Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[rocks]

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34220013/

Well said!

Very well said. Thanks

[1714221041]

1714221041

[1714221041]

1714221041

[1714221041]

1714221041

[1714221041]

1714221041

[rocks]

Just had some limit buy orders for GBTC hit in my IRA. God help me I now own* my first Bitcoin through a 3rd party intermediary I have to trust (* own as in have a legal claim to, but lack possession and thus lack true ownership).

The premium has come down a lot, my purchase was only ~$35 over coinbase's spot price. What's strange is my buy is below the day's low being reported...

Please don't f me Barry.

[TPTB_need_war]

Well the vested interest is very clear. You don't really give a hoot about what happens to the world (even though you convince yourself otherwise). You want Bitcoin to the moon because you feel it is the easiest way for you to make ROI. Volatile altcoins or other investments would be so much more difficult than the...

The sure thing.

Until it is not...

Yeah buy this deadcat ramp to $315. (which I told you in May was coming as predicted by Armstrong's model of public vs. private assets)

After that, it will get much more interesting.  

(and buying an IRA that will be confiscated by ObamaHillary Clinton, lol)

[thezerg]

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34220013/

Well said!

Very well said. Thanks

Thanks!  It was a very succinct way of offering support to Justus without dropping the trivial +1 moniker.  In fact, about 50% shorter than your showing of support of my support.  If you practice a bit, I'm sure you'll discover how to get to the brevity, the essence, no no can I even claim  --- the Zen mastery --- of encouragement postings.  

[tvbcof]

The reason humans can't impact the CLIMATE with CO2 is because our release of CO2 is miniscule in comparison to the CO2 absorbed and released by for example the oceans due to changes in the sea temperature due to the Sun.

Complete Bullshit. That is the natural carbon circulation. Taking carbon out of the ground and transport it into the atmosphere and the ocean means to enrich the atmosphere and the ocean with additional carbon. Every child understands it.

Even a child can understand that Santa came down the chimney, ate the cookies, drank the milk, and dropped off a load of presents.

CO2 is a trace gas in our atmosphere.  Currently around 400 ppmv or 0.04%.

Combustion of fossil fuels accounts for about 5% or so of the total release of CO2 into the atmosphere per year.  Natural processes release and absorb many times that per year.

Here's a concept that 'even a child can understand.'  If one is protecting oneself from a bullet by hiding behind an armor plate, adding another armor plate does not materially effect the outcome.  This principle applies to CO2 as a greenhouse gas in the atmosphere in that the impacts of increasing concentrations of CO2 approach nill.  Graphic:

 -> http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/clip_image002_thumb7.jpg?w=619&h=376 <-

In terms of 'greenhouse gasses' water vapor is the most crucial.  The dispute is actually about whether there is a positive or negative feedback loop.  Evidence is piling up that those who panic about a positive feedback loop are wrong.  Unfortunately, politics has damaged science to the extent that it will be difficult to understand if there is a threat here which is worth the (devastating) sacrifices needed to address it.  I lay the blame for this almost completely on the 'warmunista' side of the battle.

Bringing it home:

Coupled with the unavoidable bleak numbers coming out of even the most chicken-little science circles and realities about sizes of economies and such, the best most people can do in terms of justifying specific actions is the claim that such action will make them 'recognized as global leaders in the fight against climate change.'  This is what my state of Oregon is claiming as the benefits of charging everyone a few more bucks every time they go to the gas station.

It's pretty nebulous where the money will end up which is most likely be design.  Certainly some of it will end up in various green boondoggles as has already been the case.  Ultimately what our 'actions' here in the state of Oregon will achieve is to may us 'recognized as world-class chumps.'  Oh well.  I can afford an extra $0.20/gal for gasoline but I feel for those who are more on-the-edge and cannot.  My historically progressive concepts of 'social justice' and long held feelings about progressive/regressive taxation have not changed much so I am opposed to such scammery on multiple levels.

[rocks]

In terms of 'greenhouse gasses' water vapor is the most crucial.  The dispute is actually about whether there is a positive or negative feedback loop.  Evidence is piling up that those who panic about a positive feedback loop are wrong.  Unfortunately, politics has damaged science to the extent that it will be difficult to understand if there is a threat here which is worth the (devastating) sacrifices needed to address it.  I lay the blame for this almost completely on the 'warmunista' side of the battle.

This is what is so absurd about the whole thing, the original theory has been proven objectively incorrect, yet the theory continues as a mass delusion.

The global warming theory was predicated on a "if A, then B, then C" hypothesis, where B never happened. The original (and still current) theory is increases in CO2, increase water vapor, which in turn warms the atmosphere. But water vapor did not change in any manner predicted or needed for the theory to work. Thus the theory is wrong, QED. But I'm called the anti-science denier (often in racist terms).

As with everything, it is a scam for a narrow set of politically connected people (i.e. climate "scientists" and the green industry) to extract money from the public through the government. That is all it is.

Take away the free government money (enabled by the dollar) and the scams stop, or at least decrease significantly.

[Adrian-x]

And you are incorrect to assume that Zaradude was arguing about environment. He is not.

I was arguing about the climate of the environment, just as Nassim Taleb:

But the skepticism about models that I propose does not lead to the same conclusions as the ones endorsed by anti-environmentalists, pro-market fundamentalists, quite the contrary: we need to be hyper-conservationists ecologically, super-Green, since we do not know what we are harming with now.

I think we can all agree that "green initiatives" can lead to greater environmental harm through subsidies and waste, and that systems like carbon credits probably serve to enrich and empower such regulators, but it is still crucially importantly to be aware of our individual and collective impact upon Mother Earth (for example, realizing everything's means to their ends) regardless of said political pandering.

I think we can all agree that Nassim Taleb is saying: We should not enrich the atmosphere with additional carbon, since we do not know the result of such crazy experiments.

I'm behind you 100% but who is "We" in the statement above. We is not you and me it's the central controllers, who arguably are corrupted by TPTB. its not that we need to convince the central controllers to manage how we pollution by electing a centralized authority. that idea is now broken. But that we need the correct incentives to pollute sustainably.

the problem is real when you look at the science I was a skeptic well over a decade ago until a simple experiment proved it empirically and changed my viewpoint, basically that Co2 absorbs infrared energy and then radiates the stored energy over time.

the problem is not that the managers are doing a bad job managing Co2 or any pollutants for that matter the real problem is economic. We need 3% exponential economic growth every year to stay flush, this  results in an acceleration of the consumption of raw materials, and benefits those who consume the most resources before inflation so they can profit off consumer spending post inflation. We can thank Milton Friedman for the idea.

The thing the managers fear the most is deflation, in a deflation scenario deferred consumption is rewarded. this mode of being would drastically reduce pollution and the exploration of natural resources.
the solution is very different from what we have now, and the change is something we ether embrace or gets forced on us, our managers (the controllers who should be defining a sustainable system) are just shuffling deck chars on the titanic. TPTB_need_war, types are just messing up the water for the rest of us so the actual PTB can maintain control.

our environmental problems are not so much a byproduct of progress, but a byproduct of a sick economic system. if we the collective who need the environment all made sacrifices without correcting the economic problem, the cancer would just grow to consume what we don't.  the idea of cap and trade is also a faker it's worse than the money problem because financial institutions can manipulate carbon credits into existence.  

The People's Cap-And-Trade by James D'Angelo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCtf9eumuhU is the first proposal I think has merit in reducing unsustainable ecological impact - Bitcoin being the first.

[Adrian-x]

Check out the linear buy ramp on bitfinex.  Anyone think a whale is accumulating?

http://www.bitcoinity.org/markets/bitfinex/USD

talk about bullish posturing:

is it because of Greece or is it some whale who feels bitcoin may have a future now that Blockstream are not so strong.

[Zarathustra]

The reason humans can't impact the CLIMATE with CO2 is because our release of CO2 is miniscule in comparison to the CO2 absorbed and released by for example the oceans due to changes in the sea temperature due to the Sun.

Complete Bullshit. That is the natural carbon circulation. Taking carbon out of the ground and transport it into the atmosphere and the ocean means to enrich the atmosphere and the ocean with additional carbon. Every child understands it.

Even a child can understand that Santa came down the chimney, ate the cookies, drank the milk, and dropped off a load of presents.

CO2 is a trace gas in our atmosphere.  Currently around 400 ppmv or 0.04%.

Combustion of fossil fuels accounts for about 5% or so of the total release of CO2 into the atmosphere per year.  Natural processes release and absorb many times that per year.

Here's a concept that 'even a child can understand.' 

- He wasn't driving drunk, he just had a trace of blood alcohol; 800 ppm (0.08%) is the limit in all 50 US states, and limits are lower in most other countries).

- Don't worry about your iron deficiency, iron is only 4.4 ppm of your body's atoms (Sterner and Eiser, 2002).

- Ireland isn't important; it's only 660 ppm (0.066%) of the world population.

- That ibuprofen pill can't do you any good; it's only 3 ppm of your body weight (200 mg in 60 kg person).

- The Earth is insignificant, it's only 3 ppm of the mass of the solar system.

- Your children can drink that water, it only contains a trace of arsenic (0.01 ppm is the WHO and US EPA limit).

- Ozone is only a trace gas: 0.1 ppm

[TPTB_need_war]

The reason humans can't impact the CLIMATE with CO2 is because our release of CO2 is miniscule in comparison to the CO2 absorbed and released by for example the oceans due to changes in the sea temperature due to the Sun.

Complete Bullshit. That is the natural carbon circulation. Taking carbon out of the ground and transport it into the atmosphere and the ocean means to enrich the atmosphere and the ocean with additional carbon. Every child understands it.

Even a child can understand that Santa came down the chimney, ate the cookies, drank the milk, and dropped off a load of presents.

CO2 is a trace gas in our atmosphere.  Currently around 400 ppmv or 0.04%.

Combustion of fossil fuels accounts for about 5% or so of the total release of CO2 into the atmosphere per year.  Natural processes release and absorb many times that per year.

Here's a concept that 'even a child can understand.'

- He wasn't driving drunk, he just had a trace of blood alcohol; 800 ppm (0.08%) is the limit in all 50 US states, and limits are lower in most other countries).

- Don't worry about your iron deficiency, iron is only 4.4 ppm of your body's atoms (Sterner and Eiser, 2002).

- Ireland isn't important; it's only 660 ppm (0.066%) of the world population.

- That ibuprofen pill can't do you any good; it's only 3 ppm of your body weight (200 mg in 60 kg person).

- The Earth is insignificant, it's only 3 ppm of the mass of the solar system.

- Your children can drink that water, it only contains a trace of arsenic (0.01 ppm is the WHO and US EPA limit).

- Ozone is only a trace gas: 0.1 ppm

Increasing any of those trace quantities by 5% has what effect?  

tvbcof you see most people don't do logic. Stay hinged to them at the hip via Bitcoin Core or XT and suffer their fate. Buy an anonymous pegged BTC side chain and speculate on some of its coins and prosper. It is your choice. You must make it.

[Zarathustra]

Combustion of fossil fuels accounts for about 5% or so of the total release of CO2 into the atmosphere per year.  Natural processes release and absorb many times that per year.

This is one of the dumbest 'arguments' of the anthropocentric truthers and bible throwers.

The natural process is a carbon circulation. Combustion of fossil fuels takes carbon out of the ground and transfers it into the ocean and the atmosphere.

[zanzibar]

This is one of the dumbest 'arguments' of the anthropocentric truthers and bible throwers.

The natural process is a carbon circulation. Combustion of fossil fuels takes carbon out of the ground and transfers it into the ocean and the atmosphere.

+1, it's why we'll probably be extinct in about 150 years, we still have people denying the inevitable. 

[TPTB_need_war]

This is one of the dumbest 'arguments' of the anthropocentric truthers and bible throwers.

The natural process is a carbon circulation. Combustion of fossil fuels takes carbon out of the ground and transfers it into the ocean and the atmosphere.

+1, it's why we'll probably be extinct in about 150 years, we still have people denying the inevitable.  

You'll be culled precisely because you follow this nonsense.

I plan to fork away from your nonsense, so I won't be dragged into the abyss with you. Make your choice.

[rocks]

Combustion of fossil fuels accounts for about 5% or so of the total release of CO2 into the atmosphere per year.  Natural processes release and absorb many times that per year.

This is one of the dumbest 'arguments' of the anthropocentric truthers and bible throwers.

The natural process is a carbon circulation. Combustion of fossil fuels takes carbon out of the ground and transfers it into the ocean and the atmosphere.

It is not a circulation but a pump which over time slowly puts more and more carbon into the ground from out of the air. This is why the long term carbon graphs show carbon as constantly decreasing at a steady rate over millions of years. The amount we've taken out and put back into the air is a fraction of what was put into the ground over just the past 100M years.

In fact, this removal was/is a problem. Without mankind's intervention, atmospheric carbon would have dropped below the level require for photosynthesis in not too far into the future (geologically speaking, I think the forecast was ~10M years). It is very accurate to say that without the industrial era life on the earth would have run into issues.

One of the founders of Green Peace has a great discussion on this. He argues that we should be trying to extract carbon out of the ground to reverse this process and ensure a buffer, and shows how in the big picture we'd still be a levels which are historically low for the earth.

The reality is mankind will probably only develop the technology to extract enough carbon to get the earth back to where it was 100M years ago, which in the big picture is not much. Nuclear/wind/solar will be much cheaper alternatives after that because most of the carbon is just too difficult or uneconomical to get to.

Edit:
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2015/03/20/why-i-am-climate-change-skeptic

Human Emissions Saved Planet

Over the past 150 million years, carbon dioxide had been drawn down steadily (by plants) from about 3,000 parts per million to about 280 parts per million before the Industrial Revolution. If this trend continued, the carbon dioxide level would have become too low to support life on Earth. Human fossil fuel use and clearing land for crops have boosted carbon dioxide from its lowest level in the history of the Earth back to 400 parts per million today.

At 400 parts per million, all our food crops, forests, and natural ecosystems are still on a starvation diet for carbon dioxide. The optimum level of carbon dioxide for plant growth, given enough water and nutrients, is about 1,500 parts per million, nearly four times higher than today. Greenhouse growers inject carbon-dioxide to increase yields. Farms and forests will produce more if carbon-dioxide keeps rising.

We have no proof increased carbon dioxide is responsible for the earth’s slight warming over the past 300 years. There has been no significant warming for 18 years while we have emitted 25 per cent of all the carbon dioxide ever emitted. Carbon dioxide is vital for life on Earth and plants would like more of it. Which should we emphasize to our children?

[NewLiberty]

Just had some limit buy orders for GBTC hit in my IRA. God help me I now own* my first Bitcoin through a 3rd party intermediary I have to trust (* own as in have a legal claim to, but lack possession and thus lack true ownership).

The premium has come down a lot, my purchase was only ~$35 over coinbase's spot price. What's strange is my buy is below the day's low being reported...

Please don't f me Barry.

I'm right there with you.
401K funds without much other options that have a US CUSIP.

If/when the Winklevoss COIN materializes, the premium should normalize toward (or below) the actual bitcoin prices with the onset of competition, and shorting.

The question though... what will the bitcoin price be by then?  Who knows how long that will take.

[NewLiberty]

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34220013/

Thanks for this.
We can be conquered by our divisions, yet enhanced by friendly competition.
So long as both developments remain open source it is a win, but Bitcoin is still a tiny thing, for all its resilience, for all its promise.

There is overmuch vitriol.

For the record, I'm not entirely pleased with any of the proposals but most favor the BIP100 currently, if only for the notion that it divests the developers of the central decision making over the issue.
It would be a positive way to end the argument and get back to building.

[tvbcof]

The reason humans can't impact the CLIMATE with CO2 is because our release of CO2 is miniscule in comparison to the CO2 absorbed and released by for example the oceans due to changes in the sea temperature due to the Sun.

Complete Bullshit. That is the natural carbon circulation. Taking carbon out of the ground and transport it into the atmosphere and the ocean means to enrich the atmosphere and the ocean with additional carbon. Every child understands it.

Even a child can understand that Santa came down the chimney, ate the cookies, drank the milk, and dropped off a load of presents.

CO2 is a trace gas in our atmosphere.  Currently around 400 ppmv or 0.04%.

Combustion of fossil fuels accounts for about 5% or so of the total release of CO2 into the atmosphere per year.  Natural processes release and absorb many times that per year.

Here's a concept that 'even a child can understand.' 

- He wasn't driving drunk, he just had a trace of blood alcohol; 800 ppm (0.08%) is the limit in all 50 US states, and limits are lower in most other countries).

- Don't worry about your iron deficiency, iron is only 4.4 ppm of your body's atoms (Sterner and Eiser, 2002).

- Ireland isn't important; it's only 660 ppm (0.066%) of the world population.

- That ibuprofen pill can't do you any good; it's only 3 ppm of your body weight (200 mg in 60 kg person).

- The Earth is insignificant, it's only 3 ppm of the mass of the solar system.

- Your children can drink that water, it only contains a trace of arsenic (0.01 ppm is the WHO and US EPA limit).

- Ozone is only a trace gas: 0.1 ppm

You missed the actual argument here:  The change in CO2 concentrations over the last several hundred years is actually quite startling.  It's absolutely something worth study very well could be something to freak out about.  Again, you guys are fucking up any realistic possibility of doing decent work on the issue by blatant politicization of it.

Here's the funniest thing I've read in a long time:  The idea that anesthesia gasses from the operating room are powerful greenhouse gasses and contributing to global warming.  This is true, BTW.  The concentrations of these gasses identified were iirc about 0.3 parts per trillion.  It is almost certainly true that it will cause extra warming by perhaps 0.00000003 degrees C.  The amazing thing is that this shocking story induced a response in people who are bright enough to have obtained a medical degree:

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/04/07/3643995/anesthesia-gases-contribute-to-climate-change/

I'm pretty sure this story was a psy-op test to see how stupid people could possibly be.  A follow-up to the experiment to try to convince people that medicine passes right through people into the sewage system and turns male fish into females or whatever.  That was a remarkable success BTW.  Nobody that I know even raised their eyebrows.  In other news, the Federal govt is giving $500,000,000 in grants and loans to upgrade Sacramento's sewage treatment facilities.

[Adrian-x]

Just had some limit buy orders for GBTC hit in my IRA. God help me I now own* my first Bitcoin through a 3rd party intermediary I have to trust (* own as in have a legal claim to, but lack possession and thus lack true ownership).

The premium has come down a lot, my purchase was only ~$35 over coinbase's spot price. What's strange is my buy is below the day's low being reported...

Please don't f me Barry.

I'm right there with you.
401K funds without much other options that have a US CUSIP.

If/when the Winklevoss COIN materializes, the premium should normalize toward (or below) the actual bitcoin prices with the onset of competition, and shorting.

The question though... what will the bitcoin price be by then?  Who knows how long that will take.

Could it be that now the Bit license is settled that COIN ETF is moving forward, and there is some "front running"  going on, new money cumming in, in anticipation of the news?  
good thing it's taking so long, otherwise I would have bought when Bitcoin was $600.

[Zarathustra]

Combustion of fossil fuels accounts for about 5% or so of the total release of CO2 into the atmosphere per year.  Natural processes release and absorb many times that per year.

This is one of the dumbest 'arguments' of the anthropocentric truthers and bible throwers.

The natural process is a carbon circulation. Combustion of fossil fuels takes carbon out of the ground and transfers it into the ocean and the atmosphere.

It is not a circulation but a pump which over time slowly puts more and more carbon into the ground from out of the air. This is why the long term carbon graphs show carbon as constantly decreasing at a steady rate over millions of years.

No, not constantly decreasing. Cyclically decreasing. 150 Million years ago the concentration has been much higher than 300 Million years ago.
Anthropogenic experiments in changing the composition of the atmosphere in record time are anyway an idiocy. Man made, shock-like changes in the atmosphere determine shock-like reactions of flora and fauna.

[gijoes]

If/when the Winklevoss COIN materializes, the premium should normalize toward (or below) the actual bitcoin prices with the onset of competition, and shorting.

The question though... what will the bitcoin price be by then?  Who knows how long that will take.

It's interesting that Nasdaq OMX ETN (XBT) does not have any premium, and it's trading right at Bitstamp rate. Certainly, it doesn't have CUSIP, so not suitable for 401K. However, it can be bought in US (Interactive Brokers: COINXBT)... So competition in the space is heating up.