Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 04:16:15 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 [589] 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1805891 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 04:46:20 PM
 #11761

silver criticality incoming.

first critical breach is $19 for psychological reasons.  then 18.70, finally 18.17.

first breach accomplished
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481170575
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481170575

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481170575
Reply with quote  #2

1481170575
Report to moderator
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
September 08, 2014, 04:58:00 PM
 #11762

So, if we ignore for a minute, the properties of gold that make it less attractive than bitcoin, and purely focus on the limited nature of each one; Why isn't gold acting as a store of value in a QE economy? Why is it not guaranteed profit to take out a huge low interest loan, and buy gold?

If there is an answer to that, why doesn't it apply to bitcoin?

Gold truly is the barbarous relic. It can be shorted to hell with naked contracts (big banks can sell what they don't own) and it is very inefficient in the digital age. How can it compete with instant and cheap value transfers like bitcoin (for which naked short selling does not currently exist)?

As we've said before, bitcoin is assuming the position historically held by gold. Bitcoin is Gold's Black Swan. Just remember to take possession of your private keys.

Appreciate the response Steve. To delve a little deeper, I realize that gold is a "barbarous relic" and inconvenient to use, which is why I was ignoring those facets for this particular comparison. Surely a clumsy, less efficient, hassle of a commodity will still rise in value relative to a paper currency issued in unlimited supply?

If naked shorts really are the answer to what keeps gold value in check, then my next question would be what keeps bitcoin protected from entities offering naked short selling? I realize that if everyone acts responsibly, that won't be a possibility, but that's never happened before, so I'm not counting on it.

Also, just to clarify a bit, I wasn't trying to compare gold to bitcoin, I believe bitcoin is superior in this role. I was comparing each to dollars, and wondering how we can expect bitcoin to clear the hurdles that gold failed to do, when they are both using the same approach.

It is much easier to demand delivery of Bitcoin, or at least proof of reserves.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 05:00:32 PM
 #11763


This looks legit, but I'm in awe.  The video was uploaded by the official PayPal YouTube account, and it clearly says "we can spend bitcoin with a tap" at 0:09.    

I want to believe but I'm going to need confirmation.  This would be huge.  But perhaps everyone's positioning themselves to ride the coat tails of the media attention that mobile payments are going to receive when Apple unveils its new payment system.  Bitcoin adoption by PayPal is more edgy than an iWallet, so perhaps they hope to steal some of the spotlight.  

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
zeetubes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 371


View Profile
September 08, 2014, 05:06:33 PM
 #11764

It is probably becoming another good time to purchase precious metals.   In the long term, there is almost no logical way that precious metals will not appreciate.   As the USD (and other currencies) get further and further inflated, precious metals will have to go up (hopefully along with BTC)

Probably true. To me, gold bugs are mostly insignificant in terms of their influence on prices. The 4000 ton gorilla in the room is China and to a lesser extent India and Russia. China has been accumulating Gold and probably silver (the name for a bank in China is essentially Silver Company - 银行 yin hang) for several years. It will be China vs the Fed and fiat. If and when China decides it's time to flex its financial muscles, it will announce that its current reserves have increased by x000 tons and USD will begin its death rattle. I'm not sure i want to be around when it happens but at least we will be able to say we saw history in action. For me, gold and btc are complementary: PMs for the older generations and BTC for the more technically savvy. I went out for dinner with a chinese girl last night and talked about economics for a while. She said her mother (mega rich) had bought a stash of physical gold in the past few months. I asked her about bitcoins and she said her mother had heard of it but wouldn't trust it if she couldn't hold it.
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1153


View Profile
September 08, 2014, 05:07:08 PM
 #11765

So, if we ignore for a minute, the properties of gold that make it less attractive than bitcoin, and purely focus on the limited nature of each one; Why isn't gold acting as a store of value in a QE economy? Why is it not guaranteed profit to take out a huge low interest loan, and buy gold?

If there is an answer to that, why doesn't it apply to bitcoin?

Gold truly is the barbarous relic. It can be shorted to hell with naked contracts (big banks can sell what they don't own) and it is very inefficient in the digital age. How can it compete with instant and cheap value transfers like bitcoin (for which naked short selling does not currently exist)?

As we've said before, bitcoin is assuming the position historically held by gold. Bitcoin is Gold's Black Swan. Just remember to take possession of your private keys.

Appreciate the response Steve. To delve a little deeper, I realize that gold is a "barbarous relic" and inconvenient to use, which is why I was ignoring those facets for this particular comparison. Surely a clumsy, less efficient, hassle of a commodity will still rise in value relative to a paper currency issued in unlimited supply?

If naked shorts really are the answer to what keeps gold value in check, then my next question would be what keeps bitcoin protected from entities offering naked short selling? I realize that if everyone acts responsibly, that won't be a possibility, but that's never happened before, so I'm not counting on it.

Also, just to clarify a bit, I wasn't trying to compare gold to bitcoin, I believe bitcoin is superior in this role. I was comparing each to dollars, and wondering how we can expect bitcoin to clear the hurdles that gold failed to do, when they are both using the same approach.

Gold can only function properly if the majority of people demand delivery of physical metal. If the majority do not demand delivery of physical then it becomes possible to fractionalize gold and artificially increase supply by selling paper. Essentially the scarcity property of gold breaks down unless the majority of people take physical delivery.

This is why FDR's executive order banning physical possession was so effective at breaking the gold standard, after 2 generations the majority no longer demanded physical possession, but see paper products as "gold". It also is why the "gold bugs" vision is never realized, you need the majority of the population to demand physical and reject paper. If only 1% of the population regularly buys gold eagles, then banks can continue to sell paper for a long time.

The advantage for bitcoin is it is just so easy to take delivery. Any smartphone app can do so in seconds, and there is no reason not to. If people who adopt bitcoin for the most part use bitcoins directly then we just might fix the problems gold ran into.

My suspicion is this is how bitcoin will be attacked though, with regulation that drives adoption out of individually held wallets and into coinbase type online services by making compliance easier with online services. From there it becomes easier for online services to fractionalize bitcoin same as gold...
zeetubes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 371


View Profile
September 08, 2014, 05:17:05 PM
 #11766

"Gold truly is the barbarous relic."

More accurately it's the gold 'Standard' that Keynes referred to as the relic. Gold itself will be in every new iphone because nothing else can do what it does as efficiently from an industrial perspective.   
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 05:26:24 PM
 #11767


My suspicion is this is how bitcoin will be attacked though, with regulation that drives adoption out of individually held wallets and into coinbase type online services by making compliance easier with online services. From there it becomes easier for online services to fractionalize bitcoin same as gold...

i think it's too late for them to try that. 

the good thing about the mtgox hack is that it's now forced the community into performing Bitcoin audits via the hashing trees.  i don't think legacy payment processors like Paypal will be able to just get away w/o the same auditing as awareness is now high regarding the importance of this.
Chalkbot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 892



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 05:30:52 PM
 #11768

So, if we ignore for a minute, the properties of gold that make it less attractive than bitcoin, and purely focus on the limited nature of each one; Why isn't gold acting as a store of value in a QE economy? Why is it not guaranteed profit to take out a huge low interest loan, and buy gold?

If there is an answer to that, why doesn't it apply to bitcoin?

Gold truly is the barbarous relic. It can be shorted to hell with naked contracts (big banks can sell what they don't own) and it is very inefficient in the digital age. How can it compete with instant and cheap value transfers like bitcoin (for which naked short selling does not currently exist)?

As we've said before, bitcoin is assuming the position historically held by gold. Bitcoin is Gold's Black Swan. Just remember to take possession of your private keys.

Appreciate the response Steve. To delve a little deeper, I realize that gold is a "barbarous relic" and inconvenient to use, which is why I was ignoring those facets for this particular comparison. Surely a clumsy, less efficient, hassle of a commodity will still rise in value relative to a paper currency issued in unlimited supply?

If naked shorts really are the answer to what keeps gold value in check, then my next question would be what keeps bitcoin protected from entities offering naked short selling? I realize that if everyone acts responsibly, that won't be a possibility, but that's never happened before, so I'm not counting on it.

Also, just to clarify a bit, I wasn't trying to compare gold to bitcoin, I believe bitcoin is superior in this role. I was comparing each to dollars, and wondering how we can expect bitcoin to clear the hurdles that gold failed to do, when they are both using the same approach.

Gold can only function properly if the majority of people demand delivery of physical metal. If the majority do not demand delivery of physical then it becomes possible to fractionalize gold and artificially increase supply by selling paper. Essentially the scarcity property of gold breaks down unless the majority of people take physical delivery.

This is why FDR's executive order banning physical possession was so effective at breaking the gold standard, after 2 generations the majority no longer demanded physical possession, but see paper products as "gold". It also is why the "gold bugs" vision is never realized, you need the majority of the population to demand physical and reject paper. If only 1% of the population regularly buys gold eagles, then banks can continue to sell paper for a long time.

The advantage for bitcoin is it is just so easy to take delivery. Any smartphone app can do so in seconds, and there is no reason not to. If people who adopt bitcoin for the most part use bitcoins directly then we just might fix the problems gold ran into.

My suspicion is this is how bitcoin will be attacked though, with regulation that drives adoption out of individually held wallets and into coinbase type online services by making compliance easier with online services. From there it becomes easier for online services to fractionalize bitcoin same as gold...

It is much easier to demand delivery of Bitcoin, or at least proof of reserves.

Thanks rocks and notme.

You both agree that the simplicity of taking delivery of bitcoin is what is going to protect it from the same fate as gold. I think it's a reasonable observation, but so far we've seen no evidence of that happening. The general public, and even some outstanding members of our early adopter community, have repeatedly lost bitcoin entrusted to a third party. The general feeling I get from normal folk when I talk about bitcoin is that it's too complicated, and they'd rather have someone else holding it for them and allowing access with a nice GUI or credit card analogue. This is what gave me pause; Outside of the people in threads like this, everyone wants a 3rd party to hold their bitcoin, and they may or may not care about solvency or audits. These are things that they don't really have a grasp of. With the majority of the world made up of people like this, how can we expect the industry NOT to capitalize on them? We can shout about private keys and audits all day long, but to an outside observer, we sound like the gold bug stackers ranting about physical coins.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
September 08, 2014, 05:48:00 PM
 #11769

i think it's too late for them to try that.
I think it is too late for them to be successful at this, but I'm convinced they will make the attempt.

PayPal et al. can throw a lot of resources at UX and advertising (propaganda) designed to keep people from taking physical custody.

They can also get help with this from the IRS and other government agencies. We might see a situation where anyone who takes physical custody of their coins will be subject to merciless and endless legal harassment.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 05:51:09 PM
 #11770

i think it's too late for them to try that.
I think it is too late for them to be successful at this, but I'm convinced they will make the attempt.

PayPal et al. can throw a lot of resources at UX and advertising (propaganda) designed to keep people from taking physical custody.

They can also get help with this from the IRS and other government agencies. We might see a situation where anyone who takes physical custody of their coins will be subject to merciless and endless legal harassment.

it's then up to us to raise holy hell about audits in that case.  i have no problem doing that. 

if all the top experts in the Bitcoin field do just that, i doubt they can be ignored.
Trader Steve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 725


"How do you eat an elephant? One bit at a time..."


View Profile
September 08, 2014, 05:55:04 PM
 #11771

So, if we ignore for a minute, the properties of gold that make it less attractive than bitcoin, and purely focus on the limited nature of each one; Why isn't gold acting as a store of value in a QE economy? Why is it not guaranteed profit to take out a huge low interest loan, and buy gold?

If there is an answer to that, why doesn't it apply to bitcoin?

Gold truly is the barbarous relic. It can be shorted to hell with naked contracts (big banks can sell what they don't own) and it is very inefficient in the digital age. How can it compete with instant and cheap value transfers like bitcoin (for which naked short selling does not currently exist)?

As we've said before, bitcoin is assuming the position historically held by gold. Bitcoin is Gold's Black Swan. Just remember to take possession of your private keys.

Appreciate the response Steve. To delve a little deeper, I realize that gold is a "barbarous relic" and inconvenient to use, which is why I was ignoring those facets for this particular comparison. Surely a clumsy, less efficient, hassle of a commodity will still rise in value relative to a paper currency issued in unlimited supply?

If naked shorts really are the answer to what keeps gold value in check, then my next question would be what keeps bitcoin protected from entities offering naked short selling? I realize that if everyone acts responsibly, that won't be a possibility, but that's never happened before, so I'm not counting on it.

Also, just to clarify a bit, I wasn't trying to compare gold to bitcoin, I believe bitcoin is superior in this role. I was comparing each to dollars, and wondering how we can expect bitcoin to clear the hurdles that gold failed to do, when they are both using the same approach.

Gold can only function properly if the majority of people demand delivery of physical metal. If the majority do not demand delivery of physical then it becomes possible to fractionalize gold and artificially increase supply by selling paper. Essentially the scarcity property of gold breaks down unless the majority of people take physical delivery.

This is why FDR's executive order banning physical possession was so effective at breaking the gold standard, after 2 generations the majority no longer demanded physical possession, but see paper products as "gold". It also is why the "gold bugs" vision is never realized, you need the majority of the population to demand physical and reject paper. If only 1% of the population regularly buys gold eagles, then banks can continue to sell paper for a long time.

The advantage for bitcoin is it is just so easy to take delivery. Any smartphone app can do so in seconds, and there is no reason not to. If people who adopt bitcoin for the most part use bitcoins directly then we just might fix the problems gold ran into.

My suspicion is this is how bitcoin will be attacked though, with regulation that drives adoption out of individually held wallets and into coinbase type online services by making compliance easier with online services. From there it becomes easier for online services to fractionalize bitcoin same as gold...

It is much easier to demand delivery of Bitcoin, or at least proof of reserves.

Thanks rocks and notme.

You both agree that the simplicity of taking delivery of bitcoin is what is going to protect it from the same fate as gold. I think it's a reasonable observation, but so far we've seen no evidence of that happening. The general public, and even some outstanding members of our early adopter community, have repeatedly lost bitcoin entrusted to a third party. The general feeling I get from normal folk when I talk about bitcoin is that it's too complicated, and they'd rather have someone else holding it for them and allowing access with a nice GUI or credit card analogue. This is what gave me pause; Outside of the people in threads like this, everyone wants a 3rd party to hold their bitcoin, and they may or may not care about solvency or audits. These are things that they don't really have a grasp of. With the majority of the world made up of people like this, how can we expect the industry NOT to capitalize on them? We can shout about private keys and audits all day long, but to an outside observer, we sound like the gold bug stackers ranting about physical coins.

I agree that most people are fools and they will continue to entrust their asset to third-parties but I also think that it will be very difficult for entities to conduct naked short sales of bitcoin without being called on the carpet for it (squeezed). The assumption is that most of the bitcoins are already in private hands and not bankster hands making it much harder for the manipulations to take place. Of course, I could be wrong.

My optimistic opinion is that counterparty risk failures in the legacy banking system will drive bitcoin adoption along with the awareness of the importance of taking possession of one's assets.

justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
September 08, 2014, 05:55:44 PM
 #11772

if all the top experts in the Bitcoin field do just that, i doubt they can be ignored.
Yes, if they all do just that.

Hopefully there's enough of them who can't be bought out.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 06:00:53 PM
 #11773

Bitfinex BTC shorts at 10000.  time for short squeeze:

wachtwoord
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484



View Profile WWW
September 08, 2014, 06:07:59 PM
 #11774


You both agree that the simplicity of taking delivery of bitcoin is what is going to protect it from the same fate as gold. I think it's a reasonable observation, but so far we've seen no evidence of that happening. The general public, and even some outstanding members of our early adopter community, have repeatedly lost bitcoin entrusted to a third party. The general feeling I get from normal folk when I talk about bitcoin is that it's too complicated, and they'd rather have someone else holding it for them and allowing access with a nice GUI or credit card analogue. This is what gave me pause; Outside of the people in threads like this, everyone wants a 3rd party to hold their bitcoin, and they may or may not care about solvency or audits. These are things that they don't really have a grasp of. With the majority of the world made up of people like this, how can we expect the industry NOT to capitalize on them? We can shout about private keys and audits all day long, but to an outside observer, we sound like the gold bug stackers ranting about physical coins.

I think you might very well be right in your observation. I do however like to note two things:

1. Even if Bitcoin, is only better than gold and takes 80% of it's value, that's a hell of lot higher market value than it is today
2. It's easier to request delivery so it will at least happen more often than currently with gold. If it happens more frequently there won't necessarily be no naked short selling, but there will be less of it, limiting the manipulation of Bitcoin when compared to gold.

I'm curious whether history will repeat itself and the possession of Bitcoin will be made illegal in a developed country at a point in the future. At least it's easier to hide Wink

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 06:12:14 PM
 #11775

still have higher lows and working on a spinning top reversal today:

iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
September 08, 2014, 06:20:32 PM
 #11776

i think it's too late for them to try that.
I think it is too late for them to be successful at this, but I'm convinced they will make the attempt.

PayPal et al. can throw a lot of resources at UX and advertising (propaganda) designed to keep people from taking physical custody.

They can also get help with this from the IRS and other government agencies. We might see a situation where anyone who takes physical custody of their coins will be subject to merciless and endless legal harassment.

"Oops, sorry my hard drive malfunctioned and the back-ups spontaneously disappeared.  Just like Louis Lerner and her 10 accomplices' did.

Then the entire computer was lost in an unfortunate boating accident."   Cry

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Wallets - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }


Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016
Blocks must necessarily be full for the Bitcoin network to be able to pay for its own security.  davout 2015
Blocksize is an intentionally limited resource, like the 21e6 BTC limit.  Changing it degrades the surrounding economics, creating negative incentives.  Jeff Garzik 2013


"I believed @Dashpay instamine was a bug & not a feature but then read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13017231#msg13017231
I'm not against people making money, but can't support questionable origins."
https://twitter.com/Tone_LLT/status/717822927908024320


The raison d'être of bitcoin is trustlessness. - Eric Lombrozo 2015
It is an Engineering Requirement that Bitcoin be “Above the Law”  Paul Sztorc 2015
Resiliency, not efficiency, is the paramount goal of decentralized, non-state sanctioned currency -Jon Matonis 2015

Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016

Technology tends to move in the direction of making surveillance easier, and the ability of computers to track us doubles every eighteen months. - Phil Zimmerman 2013

The only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small. Fight Features. - Andy Tanenbaum 2004

"Hard forks cannot be co
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 06:20:40 PM
 #11777


You both agree that the simplicity of taking delivery of bitcoin is what is going to protect it from the same fate as gold. I think it's a reasonable observation, but so far we've seen no evidence of that happening. The general public, and even some outstanding members of our early adopter community, have repeatedly lost bitcoin entrusted to a third party. The general feeling I get from normal folk when I talk about bitcoin is that it's too complicated, and they'd rather have someone else holding it for them and allowing access with a nice GUI or credit card analogue. This is what gave me pause; Outside of the people in threads like this, everyone wants a 3rd party to hold their bitcoin, and they may or may not care about solvency or audits. These are things that they don't really have a grasp of. With the majority of the world made up of people like this, how can we expect the industry NOT to capitalize on them? We can shout about private keys and audits all day long, but to an outside observer, we sound like the gold bug stackers ranting about physical coins.

I think you might very well be right in your observation. I do however like to note two things:

1. Even if Bitcoin, is only better than gold and takes 80% of it's value, that's a hell of lot higher market value than it is today
2. It's easier to request delivery so it will at least happen more often than currently with gold. If it happens more frequently there won't necessarily be no naked short selling, but there will be less of it, limiting the manipulation of Bitcoin when compared to gold.

I'm curious whether history will repeat itself and the possession of Bitcoin will be made illegal in a developed country at a point in the future. At least it's easier to hide Wink

the way i respond to this is that wealth and capital will efficiently seek the safest, most liquid, and best store of value asset out there.  normally, this used to be savings in gold and silver (and even cash), at least for the last few decades since we depegged.  now with the Fed's unfettered manipulation of interest rates and gold's failure to check this, wealth and capital will start seeking a better safe haven.  i think the fact that Bitcoin has diverged in an upwards direction for the last 3 yrs since gold and silver topped is yet further evidence that pm's are failing and conversely that Bitcoin is winning.  as noted earlier, gold is now also failing to hedge against the war premium.  that's very bad news for goldbugs.

there can't be 2 global safe haven currencies.  despite Bitcoin's 9 mo bear mkt, i am MORE focused on the new plunge in pm's.  it's a big clue, imo.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 06:33:26 PM
 #11778

i think it's too late for them to try that.
I think it is too late for them to be successful at this, but I'm convinced they will make the attempt.

PayPal et al. can throw a lot of resources at UX and advertising (propaganda) designed to keep people from taking physical custody.

They can also get help with this from the IRS and other government agencies. We might see a situation where anyone who takes physical custody of their coins will be subject to merciless and endless legal harassment.

"Oops, sorry my hard drive malfunctioned and the back-ups spontaneously disappeared.  Just like Louis Lerner and her 10 accomplices' did.

Then the entire computer was lost in an unfortunate boating accident."   Cry

and then everyone else's Bitcoin just got more valuable encouraging even more responsible users.  a self reinforcing network phenomenon.
wachtwoord
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484



View Profile WWW
September 08, 2014, 06:47:06 PM
 #11779

This is a very nice write-up on the current state of the world economy (September 2014) and why the financial sector and especially the Euro zone is going to implode. The explain how the situation is actually a centrally planned market (as in the Soviet union) and not an open market in the slightest.

 http://www.icecapassetmanagement.com/uploads/documents/2014.09%20IceCap%20Global%20Market%20Outlook.pdf

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 08, 2014, 07:01:45 PM
 #11780

it's official:

http://blog.coinbase.com/post/96987622472/braintree-partners-with-coinbase-to-accept-bitcoin
Pages: « 1 ... 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 [589] 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 ... 1560 »
  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!