertarian technology as pet projects and if it was one of theirs you'd see hints of their mindset in the design of the project itself.

In addition, no central banker could ever conceive of releasing a decentralized currency and diminishing their own power. It's like imagining that a priest would tell people to just go start their own religion.

[Severian]

I was a user of E-gold before it was taken down.

Out of curiosity, did you lose anything when they smacked it?

[noedaRDH]

The bankers don't support libertarian technology as pet projects and if it was one of theirs you'd see hints of their mindset in the design of the project itself.

In addition, no central banker could ever conceive of releasing a decentralized currency and diminishing their own power. It's like imagining that a priest would tell people to just go start their own religion.

Why not? Central bankers are just trying to de-legitimatize the idea of decentralized currency. Why not release their own version of one, then smack it down to prove a point.

[eric345]

The bankers don't support libertarian technology as pet projects and if it was one of theirs you'd see hints of their mindset in the design of the project itself.

In addition, no central banker could ever conceive of releasing a decentralized currency and diminishing their own power. It's like imagining that a priest would tell people to just go start their own religion.

Why not? Central bankers are just trying to de-legitimatize the idea of decentralized currency. Why not release their own version of one, then smack it down to prove a point.

For them, that's like opening pandora's box.

[Luckybit]

It's possible that Bitcoin itself is a pet project of the bankers. Its volatility, association with SR, and general shakiness is a good way to establish to the public that currencies only work in the hands of a centralized entity, to destroy the public's confidence in any sort of decentralized currency. It's also a very clever way to disclose the opinions of the public, sort of like detecting thought-crime. Just one theory. So who knows.

Not likely. The bankers don't support libertarian technology as pet projects and if it was one of theirs you'd see hints of their mindset in the design of the project itself. It would reek of centralization and centralized power.

There was a new Bitcoin video that popped up on Youtube recently. All computer graphics, much of which have a lot of Masonic symbolism in it. Just saying.

Masons aren't any more important than any other social club. I suppose you believe the toastmasters international are the elite? The elite don't need to join a club, they are born into their family. If you need to join a club then you aren't elite.

[Luckybit]

I was a user of E-gold before it was taken down.

Out of curiosity, did you lose anything when they smacked it?

No. I didn't really have any money in it, I just had tried it out.

[noedaRDH]

It's possible that Bitcoin itself is a pet project of the bankers. Its volatility, association with SR, and general shakiness is a good way to establish to the public that currencies only work in the hands of a centralized entity, to destroy the public's confidence in any sort of decentralized currency. It's also a very clever way to disclose the opinions of the public, sort of like detecting thought-crime. Just one theory. So who knows.

Not likely. The bankers don't support libertarian technology as pet projects and if it was one of theirs you'd see hints of their mindset in the design of the project itself. It would reek of centralization and centralized power.

There was a new Bitcoin video that popped up on Youtube recently. All computer graphics, much of which have a lot of Masonic symbolism in it. Just saying.

Masons aren't any more important than any other social club. I suppose you believe the toastmasters international are the elite? The elite don't need to join a club, they are born into their family. If you need to join a club then you aren't elite.

Yet there are Masons who are born into it. I don't buy into that idea that Freemasons are just the same as any other social club. They seem to have greater influence than say, Toastmasters, which is just a club to improve one's speech-giving abilities.

[bitcad]

Should we be afraid of this?
http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/04/huge-attack-on-wordpress-sites-could-spawn-never-before-seen-super-botnet/

[Severian]

http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/04/huge-attack-on-wordpress-sites-could-spawn-never-before-seen-super-botnet/

Makes sense. Wordpress is the biggest site to accept bitcoins.

This will be ongoing and ramped up, I believe. Time to start buying namecoins and use .bit?

[stash]

Definitely coordinated, i have the feeling it is just a small group of speculators who are causing all this.

I believe this is a real reason, if elites want destroy they will go easy ways via regulation and legal.