Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[brg444]

I don't understand the fear of alts. I'm into Bitcoin because it's better money, in our history it's the best yet.
Competition is what will make it better. Alts can out innovate Bitcoin on every metric except one, the Network Effect, and this is what makes it useful as a SoV.

I think this significantly underestimates the threat of alt coins and why Bitcoin is not a given (I'm saying this as someone who believes/hopes in the project)

For example what if the US government created a USDollarCoin that:
1) has all of the benefits of programmable money, you can have your own wallet and spend it through computing devices
2) has the _perceived_ benefits of centralized control including the ability to "recover" lost coins and "reverse fraudulent" transactions (possibility a majority of people prefer this based on Bitcoin's detractors' views). This could be accomplished with forced use of multisig where the FED has co-control.
3) has significantly easier tax implications to deal with (meaning no tax implications) compared to bitcoin where EVERY transaction is a taxable event
4) launches with mass adoption through automatic bank account conversion
5) was legislated as the only legal currency

Maybe that doesn't scare you, but it scares me.

The first wave of alts were simple clones, it was almost a given that network effects would hold them back here. However the next wave of alts are going to
a) come with real innovations and then
b) come with government sanctioned force

Network effects & Bitcoin's programmable nature will probably keep a) at bay, however network effect might actually work against Bitcoin if b) ever came to pass.

I'm not saying this will happend, and it may seem far fetched today, but it is in the realm of possibilities. The US government lives off of the inflation tax and if Bitcoin ever becomes a real threat, the state will definitely try more and more attempts to maintain control of the money supply. It's possible the proposal above would be a last ditch attempt to save itself.

As I have said previously, the beauty of cryptocurrency is that it democratizes the creation of money. Competition is now possible and Bitcoin has obvious competitive advantages solely because of its monetary policy.

This is exactly right, Bitcoin enabled real competition with state fiat money and has provided us a fighting chance.

My main point was it will be a fight and Bitcoin's success is anything but a given.

The USDcoin might have the benefits of digital money but carries with it the devaluation problems and the reliance on a failed, soon to be bankrupt state.

Of course we both know that to the general population this is not a real concern as they do not realize that money is stolen from their pocket through inflation but now that a deflationary alternative is available it won't take long until they realize they're on the wrong side of the fence.

And those views will be part of the fight, a fight proponents of the gold standard lost BTW. The majority today are against a gold standard, I can't count the number of times I've been told that the gold standard caused the great depression, which is blatantly false but has been taught in the common core for generations. I think it will be an uphill battle to convince minds they should prefer "Bitcoin as a better gold standard" over a slow inflation fiat money with _perceived_ security.

The views held in this thread are contrary to many many people, even if we know we are "right".

Agreed.

One thing we have going for us though is greed. If there is money to be made holding your wealth in Bitcoin then people will gravitate toward that option.

I have this "vision" of a Bitcoin "bank" that offers risk-free accounts denominated in USD with preferable interest rates that regular fiat banks can not compete with. If this "product" can be offered to mainstream people then Bitcoin will gain ground very, very quickly.

[1714263550]

1714263550

[1714263550]

1714263550

[1714263550]

1714263550

[1714263550]

1714263550

[NotLambchop]

...
I have this "vision" of a Bitcoin "bank" that offers risk-free accounts denominated in USD with preferable interest rates that regular fiat banks can not compete with. If this "product" can be offered to mainstream people then Bitcoin will gain ground very, very quickly.

That you, Danny?

[cypherdoc]

Bitcoin Core Developer Greg Maxwell Has ‘Ethical Concerns’ with Altcoins

http://insidebitcoins.com/news/bitcoin-core-developer-greg-maxwell-has-ethical-concerns-with-altcoins/26952

[cypherdoc]

once again, this is why we need to continue focus on what has got us here, Bitcoin as Sound Money.  b/c one day, the sharks will be coming not for your stocks, bonds, or insurance contracts, but your money:

All this fancy footwork is to prevent a run on the TBTF banks, in order to keep their derivatives casino going with our money. Warren Buffett called derivatives “weapons of financial mass destruction,” and many commentators warn that they are a time bomb waiting to explode. When that happens, our deposits, our pensions, and our public investment funds will all be subject to confiscation in a “bail in.” Perhaps it is time to pull our money out of Wall Street and set up our own banks – banks that will serve the people because they are owned by the people.

http://ellenbrown.com/2014/12/01/new-rules-cyprus-style-bail-ins-to-hit-deposits-and-pensions/

hmmm, those personal banks sound like Bitcoin.

[Adrian-x]

I don't understand the fear of alts. I'm into Bitcoin because it's better money, in our history it's the best yet.
Competition is what will make it better. Alts can out innovate Bitcoin on every metric except one, the Network Effect, and this is what makes it useful as a SoV.

I think this significantly underestimates the threat of alt coins and why Bitcoin is not a given (I'm saying this as someone who believes/hopes in the project)

For example what if the US government created a USDollarCoin that:
1) has all of the benefits of programmable money, you can have your own wallet and spend it through computing devices
2) has the _perceived_ benefits of centralized control including the ability to "recover" lost coins and "reverse fraudulent" transactions (possibility a majority of people prefer this based on Bitcoin's detractors' views). This could be accomplished with forced use of multisig where the FED has co-control.
3) has significantly easier tax implications to deal with (meaning no tax implications) compared to bitcoin where EVERY transaction is a taxable event
4) launches with mass adoption through automatic bank account conversion
5) was legislated as the only legal currency

Maybe that doesn't scare you, but it scares me.

The first wave of alts were simple clones, it was almost a given that network effects would hold them back here. However the next wave of alts are going to
a) come with real innovations and then
b) come with government sanctioned force

Network effects & Bitcoin's programmable nature will probably keep a) at bay, however network effect might actually work against Bitcoin if b) ever came to pass.

I'm not saying this will happend, and it may seem far fetched today, but it is in the realm of possibilities. The US government lives off of the inflation tax and if Bitcoin ever becomes a real threat, the state will definitely try more and more attempts to maintain control of the money supply. It's possible the proposal above would be a last ditch attempt to save itself.

No that's not as scary as doing all that on a SideChain, that scheme could just eat Bitcoins for breakfast if you throw in a 1934 Gold Reserve Act 2016 Bitcoin Reserve Act with a diminishing peg!

I'm only interested in investing in creating a world with a hard money supply. I don't actually need the hard money to be Bitcoin the fact it can be and it is and I'm invested in it is a bonus, I just want a sustainable self regulating world and Bitcoin seems to be the most efficient way to get there. I'll stick my neck out and say it's the best shot we've had in over a 100 years and if we fail the results would be devastating.  I have spent an inordinate amount of time probing and investing in many of the alt coin sachems, none in my opinion are a threat to Bitcoin, and now they are growing at a rate too complex for most to understand let alone comprehend.

For Bitcoin to succeed it just needs to be a store of value, it doesn't need to compete with the Bitcoin 2.0 Turing complete ideas to stay relevant, its not better services or better trust in institutions but trust in a better money will drive this revolution, Bitcoin is that, and it doesn't have any competition yet.

I for one welcome all forms of competition the more the better, it just makes Bitcoin more relevant, the more complex the situation becomes the more valuable a simple solution is. We have to stay vigilant, and pay attention, your Bitcoin profits are not guaranteed.    

the state is just a bunch of people doing what they know to be good, a little education and an investment in Bitcoin will help align self interest with public good and heal any perversions we see today. 

[jmw74]

Yes, I was saying they are different coins and different attempts. The first wave were the clones (which we've already had), the next wave a) will have some level of actual innovation, and the wave after that b) would be government attempts to resist Bitcoin and regain control.

the creation of USDCoin would be a tacit admission by the govt that Bitcoin has merit and, paradoxically to their wishes, money will always flow to that platform which treats it best.  that can't happen with an inflationary, violent coin.

It would be an admission by the government that Bitcoin has merit. It would also be sold to the public as having all the benefits of Bitcoin with all the security of government money. Given the history of money, this has worked. It did for the FED in the 1930's.

Let's be clear here. Taking the existing banking system, add in lower fees and faster transactions, is nothing like bitcoin.  It's just the same old shit, but not quite as stuck in the dark ages as it is now.

The concept of a government-controlled blockchain is complete nonsense.  Those two things are mutually exclusive, as soon as a central authority has control of the blockchain, the entire thing becomes a waste of resources. You'd get the same effect from the government just running a centralized database, except it's much more efficient.

[Adrian-x]

nothing hotter than a chick with passion:

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

I just dont get RT what am I missing, I thought it was Russia's propaganda network intended to pick holes in the Western one sided media.
But they come up with great articles like this, this type of content will help the West become more resilient and out compete Russia, however these same ideas are not promoted in Russia why?

[Wekkel]

"It is absolutely out of the question that these banks will transfer money over the actual bitcoin blockchain out of reach from the Dutch central bank.”

http://www.coindesk.com/top-dutch-banks-confirm-blockchain-experiments/

if they won't transfer money over the blockchain, you can only imagine their resistance to transferring speculative assets.

That's not what the quote says. The quote only says 'no transfer of money out of reach from the Dutch central bank'. That still leave room for many options, most of which are not even known yet. The market will move on and so will banks (central bank or no central bank).

[rocks]

One thing we have going for us though is greed. If there is money to be made holding your wealth in Bitcoin then people will gravitate toward that option.

Had the exact same thought last night. If a new form of sound money is created from nothing, the potential for the largest transfer of wealth in possibility humanity's history will be so tremendous that human greed will have the strongest influence of all. It would only take a few senators on the right committees aligned to Bitcoin's speculative waves, to gum up state attempts to block Bitcoin. They would position themselves as the good guys, but it would really just be greed.

[acquafredda]

One thing we have going for us though is greed. If there is money to be made holding your wealth in Bitcoin then people will gravitate toward that option.

Had the exact same thought last night. If a new form of sound money is created from nothing, the potential for the largest transfer of wealth in possibility humanity's history will be so tremendous that human greed will have the strongest influence of all. It would only take a few senators on the right committees aligned to Bitcoin's speculative waves, to gum up state attempts to block Bitcoin. They would position themselves as the good guys, but it would really just be greed.

100% on that

[rocks]

the state is just a bunch of people doing what they know to be good, a little education and an investment in Bitcoin will help align self interest with public good and heal any perversions we see today. 

Could not disagree with this more.

Gold bugs have spent 100 years knowing  they are "right" and waiting for everyone else to education themselves understand history and see the light. Never happened.

In the meantime the state resorted to banning private possession of gold for almost 2 generations in order to break the public's view of gold as money. The state will fight Bitcoin just as hard.

[Adrian-x]

Also i expect about 50% of mined coins to make it into the market as most miners can cover all costs and comfortably save 50% of there BTC income. (the proponents will be saving anyway)  

Some interesting analysis on coin movements:

http://www.coindesk.com/analysis-around-70-bitcoins-dormant-least-six-months/

interesting read thanks, I think the amount of new coins coming into the market will slow and i think his prediction that holders from the tops of April and December growth stages will start to sell has some validity.

[Adrian-x]

the state is just a bunch of people doing what they know to be good, a little education and an investment in Bitcoin will help align self interest with public good and heal any perversions we see today. 

Could not disagree with this more.

Gold bugs have spent 100 years knowing  they are "right" and waiting for everyone else to education themselves understand history and see the light. Never happened.

In the meantime the state resorted to banning private possession of gold for almost 2 generations in order to break the public's view of gold as money. The state will fight Bitcoin just as hard.

Im saying the same thing as you said above, I'm in agreement

One thing we have going for us though is greed. If there is money to be made holding your wealth in Bitcoin then people will gravitate toward that option.

Had the exact same thought last night. If a new form of sound money is created from nothing, the potential for the largest transfer of wealth in possibility humanity's history will be so tremendous that human greed will have the strongest influence of all. It would only take a few senators on the right committees aligned to Bitcoin's speculative waves, to gum up state attempts to block Bitcoin. They would position themselves as the good guys, but it would really just be greed.

[traderCJ]

I don't understand the fear of alts. I'm into Bitcoin because it's better money, in our history it's the best yet.
Competition is what will make it better. Alts can out innovate Bitcoin on every metric except one, the Network Effect, and this is what makes it useful as a SoV.

I think this significantly underestimates the threat of alt coins and why Bitcoin is not a given (I'm saying this as someone who believes/hopes in the project)

For example what if the US government created a USDollarCoin that:
1) has all of the benefits of programmable money, you can have your own wallet and spend it through computing devices
2) has the _perceived_ benefits of centralized control including the ability to "recover" lost coins and "reverse fraudulent" transactions (possibility a majority of people prefer this based on Bitcoin's detractors' views). This could be accomplished with forced use of multisig where the FED has co-control.
3) has significantly easier tax implications to deal with (meaning no tax implications) compared to bitcoin where EVERY transaction is a taxable event
4) launches with mass adoption through automatic bank account conversion
5) was legislated as the only legal currency

Maybe that doesn't scare you, but it scares me.

The first wave of alts were simple clones, it was almost a given that network effects would hold them back here. However the next wave of alts are going to
a) come with real innovations and then
b) come with government sanctioned force

Network effects & Bitcoin's programmable nature will probably keep a) at bay, however network effect might actually work against Bitcoin if b) ever came to pass.

I'm not saying this will happend, and it may seem far fetched today, but it is in the realm of possibilities. The US government lives off of the inflation tax and if Bitcoin ever becomes a real threat, the state will definitely try more and more attempts to maintain control of the money supply. It's possible the proposal above would be a last ditch attempt to save itself.

This is basically where I see Bitcoin going.  The coin itself will be (more or less) irrelevant, but the technology (or something like it) will play center stage.  The U.S. government isn't concerned about Bitcoin as a threat to the dollar.  The IRS has already made it impossible to use as a traditional currency without running afoul of tax code.  Report capital gains on every transaction?  Yeah right.  They knew exactly what they were doing .. marginalizing Bitcoin.  Digital currency has been here ever since banks established electronic lines of intrabank credit.  This technology will likely be adopted in some form by governments, with their own strings attached (100% oversight).  People will go along with it.  Middle/upper class Americans simply don't have the stomach for dissent.  They've too much to lose.  Credit cards work fine for now, and when the time comes, a shift will be made to something a bit more streamlined, all the big players will be right there at the trough, make no mistake.

[brg444]

the state is just a bunch of people doing what they know to be good, a little education and an investment in Bitcoin will help align self interest with public good and heal any perversions we see today. 

Could not disagree with this more.

Gold bugs have spent 100 years knowing  they are "right" and waiting for everyone else to education themselves understand history and see the light. Never happened.

In the meantime the state resorted to banning private possession of gold for almost 2 generations in order to break the public's view of gold as money. The state will fight Bitcoin just as hard.

The problem I see with gold is also a technological one.

Even if gold had survived these government interventions, there is no way people would be using it as a currency in our modern world. Gold's physical nature is one of its more important flaw because it leads to inherent counterparty risk if we are to use it as the reserve currency.

It is the very reason why banks were able to centralize gold holdings to then issue paper notes which they later devalued through fractional reserve

[brg444]

I don't understand the fear of alts. I'm into Bitcoin because it's better money, in our history it's the best yet.
Competition is what will make it better. Alts can out innovate Bitcoin on every metric except one, the Network Effect, and this is what makes it useful as a SoV.

I think this significantly underestimates the threat of alt coins and why Bitcoin is not a given (I'm saying this as someone who believes/hopes in the project)

For example what if the US government created a USDollarCoin that:
1) has all of the benefits of programmable money, you can have your own wallet and spend it through computing devices
2) has the _perceived_ benefits of centralized control including the ability to "recover" lost coins and "reverse fraudulent" transactions (possibility a majority of people prefer this based on Bitcoin's detractors' views). This could be accomplished with forced use of multisig where the FED has co-control.
3) has significantly easier tax implications to deal with (meaning no tax implications) compared to bitcoin where EVERY transaction is a taxable event
4) launches with mass adoption through automatic bank account conversion
5) was legislated as the only legal currency

Maybe that doesn't scare you, but it scares me.

The first wave of alts were simple clones, it was almost a given that network effects would hold them back here. However the next wave of alts are going to
a) come with real innovations and then
b) come with government sanctioned force

Network effects & Bitcoin's programmable nature will probably keep a) at bay, however network effect might actually work against Bitcoin if b) ever came to pass.

I'm not saying this will happend, and it may seem far fetched today, but it is in the realm of possibilities. The US government lives off of the inflation tax and if Bitcoin ever becomes a real threat, the state will definitely try more and more attempts to maintain control of the money supply. It's possible the proposal above would be a last ditch attempt to save itself.

This is basically where I see Bitcoin going.  The coin itself will be (more or less) irrelevant, but the technology (or something like it) will play center stage.  The U.S. government isn't concerned about Bitcoin as a threat to the dollar.  The IRS has already made it impossible to use as a traditional currency without running afoul of tax code.  Report capital gains on every transaction?  Yeah right.  They knew exactly what they were doing .. marginalizing Bitcoin.  Digital currency has been here ever since banks established electronic lines of intrabank credit.  This technology will likely be adopted in some form by governments, with their own strings attached (100% oversight).  People will go along with it.  Middle/upper class Americans simply don't have the stomach for dissent.  They've too much to lose.  Credit cards work fine for now, and when the time comes, a shift will be made to something a bit more streamlined, all the big players will be right there at the trough, make no mistake.

You just found yourself a lot of enemies here with that statement  

Technology solves problems. Bitcoin is digital. Soon my hot wallet is gonna do all of the accounting for me and I should have no problem reporting and conforming with the tax code.

That's absolutely not a problem.

As we've been saying, maybe it is true that middle/upper class Americans don't have the stomach for dissent when there is nothing tangible or immediate to gain but if there is money to be made then greed overcomes fear almost everytime.

As for governements adopting the technology, this gentleman here pretty much nails it :

Let's be clear here. Taking the existing banking system, add in lower fees and faster transactions, is nothing like bitcoin.  It's just the same old shit, but not quite as stuck in the dark ages as it is now.

The concept of a government-controlled blockchain is complete nonsense.  Those two things are mutually exclusive, as soon as a central authority has control of the blockchain, the entire thing becomes a waste of resources. You'd get the same effect from the government just running a centralized database, except it's much more efficient.

[jmw74]

the state is just a bunch of people doing what they know to be good, a little education and an investment in Bitcoin will help align self interest with public good and heal any perversions we see today. 

Could not disagree with this more.

Gold bugs have spent 100 years knowing  they are "right" and waiting for everyone else to education themselves understand history and see the light. Never happened.

In the meantime the state resorted to banning private possession of gold for almost 2 generations in order to break the public's view of gold as money. The state will fight Bitcoin just as hard.

Yes, they will fight tooth and nail. The question is what are their viable strategies?

Passing a law saying "you may not accept bitcoin as payment, under penalty of 10 year prison sentence", would pretty much destroy bitcoin in that country. There's no ecosystem when no law-abiding person can use it at all.

However that's not the end of the story, other countries' bitcoin economy would continue to flourish at the expense of the iron-fist country. It's possible that pressure might open things back up.  I think the equilibrium is where some fraction of the people use bitcoin, and the rest won't be bothered due to regulations and simple lack of demand. The drug war is similar - drug policy doesn't really stop anyone from smoking a joint, but you have to want it a little more, compared to it being freely available on every corner. The government just selectively enforces the law for their benefit (disproportionately on minorities). Same will happen with bitcoin.  They'll just create a multi-billion-dollar governmental department just for enforcing "bitcoin crime".

I think the "hyperbitcoinization" scenario is sheer fantasy. The vast majority of the population do as they are told, if the tv says bitcoin is for terrorists, they will not be interested.  Only when those people die off and are replaced by bitcoin-savvy youth, might there be a chance for a takeover.

[brg444]

the state is just a bunch of people doing what they know to be good, a little education and an investment in Bitcoin will help align self interest with public good and heal any perversions we see today. 

Could not disagree with this more.

Gold bugs have spent 100 years knowing  they are "right" and waiting for everyone else to education themselves understand history and see the light. Never happened.

In the meantime the state resorted to banning private possession of gold for almost 2 generations in order to break the public's view of gold as money. The state will fight Bitcoin just as hard.

Yes, they will fight tooth and nail. The question is what are their viable strategies?

Passing a law saying "you may not accept bitcoin as payment, under penalty of 10 year prison sentence", would pretty much destroy bitcoin in that country. There's no ecosystem when no law-abiding person can use it at all.

However that's not the end of the story, other countries' bitcoin economy would continue to flourish at the expense of the iron-fist country. It's possible that pressure might open things back up.  I think the equilibrium is where some fraction of the people use bitcoin, and the rest won't be bothered due to regulations and simple lack of demand. The drug war is similar - drug policy doesn't really stop anyone from smoking a joint, but you have to want it a little more, compared to it being freely available on every corner. The government just selectively enforces the law for their benefit (disproportionately on minorities). Same will happen with bitcoin.  They'll just create a multi-billion-dollar governmental department just for enforcing "bitcoin crime".

I think the "hyperbitcoinization" scenario is sheer fantasy. The vast majority of the population do as they are told, if the tv says bitcoin is for terrorists, they will not be interested.  Only when those people die off and are replaced by bitcoin-savvy youth, might there be a chance for a takeover.

If the TV says Bitcoin is for terrorists but both my friends & neighbors use it and have doubled their wealth in the span of a year then I might just consider it.

Greed

[Adrian-x]

Bitcoin Core Developer Greg Maxwell Has ‘Ethical Concerns’ with Altcoins

http://insidebitcoins.com/news/bitcoin-core-developer-greg-maxwell-has-ethical-concerns-with-altcoins/26952

In other words, it sounds like we dont want to stop people buying into fads, we just want them to stop buying into Alternative Chain fads, and to rather buy new Side Chain fads.

[smooth]

This makes it clear that we must be careful to distinguish between the ledger (a conceptual spreadsheet keeping track of who owns what percentage of the economic community known as "the Bitcoin ecosystem" and later perhaps just "the global economy") and the protocol for updating that ledger.

We're back to this silly idea of separating the currency from from the blockchain. You can't, they are one in the same.

This "ledger" rhetoric is a paraphrase of the false idea they are separable.

The system is the blockchain is the currency is the protocol is the ledger.