Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

We discussed this gambit years ago. It's hilarious to see it play out exactly as predicted. The oligarchs rabble rabble.

If anything, it will be a tacit admission of Satoshi's brilliance minus the currency unit. Without the unit there is no incentive for miner or user participation.

In fact, I'd like to see them secure it with SHA256. Just for the lulz of seeing them get 51% attacked.

[1714220628]

1714220628

[1714220628]

1714220628

[sidhujag]

It begins

Exclusive: IBM looking at adopting bitcoin technology for major currencies
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/12/us-bitcoin-ibm-idUSKBN0M82KB20150312

Bitshares already does this

[cbeast]

We discussed this gambit years ago. It's hilarious to see it play out exactly as predicted. The oligarchs rabble rabble.

If anything, it will be a tacit admission of Satoshi's brilliance minus the currency unit. Without the unit there is no incentive for miner or user participation.

In fact, I'd like to see them secure it with SHA256. Just for the lulz of seeing them get 51% attacked.

*nods*

[explorer]

We discussed this gambit years ago. It's hilarious to see it play out exactly as predicted. The oligarchs rabble rabble.

If anything, it will be a tacit admission of Satoshi's brilliance minus the currency unit. Without the unit there is no incentive for miner or user participation.

In fact, I'd like to see them secure it with SHA256. Just for the lulz of seeing them get 51% attacked.

*nods*

Surely somebody in that camp can understand this. 

[rocks]

We discussed this gambit years ago. It's hilarious to see it play out exactly as predicted. The oligarchs rabble rabble.

If anything, it will be a tacit admission of Satoshi's brilliance minus the currency unit. Without the unit there is no incentive for miner or user participation.

In fact, I'd like to see them secure it with SHA256. Just for the lulz of seeing them get 51% attacked.

*nods*

Surely somebody in that camp can understand this.  

No, they are all in love with centralized command and control systems, it's like a shiny object to them.

To be fair though I guess they could say the same about me and that BTC is my shinny object. Anyone else getting excited about the latest drop? Might be able to reach my original target if the down trend continues.

[rocks]

It begins

Exclusive: IBM looking at adopting bitcoin technology for major currencies
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/12/us-bitcoin-ibm-idUSKBN0M82KB20150312

they're making a number of faulty assumptions.

Of course they are, this is the start of the real attack against bitcoin, they are not going to be honest about a thing either publicly or even to themselves for that matter.

[lebing]

It begins

Exclusive: IBM looking at adopting bitcoin technology for major currencies
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/12/us-bitcoin-ibm-idUSKBN0M82KB20150312

they're making a number of faulty assumptions.

Of course they are, this is the start of the real attack against bitcoin, they are not going to be honest about a thing either publicly or even to themselves for that matter.

This would be huge for bitcoin if it actually took place. Nothing like breaking down the conceptual barriers for people so they can more easily understand just how their fiat stacks up against a finite currency on a similar platform. Basically they are cementing Bitcoin's role as gold 2.0

[flipstyle]

Both bitcoin and precious metals are hurting right now.  But I still put more faith in the long term sustainability of metals.  Just my personal opinion.  I've pretty much gotten out of both, though...but may regain positions if the prices keep falling.

[sickpig]

Anyone else getting excited about the latest drop? Might be able to reach my original target if the down trend continues.

Which is?

For what is worth I've read in more than one TA EW threads, here and on tradingview, about a quite deep drop forecasts, even in the 2 digits zone.

[thezerg]

It begins

Exclusive: IBM looking at adopting bitcoin technology for major currencies
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/12/us-bitcoin-ibm-idUSKBN0M82KB20150312

they're making a number of faulty assumptions.

I think we've been calling this "govcoin" on these forums since at least 2012.

They'll release open ledger SHA-256 implementation without block subsidy (money printed by a centralized source -- a special txn signed by a well known private key).  Nobody will mine it so the government will pay banks to do so and these banks will lease IBM "cloud" based hardware to mine for massive profits to IBM.  As part of the mining contract, banks will allow their mines to blacklist addresses and in an emergency be redirected to a shorter chain so txns can be unwound.   Currency may be 51%ed by hackers for the lulz but this is exactly what some planners are actually hoping for because it will require the network to be "temporarily" limited to trusted banking partners and require massive additional spending to build out the "good" miners so that they out hash the "bad".  If it doesn't catch on, 10s or 100s of millions will have already been spent (of taxpayer money), people will be distracted from Bitcoin, and CC providers will use its failure to justify the continuation of their own insecure and data-collection-intensive methodologies.

Its a win win situation -- the perfect way to continue the current system while co-opting blockchain technology and buzz. 

[spazzdla]

We discussed this gambit years ago. It's hilarious to see it play out exactly as predicted. The oligarchs rabble rabble.

If anything, it will be a tacit admission of Satoshi's brilliance minus the currency unit. Without the unit there is no incentive for miner or user participation.

In fact, I'd like to see them secure it with SHA256. Just for the lulz of seeing them get 51% attacked.

We need to show the world how important this is...  Via decimate any network that attempts centralization.

There should be a mining pool who's soul purpose is to decimate coins it mines.

[cypherdoc]

oops, Dow's given it up again.  but it's still early...

[cypherdoc]

$DJT *already* threatening to plunge below it's secondary low pt.  that would be bad and confirmation of the non-confirmation we already have in place.  look the hell out:

[cypherdoc]

who need copper when we just need tubes?

[rocks]

It begins

Exclusive: IBM looking at adopting bitcoin technology for major currencies
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/12/us-bitcoin-ibm-idUSKBN0M82KB20150312

they're making a number of faulty assumptions.

Of course they are, this is the start of the real attack against bitcoin, they are not going to be honest about a thing either publicly or even to themselves for that matter.

This would be huge for bitcoin if it actually took place. Nothing like breaking down the conceptual barriers for people so they can more easily understand just how their fiat stacks up against a finite currency on a similar platform. Basically they are cementing Bitcoin's role as gold 2.0

That would be true if the conceptual barrier that mattered was using a digital protocol vs. using cash and bank accounts. But that is not the conceptual barrier that really matters.

The conceptual barrier that matters here is people trusting themselves vs. people relying on their betters (who promise to take care of them while robbing them blind). A Govcoin allows people to use the digital protocol, while still being wrapped in the protective love of the state, there is no tangible difference between that and what we have today.

[rocks]

It begins

Exclusive: IBM looking at adopting bitcoin technology for major currencies
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/12/us-bitcoin-ibm-idUSKBN0M82KB20150312

they're making a number of faulty assumptions.

I think we've been calling this "govcoin" on these forums since at least 2012.

They'll release open ledger SHA-256 implementation without block subsidy (money printed by a centralized source -- a special txn signed by a well known private key).  Nobody will mine it so the government will pay banks to do so and these banks will lease IBM "cloud" based hardware to mine for massive profits to IBM.  As part of the mining contract, banks will allow their mines to blacklist addresses and in an emergency be redirected to a shorter chain so txns can be unwound.   Currency may be 51%ed by hackers for the lulz but this is exactly what some planners are actually hoping for because it will require the network to be "temporarily" limited to trusted banking partners and require massive additional spending to build out the "good" miners so that they out hash the "bad".  If it doesn't catch on, 10s or 100s of millions will have already been spent (of taxpayer money), people will be distracted from Bitcoin, and CC providers will use its failure to justify the continuation of their own insecure and data-collection-intensive methodologies.

Its a win win situation -- the perfect way to continue the current system while co-opting blockchain technology and buzz. 

Why should a govcoin bother with mining which is a waste of electricity if you're not using the distributed security mechanism. They will simply design it so only the FED or some other agency can create and sign blocks. Since there is a single centralized block generator they could also issue blocks faster (say every 5 seconds) without the risk of orphans, then claim how much better their implementation is because it has faster block confirmation times (plus is wrapped in the protective love of our betters).

[zanzibar]

Why should a govcoin bother with mining which is a waste of electricity if you're not using the distributed security mechanism. They will simply design it so only the FED or some other agency can create and sign blocks. Since there is a single centralized block generator they could also issue blocks faster (say every 5 seconds) without the risk of orphans, then claim how much better their implementation is because it has faster block confirmation times (plus is wrapped in the protective love of our betters).

My thoughts exactly, why not just use POS protocol?

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

However an IBM-designed govcoin is implemented, its differences with bitcoin will be marked. The contrast will make bitcoin easier for the public to understand, and users will be able to assess advantages and disadvantages of each option. Bitcoin will then (continue to) compete on its own merits. We could ask for no better.

[cypherdoc]

Why should a govcoin bother with mining which is a waste of electricity if you're not using the distributed security mechanism. They will simply design it so only the FED or some other agency can create and sign blocks. Since there is a single centralized block generator they could also issue blocks faster (say every 5 seconds) without the risk of orphans, then claim how much better their implementation is because it has faster block confirmation times (plus is wrapped in the protective love of our betters).

My thoughts exactly, why not just use POS protocol?

exactly. IBM doesn't want to get into the biz of hashing with all the attendant ordering of multiple parts and accessories.  it's too risky.  they'll just do POS.

[hdbuck]

However an IBM-designed govcoin is implemented, its differences with bitcoin will be marked. The contrast will make bitcoin easier for the public to understand, and users will be able assess advantages and disadvantages of each option. Bitcoin will then (continue to) compete on its own merits. We could ask for no better.

+1 and then people will realize there is only one option: Bitcoin.