Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

Who controls bitcoin?

If I didn't know better,  I'd think he was talking about SC's.

He made a technical error in the article; a low hashrate of a fork wouldn't extend the time between blocks. It only would make them less secure.

[1713991504]

1713991504

[cypherdoc]

Who controls bitcoin?

Coinbase, BitStamp, and Blockchain.info upgrade. These nodes provide a lot of the infrastructure for Bitcoin, so if they do not upgrade, Bitcoin New will be a lot less useful. However, these nodes are in it for profit, so they will tend to go where the money is. They cannot necessarily afford to wield the influence they might have at the risk of short-term losses.

He's totally wrong about that. All three of those are startup companies that exist and are funded in order to achieve a large future payoff, generally at the explicit cost of short term losses. They will do what they feel provides the best long term payoff. Avoiding short term losses is relatively to entirely unimportant to them.

That still may not be the choice of fork that he or you or I would prefer however.

right.  small start ups can also be investors. 

altho generally, i think he's right.  the bigger they get, the more they are beholden to other shorter term investors in the company, to payrolls, to fixed and variable expenses, and then to IPO's and being public. 

[tabnloz]

Anyone in greece with money should be loading up on physical euro gold silver bitcoins.  Bitcoins because they are easily hidden.  In today's world without bank secrecy presumably greek govt could insist that foreign banks divulge its citizens holdings.  Tax revenue is down; looks like ppl are deferring debt payments in favor of holding.

One of the only things that Syriza & EC agree on is that tax evasion by wealthy Greeks needs to be addressed. Not sure if these evaders (all but stated as being he oligarks of greek society) would use bitcoin to 'transfer' their wealth out of traditional areas, but they could. For the regular citizens, its could be a hedge, ironically, against volatility / uncertainty.

[smooth]

Who controls bitcoin?

Coinbase, BitStamp, and Blockchain.info upgrade. These nodes provide a lot of the infrastructure for Bitcoin, so if they do not upgrade, Bitcoin New will be a lot less useful. However, these nodes are in it for profit, so they will tend to go where the money is. They cannot necessarily afford to wield the influence they might have at the risk of short-term losses.

He's totally wrong about that. All three of those are startup companies that exist and are funded in order to achieve a large future payoff, generally at the explicit cost of short term losses. They will do what they feel provides the best long term payoff. Avoiding short term losses is relatively to entirely unimportant to them.

That still may not be the choice of fork that he or you or I would prefer however.

right.  small start ups can also be investors. 

altho generally, i think he's right.  the bigger they get, the more they are beholden to other shorter term investors in the company, to payrolls, to fixed and variable expenses, and then to IPO's and being public. 

The recent Coinbase funding round was at a valuation of $400 million. There is likely at least a factor of 10 from that to where they want to be before cashing out. (Of course if things go poorly they may cash out lower or not at all.) The other companies on his list are probably valued lower.

They won't sacrifice, or even jeopardize, the longer term potential for a level of meaningful success that would make a difference to a VC portfolio to protect the tiny revenues they are getting now from transaction fees. (Again, unless they give up on the longer term potential and are looking to recover something.) Although they haven't disclosed numbers, I doubt the current transaction fees come close to supporting even the current valuation. In a sense there is nothing in way of current revenues to protect.

Long shot VC backing of companies like Coinbase is a sort of leveraged play on BTC itself. They can't really succeed without BTC going much higher than 4 billion USD total cap. So I think he's wrong in considering them distinct from investors. His whole entrepreneurs vs. investors thread makes this mistake.

[thezerg]

While this still represents a small quantity of coins I think it is important bc I believe that these are become very low velocity coins -- that is buyer would obly pay the premium and the inconvenience of face2face if he/she is holding.

[cypherdoc]

If business leaders hope to maintain broad public support for business, they must acknowledge that the purpose of the corporation is not to enrich the few, but to benefit the many. Once America’s CEOs refocus on growing their companies rather than growing their share prices, shareholder value will take care of itself and all Americans will share in the benefits of a renewed era of economic growth.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/kill-stock-buyback-to-save-the-american-economy/385259/

[sidhujag]

If business leaders hope to maintain broad public support for business, they must acknowledge that the purpose of the corporation is not to enrich the few, but to benefit the many. Once America’s CEOs refocus on growing their companies rather than growing their share prices, shareholder value will take care of itself and all Americans will share in the benefits of a renewed era of economic growth.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/kill-stock-buyback-to-save-the-american-economy/385259/

Greed trumps all.. as this emotion is engrained we are not smart enough as a species to understand that we win as a team (something that adam smith taught us).. however with some structure (blockchain) we may be forced to see the light.. maybe satoshi was fate to teach us before our own demise... the last growth after the industrial revolution that averted disaster was the internet.. so to avert a full on depression we need the next wave of technology to carry us forward.. if its not the blockchain i dont know what it is..

[ssmc2]

http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/

[sidhujag]

http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/

Im gonna give that to a coworker who is a conspiracy theorist yet pessimistic about bitcoin.. He always asks who controls bitcoin and never satsified as a fork can cause a large loss to his investment.. Thus labels it a ponzi scheme aimed at luring in small fish

[Melbustus]

Who controls bitcoin?

Coinbase, BitStamp, and Blockchain.info upgrade. These nodes provide a lot of the infrastructure for Bitcoin, so if they do not upgrade, Bitcoin New will be a lot less useful. However, these nodes are in it for profit, so they will tend to go where the money is. They cannot necessarily afford to wield the influence they might have at the risk of short-term losses.

He's totally wrong about that. All three of those are startup companies that exist and are funded in order to achieve a large future payoff, generally at the explicit cost of short term losses. They will do what they feel provides the best long term payoff. Avoiding short term losses is relatively to entirely unimportant to them.

That still may not be the choice of fork that he or you or I would prefer however.

right.  small start ups can also be investors.  

altho generally, i think he's right.  the bigger they get, the more they are beholden to other shorter term investors in the company, to payrolls, to fixed and variable expenses, and then to IPO's and being public.  

The recent Coinbase funding round was at a valuation of $400 million. There is likely at least a factor of 10 from that to where they want to be before cashing out. (Of course if things go poorly they may cash out lower or not at all.) The other companies on his list are probably valued lower.

They won't sacrifice, or even jeopardize, the longer term potential for a level of meaningful success that would make a difference to a VC portfolio to protect the tiny revenues they are getting now from transaction fees. (Again, unless they give up on the longer term potential and are looking to recover something.) Although they haven't disclosed numbers, I doubt the current transaction fees come close to supporting even the current valuation. In a sense there is nothing in way of current revenues to protect.

Long shot VC backing of companies like Coinbase is a sort of leveraged play on BTC itself. They can't really succeed without BTC going much higher than 4 billion USD total cap. So I think he's wrong in considering them distinct from investors. His whole entrepreneurs vs. investors thread makes this mistake.

+1


And more generally, I think a lot of people make a misjudgment in assuming that actors in the bitcoin ecosystem will behave with only very short-term focus. Tim Swanson (@ofnumbers) is particularly bad about taking these absurdly narrow views and spitting out blog posts full of "analysis". Unfortunately his analysis is often not particularly useful because his assumptions are broken.

[Patel]

Who controls bitcoin?

He is biased on this statement: "Therefore, Bitcoin is not likely to be upgraded in ways which make it easier to regulate because that would decrease the value of the coins. Bitcoin might be upgraded in ways that make it more anonymous because a more anonymous coin would likely be more valuable."

Some would argue that regulation would increase value of coins, and anonymity would decrease value of coins. If this happened, the state would actually try to crush Bitcoin, and institutional money would be rushing to get out.

[brg444]

The HSBC story is fantastic  Shows once again double standard toward Bitcoins from regulators not even able to police traditional institutions

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/feb/08/hsbc-files-expose-swiss-bank-clients-dodge-taxes-hide-millions

[sidhujag]

Who controls bitcoin?

He is biased on this statement: "Therefore, Bitcoin is not likely to be upgraded in ways which make it easier to regulate because that would decrease the value of the coins. Bitcoin might be upgraded in ways that make it more anonymous because a more anonymous coin would likely be more valuable."

Some would argue that regulation would increase value of coins, and anonymity would decrease value of coins. If this happened, the state would actually try to crush Bitcoin, and institutional money would be rushing to get out.

Either way it needs regulation or the state can say we will impose harsh penalty to anyone accepting bitcoin blah blah.. Making it underground. With proper regulation incentives are there for politicians to get in now.. Buy before laws change and make money.. Its greed again and wont change. The other side is once regulated we play by their rules again and they may change just like that so we gave up annonymity for nothing...

[hdbuck]

5 Reasons To Buy Gold & Silver In 2015: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-08/guest-post-5-reasons-buy-gold-silver-2015



this chart oddly reminds me Bitcoin's diff+price chart  

[sickpig]

He made a technical error in the article; a low hashrate of a fork wouldn't extend the time between blocks. It only would make them less secure.

really? I would had thought it would be the case at least until the next diff re-target, no?

[600watt]

5 Reasons To Buy Gold & Silver In 2015: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-08/guest-post-5-reasons-buy-gold-silver-2015



this chart oddly reminds me Bitcoin's diff+price chart  

lol, gold looks like btc in 2013...   did china ban gold ?   

[Morbid]

[lunarboy]

Europe really is hotting up these days. Greece could end up being the new Lehman Brothers.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-31300992

Greek bank shares fall sharply as fears over exit grow

one word ...  Contagion

[justusranvier]

Tim Swanson (@ofnumbers) is particularly bad about taking these absurdly narrow views and spitting out blog posts full of "analysis".

You misspelled "concern trolling".

[justusranvier]

http://bitcoinism.liberty.me/2015/02/09/economic-fallacies-and-the-block-size-limit-part-2-price-discovery/