Bitcoin Forum
August 19, 2019, 01:21:06 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: What do you think about more?
Sex - 32 (40.5%)
Bitcoin - 47 (59.5%)
Total Voters: 79

Pages: « 1 ... 20432 20433 20434 20435 20436 20437 20438 20439 20440 20441 20442 20443 20444 20445 20446 20447 20448 20449 20450 20451 20452 20453 20454 20455 20456 20457 20458 20459 20460 20461 20462 20463 20464 20465 20466 20467 20468 20469 20470 20471 20472 20473 20474 20475 20476 20477 20478 20479 20480 20481 [20482] 20483 20484 20485 20486 20487 20488 20489 20490 20491 20492 20493 20494 20495 20496 20497 20498 20499 20500 20501 20502 20503 20504 20505 20506 20507 20508 20509 20510 20511 20512 20513 20514 20515 20516 20517 20518 20519 20520 20521 20522 20523 20524 20525 20526 20527 20528 20529 20530 20531 20532 ... 24805 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 21329711 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (104 posts by 20 users deleted.)
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 1925


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 12:55:46 AM

Okey so whats next???


Were gonne drop to €3k???

thinking BTC is just testing the doug polk 10K bet

I haven't seen anything from DPolk, recently, but I would imagine that he must be getting a bit nervous..... Tone Vays did have the better side of the bet in terms of being able to use the bet as leverage.. but it did seem that DPolk did make what seemed to be a reasonably decent bet in which odds seemed to be working pretty good for him.. and not so much now..

I don't imagine he is nervous at all.  10k is a twinkly little bet for him.  Annoyed perhaps.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNu9x8PEXno

I am not talking about nervous in terms of the cost of the bet, but in terms of the likelihood of winning the bet.  Yeah, sure, he is a media person, so there is some value in just making the bet, and therefore drawing attention to your person.

But, substantively, none of us knows the short-term price direction of bitcoin, and yeah each of the two of them were acting a bit cocky about their predictions, so that is part of the reason that they were willing to put down their bets (even though perhaps they are just playing the publicity, too)...     Sure, it is still possible that the BTC price bottom is in, and sure it is possible that BTC will never, ever, ever (at least before 2019) see sub $6k again, but part of my point about the seemingly likely Polk nervousness is that the odds are becoming less in his favor as the price continues to dip... and a question remains about whether the various price supports will hold above $6k in order to keep prices above $6k...

If Polk is in reality (which I have no doubt that he is), then he has got to feel a bit more nervous about his current odds as compared with what his odds were from just two weeks ago, when they made the bet.
1566220866
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566220866

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566220866
Reply with quote  #2

1566220866
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
realr0ach
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742
Merit: 299


#TheGoyimKnow


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 01:04:38 AM

I cannot believe how much money Google spent developing the JayJuanGee chat AI for these results.
TERA2
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 222


Deb Rah Von Doom


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 01:06:10 AM

Those fucking nocoiners that didn't want to go all in max leveraged long at 10k.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 1925


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 01:52:42 AM
Merited by PoolMinor (2), LFC_Bitcoin (1)

I cannot believe how much money Google spent developing the JayJuanGee chat AI for these results.

Must be one of those cases in which one questions whether everything in the whole word is a simulation, which remains doubtful on the existential level.

The fact that nocoiners, like you, seem to recognize some value in AI, thus you should recognize some value in bitcoin, too.. but some of the AI endorsing fucks are getting distracted by supposed value of various other cryptos rather than recognizing the real innovations of bitcoin...... similar to you, who seems to get distracted in recognizing value in PMs, it is like you are living in the past, yet you seem smart enough that even you probably don't believe the nonsense PM pumping bullshit that you spout nor the identity politics inflamatory posts, either.

Those fucking nocoiners that didn't want to go all in max leveraged long at 10k.

That is a strawman argument, if I have ever seen one.



Only you troll shills are suggesting that regular peeps should be playing around with leverage, because you hope that you can cause peeps to perceive BTC investing as gambling rather than the long term value that it actually is.  Fact of the matter, Tera, remains that it does not matter exactly when you began to buy into bitcoin, including starting at $19,666, because if you maintain a prudent strategy and you continue to prudently invest in BTC, such as dollar cost averaging, incrementalism, accumulation and buying on dips, you are quite likely to thank yourselfie profusely in 3-5 years (and perhaps a shorter period of time) that you took an active approach to get involved in BTC and to take stake and accumulate as many BTC as you can within your reasonable means (perhaps using some leverage, but certainly not max leveraging anything because past BTC performance should teach any reasonable person that BTC is like to continue to be volatile and even downwardly manipulated below its fundamental value).
Elwar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2842
Merit: 1442


Viva Ut Vivas


View Profile WWW
May 26, 2018, 04:13:48 AM


Oh please. the way banknotes started in the first place is merchants wanted to store their gold at a bank, rather than lugging it around themselves or setting up their own fort and small militia to protect it. Then they were issued a piece of paper, a banknote. When the bankers discovered people were using the banknotes like money, they discovered a way to loan people paper and run a fractional reserve. It doesn't matter what medium you use as money. Someone is going to find a way to put them self in the middle and exact their usurious fees. Or just plain use force or stealth and outright steal your bounty.

Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

Except not even exchanges are currently using that "feature".

Thanks to blockchain exchanges could be already guaranteeing they don't run fractional reserve. It would be as simple as this:

- Every exchange user is given a "unique private identifier".
- Every day, the exchange publish a balance sheet that comprises a listing of all UPI's and its individual balances. The total is the minimum amount of reserves the exchange must control to prove absence of fractional reserve "banking".
- Simultaneously the exchange publish a listing of addresses which individual balances (can be checked on their respective blockchains for accuracy) sum, at least, the total needed. Obviously they sign a timestamped code with those addresses to prove ownership.

- Individual users could check their balances are included and accounted for in the balance sheet.

... But not a single one exchange is still doing this. Wonder why.....


Agreed. Decentralized exchanges need to take hold.

Bisq is an ok start but p2p is not good for liquidity.

I started work on a decentralized exchange that acts just like a regular exchange with fiat. But it's not the simplest of things to accomplish, will take some time.
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
May 26, 2018, 04:29:11 AM

you know what goes here

Oh please. the way banknotes started in the first place is merchants wanted to store their gold at a bank, rather than lugging it around themselves or setting up their own fort and small militia to protect it. Then they were issued a piece of paper, a banknote. When the bankers discovered people were using the banknotes like money, they discovered a way to loan people paper and run a fractional reserve. It doesn't matter what medium you use as money. Someone is going to find a way to put them self in the middle and exact their usurious fees. Or just plain use force or stealth and outright steal your bounty.

Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

I'm sorry. I don't subscribe to your point of view either.  All I have seen in the 4 years in this cryptocurrency space is scam after scam and scheme after scheme. There is no salvation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPVpMxVn6mk


Ok what If I modify my statement a bit.

Quote
Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance is theoretically technologically capable of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

Would you disagree that it is a tool that is, at least in theory, capable of combating this in a meaningful way? If so, would you agree that it is the first technology that has ever been invented that is potentially capable of doing this?

The main reason that we see so much scamminess in this space is that blockchain is largely about censorship resistance, which is for the most part only needed by people who would be censored, and, big surprise, it turns out that a lot of the people who would have been censored are people who would have been up to no good. IMAGINE THAT! Anyway, just because that sort of thing is the lowest hanging fruit and so developed out first, I don't think this means that blockchain technology will never find legitimate use cases in safeguarding against scams (like the double counting of precious metals reserves).

4 years is not a long time, it is a flash in the pan.
bones261
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1680


KnowNoBorders.io


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 04:31:04 AM
Last edit: May 26, 2018, 05:01:36 AM by bones261


Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

Except not even exchanges are currently using that "feature".

Thanks to blockchain exchanges could be already guaranteeing they don't run fractional reserve. It would be as simple as this:

- Every exchange user is given a "unique private identifier".
- Every day, the exchange publish a balance sheet that comprises a listing of all UPI's and its individual balances. The total is the minimum amount of reserves the exchange must control to prove absence of fractional reserve "banking".
- Simultaneously the exchange publish a listing of addresses which individual balances (can be checked on their respective blockchains for accuracy) sum, at least, the total needed. Obviously they sign a timestamped code with those addresses to prove ownership.

- Individual users could check their balances are included and accounted for in the balance sheet.

... But not a single one exchange is still doing this. Wonder why.....


Agreed. Decentralized exchanges need to take hold.

Bisq is an ok start but p2p is not good for liquidity.

I started work on a decentralized exchange that acts just like a regular exchange with fiat[/b]. But it's not the simplest of things to accomplish, will take some time.

And this is the crux of the problem. BTC needs to find a way to decouple itself from fiat. Unfortunately, there is not enough adoption at this time to accomplish this. One would be really hard pressed to be able to fully purchase all of the goods and services they need directly with BTC.
bones261
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1680


KnowNoBorders.io


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 04:44:14 AM
Last edit: May 26, 2018, 05:06:09 AM by bones261


Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

I'm sorry. I don't subscribe to your point of view either.  All I have seen in the 4 years in this cryptocurrency space is scam after scam and scheme after scheme. There is no salvation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPVpMxVn6mk


Ok what If I modify my statement a bit.

Quote
Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance is theoretically technologically capable of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

Would you disagree that it is a tool that is, at least in theory, capable of combating this in a meaningful way? If so, would you agree that it is the first technology that has ever been invented that is potentially capable of doing this?

The main reason that we see so much scamminess in this space is that blockchain is largely about censorship resistance, which is for the most part only needed by people who would be censored, and, big surprise, it turns out that a lot of the people who would have been censored are people who would have been up to no good. IMAGINE THAT! Anyway, just because that sort of thing is the lowest hanging fruit and so developed out first, I don't think this means that blockchain technology will never find legitimate use cases in safeguarding against scams (like the double counting of precious metals reserves).

4 years is not a long time, it is a flash in the pan.

Unfortunately, there is nothing to prevent someone from building a layer on top of a blockchain and issuing tokens that are supposed to be backed by deposits and then running a fractional reserve. (Many accuse Tether of doing just that.) Furthermore, blockchains have difficulty scaling. That is why BTC has resorted to the lightning network to attempt to address the scaling problem.
BobLawblaw
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1976


BitcoinTalk's Most Fabulously Gay Black Power-Top


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 05:07:35 AM

Ok, Bitcorn.

Enough fucking around already.

It's going to be August before we know it, and this silliness of looking to test $7,000 USD is really harshing my mellow, dude.

I mean, come on... We're only up ~300% vs this time last year.

DaRude
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1733
Merit: 1038


In order to dump coins one must have coins


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 05:28:00 AM


Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

I'm sorry. I don't subscribe to your point of view either.  All I have seen in the 4 years in this cryptocurrency space is scam after scam and scheme after scheme. There is no salvation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPVpMxVn6mk


Ok what If I modify my statement a bit.

Quote
Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance is theoretically technologically capable of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

Would you disagree that it is a tool that is, at least in theory, capable of combating this in a meaningful way? If so, would you agree that it is the first technology that has ever been invented that is potentially capable of doing this?

The main reason that we see so much scamminess in this space is that blockchain is largely about censorship resistance, which is for the most part only needed by people who would be censored, and, big surprise, it turns out that a lot of the people who would have been censored are people who would have been up to no good. IMAGINE THAT! Anyway, just because that sort of thing is the lowest hanging fruit and so developed out first, I don't think this means that blockchain technology will never find legitimate use cases in safeguarding against scams (like the double counting of precious metals reserves).

4 years is not a long time, it is a flash in the pan.

Unfortunately, there is nothing to prevent someone from building a layer on top of a blockchain and issuing tokens that are supposed to be backed by deposits and then running a fractional reserve. (Many accuse Tether of doing just that.) Furthermore, blockchains have difficulty scaling. That is why BTC has resorted to the lightning network to attempt to address the scaling problem.

So BTC is a solution, but it's really not a solution because someone can come up with a different solution on top of BTC which wouldn't really be a solution at all, thus making underlying BTC not a solution. Think i got it. And then BTC is having problem scaling so that's why they introduced a scaling solution called LN. Did i get it right?
jojo69
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1809


no FOMO


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 05:41:40 AM

Okey so whats next???


Were gonne drop to €3k???

thinking BTC is just testing the doug polk 10K bet

I haven't seen anything from DPolk, recently, but I would imagine that he must be getting a bit nervous..... Tone Vays did have the better side of the bet in terms of being able to use the bet as leverage.. but it did seem that DPolk did make what seemed to be a reasonably decent bet in which odds seemed to be working pretty good for him.. and not so much now..

I seriously doubt Doug is the least bit nervous.  He is a pro, he knows his odds and is resigned to the outcome the fates deliver.

Also, he isn't exactly going hungry if he loses.

edit/ I see capslock beat me to it
Elwar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2842
Merit: 1442


Viva Ut Vivas


View Profile WWW
May 26, 2018, 05:51:08 AM

And this is the crux of the problem. BTC needs to find a way to decouple itself from fiat. Unfortunately, there is not enough adoption at this time to accomplish this. One would be really hard pressed to be able to fully purchase all of the goods and services they need directly with BTC.

I got to about 90% of purchases when I lived in Germany (I think gasoline was the final thing).

In the US it would have been so much easier. Bitcoin people in the US have it so easy for spending bitcoins but they don't even know it.
bones261
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1680


KnowNoBorders.io


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 06:09:43 AM


Unfortunately, there is nothing to prevent someone from building a layer on top of a blockchain and issuing tokens that are supposed to be backed by deposits and then running a fractional reserve. (Many accuse Tether of doing just that.) Furthermore, blockchains have difficulty scaling. That is why BTC has resorted to the lightning network to attempt to address the scaling problem.

So BTC is a solution, but it's really not a solution because someone can come up with a different solution on top of BTC which wouldn't really be a solution at all, thus making underlying BTC not a solution. Think i got it. And then BTC is having problem scaling so that's why they introduced a scaling solution called LN. Did i get it right?

If the solution you want is to totally prevent people from running fractional reserves, then no, the blockchain is not the solution. Perhaps if you could cram all of the functionality onto the blockchain itself it may be a solution. However, when you try to cram all of the functionality onto the blockchain itself, you run into a scaling issue. You can get a blockchain to scale, but this always comes at the cost of the network being more centralized.
DaRude
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1733
Merit: 1038


In order to dump coins one must have coins


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 06:25:08 AM


Unfortunately, there is nothing to prevent someone from building a layer on top of a blockchain and issuing tokens that are supposed to be backed by deposits and then running a fractional reserve. (Many accuse Tether of doing just that.) Furthermore, blockchains have difficulty scaling. That is why BTC has resorted to the lightning network to attempt to address the scaling problem.

So BTC is a solution, but it's really not a solution because someone can come up with a different solution on top of BTC which wouldn't really be a solution at all, thus making underlying BTC not a solution. Think i got it. And then BTC is having problem scaling so that's why they introduced a scaling solution called LN. Did i get it right?

If the solution you want is to totally prevent people from running fractional reserves, then no, the blockchain is not the solution. Perhaps if you could cram all of the functionality onto the blockchain itself it may be a solution. However, when you try to cram all of the functionality onto the blockchain itself, you run into a scaling issue. You can get a blockchain to scale, but this always comes at the cost of the network being more centralized.

Oh ok i think you cleared it up now, but just to make sure, so it's impossible to cram every possible functionality in any system, and it's also impossible to prevent a derivatives market based on any underlying asset. And since BTC exists in our faulty universe BTC is burdened with the restrictions that apply to every other system. Thus we draw a conclusion that BTC is a failed experiment and will die? I believe the scientific name for this argument is 'R0ach logic'
nanobtc
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 398
Merit: 170



View Profile WWW
May 26, 2018, 06:28:22 AM

Please don't quote the established trolls. You cannot win, and they gain traction.
DaRude
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1733
Merit: 1038


In order to dump coins one must have coins


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 06:41:23 AM


Oh please. the way banknotes started in the first place is merchants wanted to store their gold at a bank, rather than lugging it around themselves or setting up their own fort and small militia to protect it. Then they were issued a piece of paper, a banknote. When the bankers discovered people were using the banknotes like money, they discovered a way to loan people paper and run a fractional reserve. It doesn't matter what medium you use as money. Someone is going to find a way to put them self in the middle and exact their usurious fees. Or just plain use force or stealth and outright steal your bounty.

Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

Except not even exchanges are currently using that "feature".

Thanks to blockchain exchanges could be already guaranteeing they don't run fractional reserve. It would be as simple as this:

- Every exchange user is given a "unique private identifier".
- Every day, the exchange publish a balance sheet that comprises a listing of all UPI's and its individual balances. The total is the minimum amount of reserves the exchange must control to prove absence of fractional reserve "banking".
- Simultaneously the exchange publish a listing of addresses which individual balances (can be checked on their respective blockchains for accuracy) sum, at least, the total needed. Obviously they sign a timestamped code with those addresses to prove ownership.

- Individual users could check their balances are included and accounted for in the balance sheet.

... But not a single one exchange is still doing this. Wonder why.....


Because since fiat reserves cannot be verified in this manner, you're going through all this trouble to only verify 50% of your reserves. Meaning they can still theoretically run 50% fractional reserve but now you'd have that warm comforting feeling that those number mean something that they really don't.
DaRude
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1733
Merit: 1038


In order to dump coins one must have coins


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 06:50:25 AM


Good roach it's like you're almost relevant in this form!
bitserve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 767


HODL.


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 06:54:49 AM


Oh please. the way banknotes started in the first place is merchants wanted to store their gold at a bank, rather than lugging it around themselves or setting up their own fort and small militia to protect it. Then they were issued a piece of paper, a banknote. When the bankers discovered people were using the banknotes like money, they discovered a way to loan people paper and run a fractional reserve. It doesn't matter what medium you use as money. Someone is going to find a way to put them self in the middle and exact their usurious fees. Or just plain use force or stealth and outright steal your bounty.

Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

Except not even exchanges are currently using that "feature".

Thanks to blockchain exchanges could be already guaranteeing they don't run fractional reserve. It would be as simple as this:

- Every exchange user is given a "unique private identifier".
- Every day, the exchange publish a balance sheet that comprises a listing of all UPI's and its individual balances. The total is the minimum amount of reserves the exchange must control to prove absence of fractional reserve "banking".
- Simultaneously the exchange publish a listing of addresses which individual balances (can be checked on their respective blockchains for accuracy) sum, at least, the total needed. Obviously they sign a timestamped code with those addresses to prove ownership.

- Individual users could check their balances are included and accounted for in the balance sheet.

... But not a single one exchange is still doing this. Wonder why.....


Because since fiat reserves cannot be verified in this manner, you're going through all this trouble to only verify 50% of your reserves. Meaning they can still theoretically run 50% fractional reserve but now you'd have that warm comforting feeling that those number mean something that they really don't.

Being able to verify they are not running fractional reserve on crypto alone would be a great advantage. Also, FIAT funds can be proved by a signed and stamped bank statement. It could be forged yeah.... but, anyways, the FIAT reserves of the exchanges, being stored in bank accounts, are ALREADY being subject to fractional reserve by the banks itself Wink

Do you really not think an exchange that proofs daily that they have all the crypto they are suppossed to have would not be a big improvement to current system?
bitserve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 767


HODL.


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 07:01:44 AM

I officially bull trolled myself out of a once in a lifetime opportunity to make something of myself. That is so me.

AMA.

Did you sell?
DaRude
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1733
Merit: 1038


In order to dump coins one must have coins


View Profile
May 26, 2018, 07:02:44 AM


Oh please. the way banknotes started in the first place is merchants wanted to store their gold at a bank, rather than lugging it around themselves or setting up their own fort and small militia to protect it. Then they were issued a piece of paper, a banknote. When the bankers discovered people were using the banknotes like money, they discovered a way to loan people paper and run a fractional reserve. It doesn't matter what medium you use as money. Someone is going to find a way to put them self in the middle and exact their usurious fees. Or just plain use force or stealth and outright steal your bounty.

Interestingly, the first technology to be developed since the advent of fractional reserve banking that actually has a real chance of putting a stop to most of the double counting of reserve assets is... drum-roll... blockchain!

Except not even exchanges are currently using that "feature".

Thanks to blockchain exchanges could be already guaranteeing they don't run fractional reserve. It would be as simple as this:

- Every exchange user is given a "unique private identifier".
- Every day, the exchange publish a balance sheet that comprises a listing of all UPI's and its individual balances. The total is the minimum amount of reserves the exchange must control to prove absence of fractional reserve "banking".
- Simultaneously the exchange publish a listing of addresses which individual balances (can be checked on their respective blockchains for accuracy) sum, at least, the total needed. Obviously they sign a timestamped code with those addresses to prove ownership.

- Individual users could check their balances are included and accounted for in the balance sheet.

... But not a single one exchange is still doing this. Wonder why.....


Because since fiat reserves cannot be verified in this manner, you're going through all this trouble to only verify 50% of your reserves. Meaning they can still theoretically run 50% fractional reserve but now you'd have that warm comforting feeling that those number mean something that they really don't.

Being able to verify they are not running fractional reserve on crypto alone would be a great advantage. Also, FIAT funds can be proved by a signed and stamped bank statement. It could be forged yeah.... but, anyways, the FIAT reserves of the exchanges, being stored in bank accounts, are ALREADY being subject to fractional reserve by the banks itself Wink

Do you really not think an exchange that proofs daily that they have all the crypto they are suppossed to have would not be a big improvement to current system?

I'm an exchange, you deposit BTC100 with me and r0ach deposits his 2643940 shekels. I buy a lambo i mean get "hacked" for BTC50. I go to another exchange and purchase BTC50 with roaches 1321970 shekels. And at the end of the day i can still provide verifiable proof that i hold BTC100 which corresponds to my balance sheet. Yay for false sense of security!! Partial audits are pretty useless. Now this possibly could work on those crypto only exchanges, that's the future we hope to have one day

Edit: Oh and i also go to another bank and take a loan out for 1321970 shekels, and deposit it in the first bank and provide a legit statement of the full 2643940 shekels in the first bank. Never mind my 1321970 shekel liability to the 2nd bank. Unfortunately fiat is untraceable thats why all the drug cartels, pimps, and war lords use it, would be awesome to replace it with something better 
Pages: « 1 ... 20432 20433 20434 20435 20436 20437 20438 20439 20440 20441 20442 20443 20444 20445 20446 20447 20448 20449 20450 20451 20452 20453 20454 20455 20456 20457 20458 20459 20460 20461 20462 20463 20464 20465 20466 20467 20468 20469 20470 20471 20472 20473 20474 20475 20476 20477 20478 20479 20480 20481 [20482] 20483 20484 20485 20486 20487 20488 20489 20490 20491 20492 20493 20494 20495 20496 20497 20498 20499 20500 20501 20502 20503 20504 20505 20506 20507 20508 20509 20510 20511 20512 20513 20514 20515 20516 20517 20518 20519 20520 20521 20522 20523 20524 20525 20526 20527 20528 20529 20530 20531 20532 ... 24805 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!