|
F-bernanke
|
 |
December 23, 2013, 03:20:14 PM |
|
Choo choo  Lets see if we can break that damn triangle upwards. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even in the event that an attacker gains more than 50% of the network's
computational power, only transactions sent by the attacker could be
reversed or double-spent. The network would not be destroyed.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
gandhibt
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:20:49 PM |
|
"Next steps The deal must now be finalised on a technical level and will then need official approval by Council and the EP's plenary. It will enter into foce on 1 January 2015.Work on the second plank of legislation to wind up banks is also being undertaken in earnest. Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee and the Ecofin Council are both expected to state their positions next week on the rules establishing the single resolution authority and fund. They will then start negotiations in January 2014." |
|
|
|
|
|
Roccker
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:21:23 PM |
|
very good article thanks for that........ i wonder if the fiat holders have read that.... i might be wrong but most of the times i had a feeling was 100% right.... the same feeling i had before 2 years to enter BTC world....... It says "Press release - Economic and monetary affairs − 12-12-2013 - 10:16 Parliament and Council Presidency negotiators reached a political agreement Wednesday on the draft bank recovery and resolution directive, the first step towards setting up an EU system to deal with struggling banks. This directive will introduce the “bail-in” principle by January 2016, thereby ensuring that taxpayers will not be first in line to pay for bank failures." I am a noob, but this sounds like: People have to fear LESS that their bank-money is taken away by them (therefore less interest to put money in bitcoin, not more). (?) |
|
|
|
|
|
humanitee
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:23:55 PM |
|
Wrong. Stabilize to 600 - dump. Stabilize to 300 - dump. Stabilize to 150 - dump. Nothing else to dump - Buy Buy Buy! - Price at insane levels again.
I see you are just another foolish bull that can't understand graphs with arbitrary sloping lines or blockchain transaction amounts. Bitcoin to $blackhole, that much is obvious.  $blackhole = fiat blackhole, Bitcoin drinks your milkshakeThank you for that VERY informative post.  DogeStyle EDIT: Wow! Much informative! Very Condescending! God damn, I even put the :p on there and everything. This forum is way srsbiz as of late. |
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:24:11 PM |
|
very good article thanks for that........ i wonder if the fiat holders have read that.... i might be wrong but most of the times i had a feeling was 100% right.... the same feeling i had before 2 years to enter BTC world....... There will be a year after the directive is forced to action. Nevertheless the EU stress tests for determining which banks are the "lowballs" are already on and will be due to 2014. This is an interesting thing if you add the latest ratings from S&P. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/20/eu-credit-rating-cut_n_4477738.htmlWe'll see. My gut tells me to HODL!  |
|
|
|
|
|
Mad Scientist
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:25:06 PM |
|
This directive will introduce the “bail-in” principle by January 2016, thereby ensuring that taxpayers will not be first in line to pay for bank failures." Bail-In means the Depositors accounts will be taken first, THEN the Taxpayers pay for a Bail-Out so yeah, they're not first in line. John Corzine times many thousands. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mad Scientist
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:27:35 PM |
|
Wrong. Stabilize to 600 - dump. Stabilize to 300 - dump. Stabilize to 150 - dump. Nothing else to dump - Buy Buy Buy! - Price at insane levels again.
I see you are just another foolish bull that can't understand graphs with arbitrary sloping lines or blockchain transaction amounts. Bitcoin to $blackhole, that much is obvious. $blackhole = fiat blackhole, Bitcoin drinks your milkshakeThank you for that VERY informative post. DogeStyle EDIT: Wow! Much informative! Very Condescending! God damn, I even put the :p on there and everything. This forum is way srsbiz as of late. Oh I'm sorry, I didn't know that's what you meant. |
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:28:05 PM |
|
very good article thanks for that........ i wonder if the fiat holders have read that.... i might be wrong but most of the times i had a feeling was 100% right.... the same feeling i had before 2 years to enter BTC world....... It says "Press release - Economic and monetary affairs − 12-12-2013 - 10:16 Parliament and Council Presidency negotiators reached a political agreement Wednesday on the draft bank recovery and resolution directive, the first step towards setting up an EU system to deal with struggling banks. This directive will introduce the “bail-in” principle by January 2016, thereby ensuring that taxpayers will not be first in line to pay for bank failures." I am a noob, but this sounds like: People have to fear LESS that their bank-money is taken away by them (therefore less interest to put money in bitcoin, not more). (?) You didn't understand the whole thing I guess. Bail-in basics
The directive establishes a bail-in system which will ensure that taxpayers will be last in the line to the pay the bills of a struggling bank. In a bail-in, creditors, according to a pre-defined hierarchy, forfeit some or all of their holdings to keep the bank alive. The bail-in system will apply from 1 January 2016.
Now is it clear?  |
|
|
|
|
|
Ivanhoe
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:36:36 PM |
|
So banks are not safe, what else is new? |
|
|
|
|
|
F-bernanke
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:36:59 PM |
|
Choo choo Lets see if we can break that damn triangle upwards. Yes, thats first step, then the long negative trend line at about 730-750. Which one? the 1h SMA200 is at ~706 |
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:39:13 PM |
|
So banks are not safe, what else is new? For you and me (among others here) it's not new. But imagine what happened in Cyprus x 25. Then you will get the idea. |
|
|
|
|
Mirsad
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
Bitcoin - love & hate
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:42:50 PM |
|
So banks are not safe, what else is new? Bitcoin is not safe (not 100%) It's easier to steal bitcoins than fiat money in a bank account technically. Bitcoin wallets only have 1 factor authentification (password), a few are even unecrypted. All it needs is a keylogger and the average joe will lose all his bitcoin holdings. Nerds store them complete offline, but that doesn't help joe. He just don't have the skills to do it (or knows it's necessary). Bitcoin wallets clearly need 2 factor authentification. Online wallets don't count, they are not safe! |
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:46:46 PM |
|
So banks are not safe, what else is new? Bitcoin is not safe (not 100%) It's easier to steal bitcoins than fiat money in a bank account technically. Bitcoin wallets only have 1 factor authentification (password), a few are even unecrypted. All it needs is a keylogger and the average joe will lose all his bitcoin holdings. Nerds store them complete offline, but that doesn't help joe. He just don't have the skills to do it (or knows it's necessary). Bitcoin wallets clearly need 2 factor authentification. Online wallets don't count, they are not safe! Under sane perspective, NOTHING is safe. Not gold, silver, bullion, even real estate isn't safe. What's your point here? |
|
|
|
|
bitcoinvest
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1124
Merit: 1000
13eJ4feC39JzbdY2K9W3ytQzWhunsxL83X
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:49:10 PM |
|
So banks are not safe, what else is new? Bitcoin is not safe (not 100%) It's easier to steal bitcoins than fiat money in a bank account technically. Bitcoin wallets only have 1 factor authentification (password), a few are even unecrypted. All it needs is a keylogger and the average joe will lose all his bitcoin holdings. Nerds store them complete offline, but that doesn't help joe. He just don't have the skills to do it (or knows it's necessary). Bitcoin wallets clearly need 2 factor authentification. Online wallets don't count, they are not safe! omg .... i think i won’t go for a walk again.... it's not safe to walk by the cars..... come on....... |
|
|
|
|
|
Ivanhoe
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:50:13 PM |
|
So banks are not safe, what else is new? Bitcoin is not safe (not 100%) It's easier to steal bitcoins than fiat money in a bank account technically. Bitcoin wallets only have 1 factor authentification (password), a few are even unecrypted. All it needs is a keylogger and the average joe will lose all his bitcoin holdings. Nerds store them complete offline, but that doesn't help joe. He just don't have the skills to do it (or knows it's necessary). Bitcoin wallets clearly need 2 factor authentification. Online wallets don't count, they are not safe! With bitcoin it depends on your own security. So you decide how secure it is, not someone else. That's what's important is in this case. As we speak those things are being built. I heard armory received a fair amount of money from investors for example. Give those projects some time and i'm sure bitcoin will be accessible for Joe also. |
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:51:39 PM |
|
So banks are not safe, what else is new? Bitcoin is not safe (not 100%) It's easier to steal bitcoins than fiat money in a bank account technically. Bitcoin wallets only have 1 factor authentification (password), a few are even unecrypted. All it needs is a keylogger and the average joe will lose all his bitcoin holdings. Nerds store them complete offline, but that doesn't help joe. He just don't have the skills to do it (or knows it's necessary). Bitcoin wallets clearly need 2 factor authentification. Online wallets don't count, they are not safe! With bitcoin it depends on your own security. So you decide how secure it is, not someone else. That's what's important is in this case. As we speak those things are being built. I heard armory received a fair amount of money from investors for example. Give those projects some time and i'm sure bitcoin will be accessible for Joe also. +1 Exactly. |
|
|
|
|
DaRude
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2785
Merit: 1813
In order to dump coins one must have coins
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:53:25 PM |
|
very good article thanks for that........ i wonder if the fiat holders have read that.... i might be wrong but most of the times i had a feeling was 100% right.... the same feeling i had before 2 years to enter BTC world....... It says "Press release - Economic and monetary affairs − 12-12-2013 - 10:16 Parliament and Council Presidency negotiators reached a political agreement Wednesday on the draft bank recovery and resolution directive, the first step towards setting up an EU system to deal with struggling banks. This directive will introduce the “bail-in” principle by January 2016, thereby ensuring that taxpayers will not be first in line to pay for bank failures." I am a noob, but this sounds like: People have to fear LESS that their bank-money is taken away by them (therefore less interest to put money in bitcoin, not more). (?) You didn't understand the whole thing I guess. Bail-in basics
The directive establishes a bail-in system which will ensure that taxpayers will be last in the line to the pay the bills of a struggling bank. In a bail-in, creditors, according to a pre-defined hierarchy, forfeit some or all of their holdings to keep the bank alive. The bail-in system will apply from 1 January 2016.
Now is it clear? Wonder what the pre-defined hierarchy of creditors is, and how high are peoples checking accounts are on that list. So as long as you don't own any bonds or have any money in any bank you're money will be taken last? |
|
|
|
|
|
Roccker
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:55:40 PM |
|
very good article thanks for that........ i wonder if the fiat holders have read that.... i might be wrong but most of the times i had a feeling was 100% right.... the same feeling i had before 2 years to enter BTC world....... It says "Press release - Economic and monetary affairs − 12-12-2013 - 10:16 Parliament and Council Presidency negotiators reached a political agreement Wednesday on the draft bank recovery and resolution directive, the first step towards setting up an EU system to deal with struggling banks. This directive will introduce the “bail-in” principle by January 2016, thereby ensuring that taxpayers will not be first in line to pay for bank failures." I am a noob, but this sounds like: People have to fear LESS that their bank-money is taken away by them (therefore less interest to put money in bitcoin, not more). (?) You didn't understand the whole thing I guess. Bail-in basics
The directive establishes a bail-in system which will ensure that taxpayers will be last in the line to the pay the bills of a struggling bank. In a bail-in, creditors, according to a pre-defined hierarchy, forfeit some or all of their holdings to keep the bank alive. The bail-in system will apply from 1 January 2016.
Now is it clear? Ah, thanks a lot! People who have money on that bank will pay before the state/taxpayers. |
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
December 23, 2013, 03:56:57 PM |
|
Wonder what the pre-defined hierarchy of creditors is, and how high are peoples checking accounts are on that list. So as long as you don't own any bonds or have any money in any bank you're money will be taken last?
Yep. This is pretty much accurate. In Cyprus they took every cent above 100,000euro creditors. I've watched a show about it; one of them was the "economic nobel prize" winner, a professor in economics who got 1,000,000 of euro as his prize and he was left with 100,000...  |
|
|
|
|
|
F-bernanke
|
|
December 23, 2013, 04:04:27 PM |
|
Wonder what the pre-defined hierarchy of creditors is, and how high are peoples checking accounts are on that list. So as long as you don't own any bonds or have any money in any bank you're money will be taken last?
Yep. This is pretty much accurate. In Cyprus they took every cent above 100,000euro creditors. I've watched a show about it; one of them was the "economic nobel prize" winner, a professor in economics who got 1,000,000 of euro as his prize and he was left with 100,000... Yeah, that's quite volatile... Zhou Tonged - Cyprus Anthem http://youtu.be/yc6Hp_Zq3rU |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
