"Failure to Understand Bitcoin Could Cost Investors Billions" (Bitcoin's flaws)

[AnonyMint]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=439357.msg5377702#msg5377702

Come on Bitards, wake up from your stupor. There is no anonymity in Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the ledger from hell that will destroy all your freedom. Everything can now be tracked. Zillions times worse than cash for mankind's freedom.

I can't even find a Bitcoin mixer, tumbler, or laundry which provides anonymity for mixing smaller amounts.

For example, Bitcoinfog does not make the deposit and withdrawal amount constant, e.g. 0.5 BTC, thus one can correlate the amounts sent in and the amounts withdrawn. It is very unlikely that there is a large pool of users who are splitting their up their withdrawals in a similar level of chunk sizes as you are, unless you are mixing 10 - 100+ BTC and can employ chunk sizes over many ranges, e.g. 0.1 BTC, 0.5BTC, 1BTC, 2BTC, 4BTC, etc..

And we don't even know if the operators of the mixing service are not already compromised by a national security gag order letter. We can probably assume they are, even if they deny it (gag order can force them to deny it). Since the service centralized, they are easy prey for the NSA to track down, hack, and serve with a order.

Also the legal liability for using a mixing service is potentially severe:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mixing_service

[AnonyMint]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=316297.msg5379359#msg5379359

Several more thoughts. If the TPTB have accumulated millions of coins (probably are Satoshi as well and thus own his 1 million coins), they control a poison pill. Just in case they can't destroy the anonymity and make it the ledger from hell, they control several means to kill it (law, majority of the float, etc).

The very wealthy are always controlled by the government, for they can't do anything without being tracked, due to their large size. The Winklevoss twin's stash is also effectively under the control of the government. For example, Warren Buffet has to toe the line because for one reason his insurance businesses need licenses from the governments.

What is excruciating ironic is that Bitcoin may actually grow stronger from more centralization of mining, exchanges, and coin ownership. Excruciating because there is no way to resolve the $150 trillion debt bubble that doesn't result in confiscating all traceable wealth (and I think that will include yours rpietila and especially your very traceable castle, sorry to say). And these charts show the model for this outcome is already underway. Trusting the government and the rule of collective law (a.k.a. socialism) is going to result in horrific failure. And this is not a decade from now. The financial and physical violence is breaking out now in Thailand, Ukraine, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Bulgaria, Spain, Greece, Turkey, Brazil, Venezuela, etc.. By 2016ish, this will come to the core countries, such as the USA, France, etc..

This is a time where leaders such as Patrick Henry need to be bold. Rpietila as an astute, full-time trader lead me to Bitcoin. I am not focused on trading, rather am the thinker, the highly detailed technologist, the programmer, the conceptual iconoclast genius. He did his part to lead me here. Now will he know when to follow?

I explained why anarchy can never be as horrible as the end game outcomes of socialism.

Hey what happened to all the ignores on my name. Remember it was glowing in color a couple of months ago. 

[mechanikalk]

I wonder if the current system that we have for innovating in the cryptocurrency space is the most efficient if we are going to address the concerns the OP has about Bitcoin.  Instead of starting a new altcoin everytime their is an idea for a new feature it would be interesting to have an alt-coin evolve new features over time.  An alt-coin would be more able to do this than Bitcoin because the market cap would be lower and so would the overall risk of screwing it up.  It could be called EvoCoin.

[CoinCube]

Failure to understand Bitcoin will indeed cost investors billions. 744,408 BTC stolen (nearly 7% of total mined coins to date) and some people seem to be cheering like this is a good thing because they don’t like (long despised) MtGox. This is far far from over.  Where did those stolen coins go? Well check your wallet because they were likely fed back to the markets. If you have been buying bitcoins on any exchange chances are you have some of the stolen loot yourself. These stolen coins can be traced back to their true owner in a direct chain of title thanks to the block chain. If you don’t think this matters you don’t understand the legal system and the principle of Nemo dat quod non habet

Under both American and English law the original owner of stolen property can demand ownership be returned to him if he can prove a chain of title (something the blockchain conveniently provides). The only recourse for an innocent buyer of stolen goods (and only in some jurisdictions) is to argue the exchange it was bought from had an implied warranty and he can try to sue the exchange after returning the coins to the true owner. MtGox is insolvent good luck there. BTC-e is run by anonymous folks think they will stick around in the face of massive lawsuits?

But cheer up there is still a chance most MtGox victims will get their coins back. The threat of massive unending lawsuits targeting innocent bitcoin buyers is an existential one for bitcoin. The 10-15 early adopters stand (by far) to lose the most if bitcoin goes down in flames. They might actually decide to buy out MtGox for the 744,408 bitcoins (an amount grossly exceeding the worth of the company) not because they are altruistic people, but because the chain of lawsuits that would follow if they don't act may hurt their holdings more than the loss of 744,408 bitcoins. It’s a lot of money, however, so its likely a difficult call for them. Regardless expect all future exchanges to require both rigorous identity checks prior to buying and selling as well as fine print stating that anyone who supplies coins to a market is ultimately responsible in the event those coins are determined to be “black” or stolen goods in the future.

Still think there is no need for truly anonymous cryptocurrency?

[AnonyMint]

This isn't my sockpuppet.

How Bitcoin could become its antithesis

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=488682.msg5384562#msg5384562

First off let me say right away that I’m a newbie. I’ve known about Bitcoin for a few years, and have been watching from afar, but only recently decided to immerse myself in the technical details  — and equally important, the culture. I stayed away out of a suspicion that one of Bitcoin’s main claimed virtues (privacy) was oversold, and because I knew that it would hard for me to get into Bitcoin in a casual way.

What I’ve found so far is a an environment that’s far more complex and captivating then I’d imagined. It could help liberate the world from the chains of fait currency and the banking establishment, but it could also become a powerful tool for statist control. I’m sure this latter possibility is inconceivable to many within the space, but it would’t be the first time a vehicle of liberation spun around 180 degrees.

From what I can tell, the early adopters of Bitcoin skewed heavily libertarian, anarcho-capitalist, Rothbardian. As use of Bitcoin spreads to the general public, the culture surrounding it changes, becomes more mainstream. There’s a long history of online communities which, over time, became hostile to the original crowd and their laissez-faire ideals. Slashdot, Wired, Reddit. You can see the transition happening right now in the comments section at Zerohedge.

The reaction to the fall of MtGox shows that many Bitcoiners are now muggles (or matrix dwellers, if you prefer). These new users were raised on an intellectual diet of “market failure” and “much needed government regulation.” Their first instinct when things go wrong is to look for government to fix it. They’re comfortable with filing requirements, identity verification, withdrawal limits. They’re shocked to find out the BTC exchanges don’t have deposit insurance.

Here we get to an essential weakness of the protocol, at least so far as how it compares to the promised benefits. As a pseudonymous currency with a full public ledger of transactions, the privacy of everyone depends on the privacy of everyone else. Every single input and output from the real world to Bitcoin (every wire transfer you send to an exchange, every purchase of items shipped to your home), is a potential crack in the veil of privacy not just for you, but for everyone else.

I can see that developers are working on interesting technologies, like CoinJoin, which could be baked into the the protocol to enhance privacy. But right now, securing your privacy within Bitcoin requires additional, complicated steps (using tumblers, creating a new address for each transaction). The lessons from PGP email could not be more clear: if it’s a hassle, the vast majority of users won’t do it, which means that users of these privacy measures will be the ones who *really* need it. But because the defining feature of our new age is data interconnectivity, true privacy in can only come from increasing the amount of noise in the system, not decreasing the amount of signal. When the privacy of the network as a whole depends on individual users taking steps that make their lives more complicated, this privacy won’t survive.

Even if changes to the protocol make tracking harder by default, political changes could allow governments to view a nearly complete record of every BTC purchase and movement of funds. What’s going to happen if the IRS adds an addendum to the FBAR that requires you to list all of your public keys? What will happen when thousands of law-abiding citizens report their capital gains (and losses) from Bitcoin on their returns?

If your Bitcoin profits are turned into fiat and taxed to support the continued bailout of Wall Street, then nothing’s really changed. Bitcoin trading becomes one more acceptable way for people to make money that can be funneled back to the state and its favored groups.

Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s virtues compared to dealing with credit cards, in terms of lower transaction costs and reduced counter-party risk, could speed adoption among merchants, which in turn generates more data to connect buyers and sellers with public BTC addresses.  

Volatility, transaction malleability, exchanges gone bad… to me these seem like minor issues, taking the long view. They’re not why I’m still looking in from the outside, without a single satoshi to my name. These aren’t the reasons I decided to write this open letter to the Bitcoin developers and community at large.

I’m writing this because I’m worried that Bitcoin could become a far greater threat to fiscal independence than anything that’s come before. The history of the United States itself should serve as a warning. What began with a constitution to strictly restrain the government’s role, and a Bill of Rights as safeguard, is now a leviathan with effectively unlimited power. The massive economic surplus, fostered by the country’s laissez-faire roots, is now used to fund the largest welfare-warfare state the world has ever known.

[AnonyMint]

In addition to following advantages of small, reasonable perpetual rate of annual debasement of the base money supply (M0) explained in detail upthread:

• Mining isn't securely funded with transaction fees
• Wealth is power-law distributed, upper 1% will aggregate all wealth via usury if we don't redistribute some to competitive mining.
• Small capital can seek ROI that doubles investment in short-time, e.g. a guy selling mineral water on a hot day can get 300% daily ROI, whereas the upper 1% can't double their wealth in 5 years via usury (only if they steal by capturing the government and the central bank).
• Small debasement rate doesn't impact appreciation of the coin price, because it is also dependent on velocity of (thus demand for) money V in the Quantity Theory of Money.
• Means of obtaining virgin (untainted) coin.
• Increase the velocity of money V.

I add that:

• Also raises the minimum level of profitable interest rate in the economy, thus discouraging the kind of easy money, debt bubble we have now.

Edit: add another:

• Provides virgin coins free from coin taint clawback and prevents all coins from being stolen multiple times eventually.

[AnonyMint]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=316297.msg5388395#msg5388395

There is no way BTC goes to $1 million such that the holders of 100+ BTC go to $100 millionaires and maintain control over their wealth.

Society controls large wealth. This is why large wealth colludes to control government. Thus if that $1 million/BTC comes true, you BTC100 holders either become corrupt (join in the capture of the government) or you give up control of your wealth to the socialism.

Thus the goal of a more anonymous altcoin (since Bitcoin isn't anonymous at all) is not to make large holders anonymous, rather to make the small and medium holders anonymous. And thus large holders also can keep a small portion anonymous. This is their diversification, get of tax hell plan.

[BADecker]

It takes a very alert person to combine all the points of OP, and come out with a correct picture. There are other things that might come about that will completely throw this whole scenario out the window. One of these things might be MaidSafe, or something like it. There are, also, acts of nature - it seems that portions of the world (Brazil) are in deep drought right now. Even U.S. crops are failing somewhat.

[AnonyMint]

It takes a very alert person to combine all the points of OP, and come out with a correct picture. There are other things that might come about that will completely throw this whole scenario out the window. One of these things might be MaidSafe, or something like it. There are, also, acts of nature - it seems that portions of the world (Brazil) are in deep drought right now. Even U.S. crops are failing somewhat.

Thank you for the compliment and for raising my awareness of MaidSafe.

I don't know how you expect climate drought to lessen the severity of the implosion from the $150 trillion debt bubble.

MaidSafe is charging a 1% royalty-fee thus it can never become the next internet. If they were really serious, they would make it free then develop applications on top of it to generate their ROI.

I see no white paper on their website. I was working on DHT and distributed file serving back in 2006 through 2008.

BitTorrent designs such as Azureus have had the same developer. I was interacting with him technically in 2008.

I started getting into P2P around the time of Bittorrent:

http://web.archive.org/web/20130401040049/http://forum.bittorrent.org/viewtopic.php?id=28

I thought of these ideas too and am aware of the issues such as denial-of-service resistance lowers performance and the problem of who pays for the asymmetric bandwidth & uptime case where the client is slower and more intermittent than the server (which apparently MaidSafe doesn't solve, it just forces the client to get slow service which is entirely unaccepted for popular websites). There isn't absolute anonymity because just like Tor, it can be analyzed with timing analysis for an entity such as the NSA which can see all traffic (even if it is encrypted). To get absolute anonymity requires drastically lowering the performance, thus it can't be applied to file serving where performance is very important to end users who are browsing websites. This will be explained in my coming white paper.

I posted the following comment at MaidSafe's blog:

http://blog.maidsafe.net/2014/02/18/token-on-maidsafe-network/comment-page-1/#comment-35

The "3. Exchanging" section appears to be hand waving. A DHT (space) resource has no concept of time-ordering, thus there is no way to create a secure time-based ledger of balances. Only Satoshi's proof-of-work solves the Byzantine Generals problem in the time domain. I covered this in greater detail at bitcointalk.org under my pseudonym AnonyMint. I had originally considered the concept of proof-of-space and then dismissed it.

I'd be interested to see DHT running on long-lived servers to strive for some of the benefits MaidSafe mentions in the video on their homepage. This is something I'd want to explore after fixing this current problem with Bitcoin.

[AnonyMint]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=316297.msg5402853#msg5402853

I hope this post finally makes it go "Bingo!" in your minds.

The real reason I don't worry too much about Bitcoin the brand, is because the tech is there. Decentralize all the things. Trustless money, trustless contracts, trustless, decentralized, disintermediated *everything*.

Unfortunately Bitcoin doesn't do any of those things.

Mining and exchanges are already highly centralized.

We can see with the Mt.Gox outcome that the coin supply is shrinking and centralized into ownership by probably some head of the same "DEEP STATE" monster that controls the NSA (very reputable Bill Moyers interview at the linked post).

Bitcoin can't even handle real-time transactions so then we need VISA (Mastercoin) again and we are right back to centralization.

And trustless contracts are opcodes that the centralized developers have to enable one-by-one and most haven't been turned on.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=490073.msg5401309#msg5401309

Hey all,

Posted just a few hours ago at The Hub. Jaws dropped when we received this for publication.

Article here: http://hub.playerauctions.com/bitcoin-mtgox-ryanstraus/

Content:
The Mt. Gox situation is troublesome for the bitcoin industry as it exists today. However, the situation presents a bigger problem for the bitcoin industry than it does for bitcoin itself.  After all, this story is not about the squandering of trust by one party or the need to restore the community’s trust in other parties.  Rather, this story is about the continued bastardization of Bitcoin through the injection of the question of trust into a protocol that was designed to function without it.

...

If Bitcoin becomes NWOCoin (or whatever) we will still create our own future with other options. Oppression won't work. By 2030 or whenever, if a 1WG is being made, and it seems to be an oppressive one, people will leave this rock behind, too.

We can't just expect those options to happen. We must actually make them happen.

50% of the population is not ready for the disruption of decentralization, as they will be unemployed (as predicted by Oxford that 47% will be replaced by computer automation). Thus a majority of the society will fighting for centralization and "we are the 99%, take it from the 1%" with Obama, Merkel, Hollande, etc leading the charge! Remember Obama said, "you didn't earn that without the government and society".

Google "life of the nobility in 1800s England" for example. The social structure had places for all, and this is being reintroduced. Any breach means [you lose your job].

A rich person without cooks and lawn keepers is the oddity, it's normal to have them.

You picked the wrong time period. Try again from 500 A.D. for about 600 years hence. The nobility had to live in heavily guarded castles to fend off the Robin Hoods.

That model works well after the chaos of the debt implosion when the social order can restabilize.

The problem right now is most of the population will be rendered unemployable, because there won't be enough rich to provide enough jobs for maids. And the computer automation will render the rest unemployed. Look at this for visual proof of what is coming at McDonalds (100% automation)!

Your IQ is too high to understand these things of simple life, you are 100% focused in your abstract concepts.

Somewhat true at times, but actually I lived in the Philippines during the Asian Crisis and saw what really happens during economic implosions. Even my eye was gouged out by one of those pissed off jobless. I saw kidnapping every where, even I had to be careful when driving my car outside the city boundary.

The fascists and the immoral will always lag behind. While the real world isn't a Disney film, and there are no good guys or bad guys, just people that are mixtures of both to varying degrees... the world *is* like a Disney film in that, in the end, the good(er) guys win. There's nothing man can do that either surprises me, or makes me afraid. As I watch the slow triumph of good actors, though, I do occasionally get twinges of excitement.

During debt collapse, they can do a lot of damage before they are wiped out. You have grown up in period of no chaos and world war, because we were borrowing $150 trillion to keep everyone appeased.

Now you will learn about reality. The history you refuse to believe existed or you don't think can ever happen again. You will learn the hard way I guess.

My own mother, a devout Baptist, had the initial concern that Bitcoin will be part of the end-of-the-world regime prophesied in Revelations. I don't believe in that kind of thing, but my answer is the same regardless. If somehow, in a way I cannot immediately foresee, Bitcoin is appropriated by bad actors and becomes the thing she fears, it won't be by us; free men will trade whatever they please. We'll use another cryptocurrency, or several; a zerocoin or an anoncoin or whatever we need to be free. For now, Bitcoin looks like a good option. That can change, and so can the users. In the meantime, even assuming that outcome, a controlled Bitcoin is probably still freer and fairer and more transparent to all participants, than the existing system. So it's progress either way.

My mother now saves using Bitcoin, btw.

We have to actually make the better Bitcoin. It won't just come by being closed-minded to the reality at-hand.

There is no way BTC goes to $1 million such that the holders of 100+ BTC go to $100 millionaires and maintain control over their wealth.

Society controls large wealth. This is why large wealth colludes to control government. Thus if that $1 million/BTC comes true, you BTC100 holders either become corrupt (join in the capture of the government) or you give up control of your wealth to the socialism.

Thus the goal of a more anonymous altcoin (since Bitcoin isn't anonymous at all) is not to make large holders anonymous, rather to make the small and medium holders anonymous. And thus large holders also can keep a small portion anonymous. This is their diversification, get of tax hell plan.

Had the same mistaken belief a while ago.  Then saw how quickly most large holders were spending coins when price broke $1000 on all kinds of stuff.  Manors, Gold, Lambos.  If you own 100 XBT and the price becomes 100,000 per XBT you will not be holding it all in the hopes of $1million.  You will sell.

My point is that the society will be dysfunctional due to debt collapse contagion with 50% technological unemployment. Thus being wealthy will mean the larger wealthy eat the smaller wealthy by employing the "99% versus 1%" political uprising.

Let's say I am wrong. Have you hedged just in case I am correct? Gold buried in the ground to collapse the velocity of money to help intensify a Dark Age?

How about an anonymous altcoin with superior features for decentralized everything in order to increase the velocity of money inspite of he dysfunctional social collapse?

[AnonyMint]

Failure to understand Bitcoin will indeed cost investors billions. 744,408 BTC stolen (nearly 7% of total mined coins to date) and some people seem to be cheering like this is a good thing because they don’t like (long despised) MtGox. This is far far from over.  Where did those stolen coins go? Well check your wallet because they were likely fed back to the markets. If you have been buying bitcoins on any exchange chances are you have some of the stolen loot yourself. These stolen coins can be traced back to their true owner in a direct chain of title thanks to the block chain. If you don’t think this matters you don’t understand the legal system and the principle of Nemo dat quod non habet

Under both American and English law the original owner of stolen property can demand ownership be returned to him if he can prove a chain of title (something the blockchain conveniently provides). The only recourse for an innocent buyer of stolen goods (and only in some jurisdictions) is to argue the exchange it was bought from had an implied warranty and he can try to sue the exchange after returning the coins to the true owner. MtGox is insolvent good luck there. BTC-e is run by anonymous folks think they will stick around in the face of massive lawsuits?

But cheer up there is still a chance most MtGox victims will get their coins back. The threat of massive unending lawsuits targeting innocent bitcoin buyers is an existential one for bitcoin. The 10-15 early adopters stand (by far) to lose the most if bitcoin goes down in flames. They might actually decide to buy out MtGox for the 744,408 bitcoins (an amount grossly exceeding the worth of the company) not because they are altruistic people, but because the chain of lawsuits that would follow if they don't act may hurt their holdings more than the loss of 744,408 bitcoins. It’s a lot of money, however, so its likely a difficult call for them. Regardless expect all future exchanges to require both rigorous identity checks prior to buying and selling as well as fine print stating that anyone who supplies coins to a market is ultimately responsible in the event those coins are determined to be “black” or stolen goods in the future.

Still think there is no need for truly anonymous cryptocurrency?

Serious problem for Bitcoin now:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=486872.msg5407521#msg5407521

More:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=486872.msg5408045#msg5408045

I hope readers can start to comprehend why coin taint is the most serious Achilles heel of Bitcoin.

On Friday, 2 BTC were stolen from me. I am considering reporting this to law enforcement. This means that anyone who receives BTC which derives from my stolen 2 BTC will be liable to return them back to me.

Perhaps the thief pushed them through a mixer such as Bigcoinfog.com

Thus that mixer will be liable to provide records. If it can't, then it will be liable for the 2 BTC.

So you can't you see you are playing with fire by mixing your coins through a centralized mixer.

And can't you see that without widespread anonymity (and decentralized mixers!), then crypto-currency is absolutely useless except to a government which wants a ledger from hell to track everything.

[AnonyMint]

Most Bitcoin will be clawed back due to widespread theft

Only a person who wants to end up destitute would obtain Bitcoins. Sending Bitcoin to someone is the antithesis of love, it is a kiss of trouble and woe in the future.

I am very sad about this. I had high hopes for decentralized currency. Unfortunately, unless we can perfect widespread anonymity then this entire decentralized currency concept is dead in the future.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=486872.msg5413937#msg5413937

You should realize that this means all BTC you own and all the gains you accrue can be clawed back from you in the future.

Theft of BTC is very widespread even without the exchanges and with the Mt.Gox fiasco (and more to come because the government + banks can bankrupt all the exchanges with regulations, fines, placing holds on funds, etc, or even send in secret agencies to steal the keys).

For those readers trying to rationalize away the contract between accounts holders and Mt.Gox, you have no legal standing. Bitcoin is not legal tender. So many governments have spoken on this already and declared it to be a commodity. Clearly we are looking at a big legal mess with Bitcoin which the government is going to have to solve holistically. Now you see I was correct from the very beginning in Bitcoin : The Digital Kill Switch.

All you Bitcoin millionaires are going to be Bitcoin jailbirds and destitute.

For those who are rationalizing away the chain of ownership (I explained upthread) due to that the lack of physical nature to Bitcoin, you don't have any chance of winning that argument. If it wasn't owned, it wouldn't have value that can be exchanged. Even if we are trading fungible tokens in a pool, the tokens are still owned. Cripes, are you guys totally ingenuous or ignorant.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=486872.msg5414095#msg5414095

Oh, bold and red font.. Must be legit.

Continue to ignore it please. I will be watching all Bitards fall into the abyss together when the mess comes to the point that you can't find any one to buy your coins, yet you are liable for all the clawback amount.

Mansions will be confiscated. Paddy rides to debtors prison will be ensue when you can't pay.

[Vlad2Vlad]

How can the masses be so clueless?

The Bitcoin Foundation board controls and regulates Bitcoin, every little aspect of the protocol, even the hardcap which is a joke to call hard or permanent cause it's nothing more than the carrot in this entire scheme.

In under 30 days 2 of the board seats have been vacated through outside force and influence.

How many more seats would need to be replaced to completely take control of Bitcoin and the entire protocol?

Did all these Bitcoin millionaire clowns really think the NSA, the Fed and everyone else with power were just gonna let them run the next global monetary system?  Lol, what clueless clowns - watch the next board seat come up for "vote" in little time - 30-60 days, like dominoes.

No need for a 51% attack, no need for even massive legislation, the Fed will own Bitcoin from the inside out before Christmas and none of these idiot techies will even realize it until it's way too late and the great currency swap of 2015 is underway.

Is anybody getting this?

[MoonShadow]

How can the masses be so clueless?

The Bitcoin Foundation board controls and regulates Bitcoin, every little aspect of the protocol, even the hardcap which is a joke to call hard or permanent cause it's nothing more than the carrot in this entire scheme.

No, they don't.  They have almost as much say in the protocol as you do.

[Vlad2Vlad]

How can the masses be so clueless?

The Bitcoin Foundation board controls and regulates Bitcoin, every little aspect of the protocol, even the hardcap which is a joke to call hard or permanent cause it's nothing more than the carrot in this entire scheme.

No, they don't.  They have almost as much say in the protocol as you do.

Ahahaaaa.  This is what I mean by totally clueless.


You haven't read the SEC filing from the Winklevoss ETF application, have you?

I have and that's exactly the case and it is printed in black and white in the application for the ETF.  But you have to actually think for yourself and do research to understand anything not being spoon-fed to you by the mainstream media.  

And who wants to do all that hard work, eh?

Unless of course, you think you know more about the Bitcoin rules and protocol than the Winklevoss twins and their lawyers and the Board members they worked with and helped fund (ie. Charlie Shrem).

This is why this diabolical plan will work so well and why I'm invested in cryptos, not even the morons who have been here since day one have any idea what's really going on.

It actually makes me wanna laugh even though I know the tragedy that is to follow.

[tvbcof]

How can the masses be so clueless?

The Bitcoin Foundation board controls and regulates Bitcoin, every little aspect of the protocol, even the hardcap which is a joke to call hard or permanent cause it's nothing more than the carrot in this entire scheme.

No, they don't.  They have almost as much say in the protocol as you do.

Ahahaaaa.  This is what I mean by totally clueless.

You haven't read the SEC filing from the Winklevoss ETF application, have you?

I have and that's exactly the case and it is printed in black and white in the application for the ETF.  But you have to actually think for yourself and do research to understand anything not being spoon-fed to you by the mainstream media.  

And who wants to do all that hard work, eh?

Unless of course, you think you know more about the Bitcoin rules and protocol than the Winklevoss twins and their lawyers and the Board members they worked with and helped fund (ie. Charlie Shrem).

This is why this diabolical plan will work so well and why I'm invested in cryptos, not even the morons who have been here since day one have any idea what's really going on.

It actually makes me wanna laugh even though I know the tragedy that is to follow.

LOL!  Ya, one would have to be a world-class simp to believe that TBF writes Gavin's checks and have no influence on what he does.  Moonshadow may very well be 'patient zero' here.

At this point the people who want centralization to facilitate surveillance and control include:

 - The regulators
 - Law enforcement
 - The Bitcoin Foundation
 - The VC's
 - The exchange type businesses
 - Half the core developers
 - A rapidly increasing percentage of users.

It seems pretty unlikely that the motley crew who is left are going to be able to achieve much in terms of decentralization and privacy.  Certainly that is not where my money is (though they otherwise have my 'spiritual' support), and I'm planning to try to find a 'sweet spot' where the values are high before people realize how worthless the solution has become.

The VC money is green and abundant and I've already started putting a good bit of it into my own pocket.  They can have my BTC but they have to blow me to get it such is my reward for being one of the earlier people in the hood.

[AnonyMint]

It seems pretty unlikely that the motley crew who is left are going to be able to achieve much in terms of decentralization and privacy.  Certainly that is not where my money is (though they otherwise have my 'spiritual' support), and I'm planning to try to find a 'sweet spot' where the values are high before people realize how worthless the solution has become.

Thanks for the spiritual love bro,  

I agree the deck appears to be stacked against us. Did the Colonists lose against Great Britain.

Now get ready for the concrete solution to materialize in front of your eyes.  

[MoonShadow]

How can the masses be so clueless?

The Bitcoin Foundation board controls and regulates Bitcoin, every little aspect of the protocol, even the hardcap which is a joke to call hard or permanent cause it's nothing more than the carrot in this entire scheme.

No, they don't.  They have almost as much say in the protocol as you do.

Ahahaaaa.  This is what I mean by totally clueless.


You haven't read the SEC filing from the Winklevoss ETF application, have you?

I have and that's exactly the case and it is printed in black and white in the application for the ETF.  But you have to actually think for yourself and do research to understand anything not being spoon-fed to you by the mainstream media.  

The Winklevi are trying very hard to convince the feds that Bitcoin is as controlable as they wish it to be, and that they can help them do it.

[Vlad2Vlad]

It seems pretty unlikely that the motley crew who is left are going to be able to achieve much in terms of decentralization and privacy.  Certainly that is not where my money is (though they otherwise have my 'spiritual' support), and I'm planning to try to find a 'sweet spot' where the values are high before people realize how worthless the solution has become.

Thanks for the spiritual love bro, 

Now get ready for the concrete solution to materialize in front of your eyes. 

You've got my vote as well but a new coin or protocol is not the real challenge, getting people to see it and embrace it is the real challenge.

And if the powers that be are behind BTC then you're facing much more than sheer mass ignorance, which in and of itself, is the Everest of probabilities.


Expect mass sabotage and make sure your taxes are all up to code.  No Joke; Shrem and Karpeles were just the beginning.

[AnonyMint]

Too easy.  

Really these Bitcoin developers suck (not in technical ability but in terms of knowing which features and third party apps to create). It is like taking candy from a baby to compete with them.

Agreed on getting one's taxes in order. And trading all your Bitcoin for newly mined coins is probably another good precaution.

Oh but you need an ASIC. Now you start to see the wisdom of my OP, e.g. cpu-only mining, perpetual debasement, etc..