Tim Draper to Do Press Conference about Winning Silk Road Auction 2pm PST

[ElectricMucus]

Well, yeah but he's so enthusiastic about his idea, in a funny and naive way it is worth to watch him talk about it.

[Hyena]

When some technology reaches a critical threshold of adoption, it becomes too big to fail. Internet is too big to fail and potentially the same can be said for Bitcoin.

This is how terms are coined. Idiot once meant a person with a neutral opinion on something but not any more because someone like me decided to start using it in other context. There are no patents for coined terms and their meanings. I am free to mutate any term I want if I find the new definition more proper. "Too big to fail" should be a much broader term and without the stench of government bailouts.

Many people, especially uptight "scientists", would hate me for that but the feelings are mutual as some branches of science are grotesquely inbreeding themselves. Informally speaking, I'd ask them: "Do you guys fuck all your cousins or just the ones you find attractive?"

[ajareselde]

When some technology reaches a critical threshold of adoption, it becomes too big to fail. Internet is too big to fail and potentially the same can be said for Bitcoin.

This is how terms are coined. Idiot once meant a person with a neutral opinion on something but not any more because someone like me decided to start using it in other context. There are no patents for coined terms and their meanings. I am free to mutate any term I want if I find the new definition more proper. "Too big to fail" should be a much broader term and without the stench of government bailouts.

Many people, especially uptight "scientists", would hate me for that but the feelings are mutual as some branches of science are grotesquely inbreeding themselves. Informally speaking, I'd ask them: "Do you guys fuck all your cousins or just the ones you find attractive?"

nothing physical is too big to fail, including bitcoin network.
internet as an idea of connecting and sharing will never fail, but alot of internet companies were replaced for better ones, and just as easy, bitcoin idea could live on on some new platform under a new name, and bitcoin itself could die.

[Hyena]

When some technology reaches a critical threshold of adoption, it becomes too big to fail. Internet is too big to fail and potentially the same can be said for Bitcoin.

This is how terms are coined. Idiot once meant a person with a neutral opinion on something but not any more because someone like me decided to start using it in other context. There are no patents for coined terms and their meanings. I am free to mutate any term I want if I find the new definition more proper. "Too big to fail" should be a much broader term and without the stench of government bailouts.

Many people, especially uptight "scientists", would hate me for that but the feelings are mutual as some branches of science are grotesquely inbreeding themselves. Informally speaking, I'd ask them: "Do you guys fuck all your cousins or just the ones you find attractive?"

nothing physical is too big to fail, including bitcoin network.
internet as an idea of connecting and sharing will never fail, but alot of internet companies were replaced for better ones, and just as easy, bitcoin idea could live on on some new platform under a new name, and bitcoin itself could die.

That's so obvious I wonder why you even cared to say it out.  If you want to take that route, I'd suggest you contact the authors of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_big_to_fail and keep saying them the same you just told me (nothing physical is too big to fail). I hope you see the parallel.

[vuduchyld]

I'm sure this won't be a particularly popular take, but I thought the press conference was pretty weak.  I don't think he presented well and he didn't really come off as a competent man with a serious plan and serious ideas to share on that unique pulpit.

So it goes.  I think there was an opportunity there that was not fully maximized.

That is not to say anything about what he ends up accomplishing or the ultimate value of bitcoin.  It's not to say anything about him as a person.  But I wish he had taken more advantage of the opportunity to really educate the financial community and the world (hell, I saw a pretty long article on USA Today, of all places, about the presser) about his plan, his reasoning, and the logic behind his investment.

[murraypaul]

When some technology reaches a critical threshold of adoption, it becomes too big to fail. Internet is too big to fail and potentially the same can be said for Bitcoin.

This is how terms are coined. Idiot once meant a person with a neutral opinion on something but not any more because someone like me decided to start using it in other context. There are no patents for coined terms and their meanings. I am free to mutate any term I want if I find the new definition more proper. "Too big to fail" should be a much broader term and without the stench of government bailouts.

Many people, especially uptight "scientists", would hate me for that but the feelings are mutual as some branches of science are grotesquely inbreeding themselves. Informally speaking, I'd ask them: "Do you guys fuck all your cousins or just the ones you find attractive?"

nothing physical is too big to fail, including bitcoin network.
internet as an idea of connecting and sharing will never fail, but alot of internet companies were replaced for better ones, and just as easy, bitcoin idea could live on on some new platform under a new name, and bitcoin itself could die.

That's so obvious I wonder why you even cared to say it out.  If you want to take that route, I'd suggest you contact the authors of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_big_to_fail and keep saying them the same you just told me (nothing physical is too big to fail). I hope you see the parallel.

The "too big to fail" theory asserts that certain financial institutions are so large and so interconnected that their failure would be disastrous to the economy, and they therefore must be supported by government when they face difficulty.

That absolutely does not apply to Bitcoin.
If all miners switched off tomorrow, no more transactions were processed, and the BTC/USD price fell to zero, would it have any noticeable affect on the economy, let alone a disastrous one? No, it wouldn't.

[Hyena]

That absolutely does not apply to Bitcoin.
If all miners switched off tomorrow, no more transactions were processed, and the BTC/USD price fell to zero, would it have any noticeable affect on the economy, let alone a disastrous one? No, it wouldn't.

Although I personally have already lost track on what we are arguing about, I'd point out that "too big to fail" is a state after the vertical stage of the technology's adoption S-curve. Of course a black swan event can wipe out the whole population after it has met its upper limit but early-day threats no longer apply.

[wachtwoord]

That absolutely does not apply to Bitcoin.
If all miners switched off tomorrow, no more transactions were processed, and the BTC/USD price fell to zero, would it have any noticeable affect on the economy, let alone a disastrous one? No, it wouldn't.

That's not the metric as no-one has an economic incentive to do so. The metric is: can anyone force us to? The answer is probably already no, and if not will be in the near future.

[twiifm]

When some technology reaches a critical threshold of adoption, it becomes too big to fail. Internet is too big to fail and potentially the same can be said for Bitcoin.

This is how terms are coined. Idiot once meant a person with a neutral opinion on something but not any more because someone like me decided to start using it in other context. There are no patents for coined terms and their meanings. I am free to mutate any term I want if I find the new definition more proper. "Too big to fail" should be a much broader term and without the stench of government bailouts.

Many people, especially uptight "scientists", would hate me for that but the feelings are mutual as some branches of science are grotesquely inbreeding themselves. Informally speaking, I'd ask them: "Do you guys fuck all your cousins or just the ones you find attractive?"

Dude, everyone who uses the term "too big too fail" means "too big to be allowed to fail" NOT "its so big that it can't possibly fail"

If you don't like it then too bad

[vuduchyld]

Honestly, "too big to fail" probably really means something more like "too connected to the oligopoly power structure for the elites to allow to fail". 

Frankly, it was capricious of them to save some organizations while letting others go bye bye.  If Geithner had more of his buddies employed in Bitcoin-dependent industries and if elected officials had more constituents more invested with more dire consequences, maybe somebody would save Bitcoin in the event of an unforeseeable disaster.

As it stands, NO FREAKING WAY.  This is an outsiders game. 

[Hyena]

When some technology reaches a critical threshold of adoption, it becomes too big to fail. Internet is too big to fail and potentially the same can be said for Bitcoin.

This is how terms are coined. Idiot once meant a person with a neutral opinion on something but not any more because someone like me decided to start using it in other context. There are no patents for coined terms and their meanings. I am free to mutate any term I want if I find the new definition more proper. "Too big to fail" should be a much broader term and without the stench of government bailouts.

Many people, especially uptight "scientists", would hate me for that but the feelings are mutual as some branches of science are grotesquely inbreeding themselves. Informally speaking, I'd ask them: "Do you guys fuck all your cousins or just the ones you find attractive?"

Dude, everyone who uses the term "too big too fail" means "too big to be allowed to fail" NOT "its so big that it can't possibly fail"

If you don't like it then too bad

Not true. Only people with the proper background knowledge will see too big to fail as something that will be bailed out by governments. Most people don't have the proper background and they will rely on the literal meaning of the term. Literal meaning of too big to fail has nothing to do with bailouts.

[wachtwoord]

When some technology reaches a critical threshold of adoption, it becomes too big to fail. Internet is too big to fail and potentially the same can be said for Bitcoin.

This is how terms are coined. Idiot once meant a person with a neutral opinion on something but not any more because someone like me decided to start using it in other context. There are no patents for coined terms and their meanings. I am free to mutate any term I want if I find the new definition more proper. "Too big to fail" should be a much broader term and without the stench of government bailouts.

Many people, especially uptight "scientists", would hate me for that but the feelings are mutual as some branches of science are grotesquely inbreeding themselves. Informally speaking, I'd ask them: "Do you guys fuck all your cousins or just the ones you find attractive?"

Dude, everyone who uses the term "too big too fail" means "too big to be allowed to fail" NOT "its so big that it can't possibly fail"

If you don't like it then too bad

Not true. Only people with the proper background knowledge will see too big to fail as something that will be bailed out by governments. Most people don't have the proper background and they will rely on the literal meaning of the term. Literal meaning of too big to fail has nothing to do with bailouts.

No indeed, they should have let them fail. Every. Single. One. The free market will always be more efficient than some centralized government.

Iceland was the only country to do this right (good thing they did something right )

[Glizlack]

Since we are not going to get the price he paid out of him. Have any of the other bidders in the auction disclosed their losing bids? That would still give us a reasonable idea what was paid.

Steve

[twiifm]

When some technology reaches a critical threshold of adoption, it becomes too big to fail. Internet is too big to fail and potentially the same can be said for Bitcoin.

This is how terms are coined. Idiot once meant a person with a neutral opinion on something but not any more because someone like me decided to start using it in other context. There are no patents for coined terms and their meanings. I am free to mutate any term I want if I find the new definition more proper. "Too big to fail" should be a much broader term and without the stench of government bailouts.

Many people, especially uptight "scientists", would hate me for that but the feelings are mutual as some branches of science are grotesquely inbreeding themselves. Informally speaking, I'd ask them: "Do you guys fuck all your cousins or just the ones you find attractive?"

Dude, everyone who uses the term "too big too fail" means "too big to be allowed to fail" NOT "its so big that it can't possibly fail"

If you don't like it then too bad

Not true. Only people with the proper background knowledge will see too big to fail as something that will be bailed out by governments. Most people don't have the proper background and they will rely on the literal meaning of the term. Literal meaning of too big to fail has nothing to do with bailouts.

Nobody thinks that if they watched TV in the past 8 years.  So many stories on Nightline, 20/20, 60 mins, PBS, etc.. about "too big to fail"

2008 crisis is the biggest financial event of the 21st century so far

[wachtwoord]

When some technology reaches a critical threshold of adoption, it becomes too big to fail. Internet is too big to fail and potentially the same can be said for Bitcoin.

This is how terms are coined. Idiot once meant a person with a neutral opinion on something but not any more because someone like me decided to start using it in other context. There are no patents for coined terms and their meanings. I am free to mutate any term I want if I find the new definition more proper. "Too big to fail" should be a much broader term and without the stench of government bailouts.

Many people, especially uptight "scientists", would hate me for that but the feelings are mutual as some branches of science are grotesquely inbreeding themselves. Informally speaking, I'd ask them: "Do you guys fuck all your cousins or just the ones you find attractive?"

Dude, everyone who uses the term "too big too fail" means "too big to be allowed to fail" NOT "its so big that it can't possibly fail"

If you don't like it then too bad

Not true. Only people with the proper background knowledge will see too big to fail as something that will be bailed out by governments. Most people don't have the proper background and they will rely on the literal meaning of the term. Literal meaning of too big to fail has nothing to do with bailouts.

Nobody thinks that if they watched TV in the past 8 years.  So many stories on Nightline, 20/20, 60 mins, PBS, etc.. about "too big to fail"

2008 crisis is the biggest financial event of the 21st century so far

You guys sure like to wage wars but you haven't annexed every country on the globe just yet