Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[World]

in the words of Chamath Palihapitiya, "this thing is gonna rip!"

that's almost as good as some of my memes  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nUB1LfUzLI

I love this guy.

Thank you molecular

It was a very good interview.Here is the full video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NK1HC9nvwg

[1713490480]

1713490480

[1713490480]

1713490480

[1713490480]

1713490480

[1713490480]

1713490480

[bitcodo]

We used to use Deutschland Marks and Swiss Franc against our Dinar. Any of you buying Francs or any of the scandinavian Kronen?

[tvbcof]

While I agree with out in principle, people would start starving in a matter of days while a private supply system and transportation chain would take probably years to develop.
...

I feel like that I am reading some Marxism textbooks, where capitalists are supposed to pour their milk stock into river when nobody is buying them, right?

It may or may not have been clear, but I don't see a command economy being a durable or desirable thing.  The communists have spend a century demonstrating why, and have done a smashing job of it.  I would be a temporary solution when the options are:

 - millions of people dead in the street and cities burnt to rubble.

 vs.

 - a temporary stop-gap measure occurring simultaneously with every effort made to jump-start a functional market economy.

Again, the key thing to me is that there is a robust and credible mechanism to ensure that said command economy lasts no longer than it is supported by a plurality of sane people.

Probably my single biggest complaints against Libertarian philosophy (and various others including most of the extremist religious groups) is the adherence and faith they have in some absolutist belief.  If one is unable or unwilling to entertain the notion of compromise and 'triage', then one lacks the flexibility to deal with real world problems effectively.  That is one of the main reasons I have close to zero confidence in anything espoused by my Libertarian brothers when it comes to problem solving.

[thezerg]

Ahh gold... investors keep telling yourselves "but diversify"!  Keep imagining Armageddon.  You may feel a bit better...

the silverbox update (comparison from the beginning of this thread, March 13th, 2012, gold=1690, nasdaq=3055, Bitcoin=5.4):
Bitcoin is 150.53 (142.44 btcChina in USD).  Gold is 1272.00.  Nasdaq is 3815.00
Bitcoin: 2687.59% (2537.78%)
Gold:    -24.73%
Nasdaq:  24.88%
Gold Diff:  3604% advantage Bitcoin
Nasdaq Diff:  2132% advantage Bitcoin

[tvbcof]

Ahh gold... investors keep telling yourselves "but diversify"!  Keep imagining Armageddon.  You may feel a bit better...

the silverbox update (comparison from the beginning of this thread, March 13th, 2012, gold=1690, nasdaq=3055, Bitcoin=5.4):
Bitcoin is 150.53 (142.44 btcChina in USD).  Gold is 1272.00.  Nasdaq is 3815.00
Bitcoin: 2687.59% (2537.78%)
Gold:    -24.73%
Nasdaq:  24.88%
Gold Diff:  3604% advantage Bitcoin
Nasdaq Diff:  2132% advantage Bitcoin

For my part, I diversified out of gold and silver which I'd gotten into in 2002-ish.  That is a big part of the reason I got into Bitcoin in fact.  It would take a lot more grief for me to 'feel bad' and nothing would make me draw down on that side of the books except need for fiat liquidity.  And then, as I say, only when I've re-balanced to not be quite so heavy in BTC and to take some more profits from that speculation.

The BTC speculation has been very good to me, but not near what I anticipate as possible.  If Bitcoin actually does take off someday it won't really matter than much whether I have the same number of BTC I have now or half as many.  I expect that I'd be so rich that it would not matter a lot.  And, of course, there is always the risk that a different crypto-currency will usurp Bitcoin, or the government will find a formula which for all intents and purposes renders it unusable (by me), or that some unexpected exploit damages it.  All reasons to factor into the equation when deciding how to capitalize.

[oakpacific]

While I agree with out in principle, people would start starving in a matter of days while a private supply system and transportation chain would take probably years to develop.
...

I feel like that I am reading some Marxism textbooks, where capitalists are supposed to pour their milk stock into river when nobody is buying them, right?

It may or may not have been clear, but I don't see a command economy being a durable or desirable thing.  The communists have spend a century demonstrating why, and have done a smashing job of it.  I would be a temporary solution when the options are:

 - millions of people dead in the street and cities burnt to rubble.

 vs.

 - a temporary stop-gap measure occurring simultaneously with every effort made to jump-start a functional market economy.

Again, the key thing to me is that there is a robust and credible mechanism to ensure that said command economy lasts no longer than it is supported by a plurality of sane people.

Probably my single biggest complaints against Libertarian philosophy (and various others including most of the extremist religious groups) is the adherence and faith they have in some absolutist belief.  If one is unable or unwilling to entertain the notion of compromise and 'triage', then one lacks the flexibility to deal with real world problems effectively.  That is one of the main reasons I have close to zero confidence in anything espoused by my Libertarian brothers when it comes to problem solving.

I do not believe the corporations controlling large tracts of farmland, would refuse to seize control of the land and the agricultural products, there are many sensible reasons to do just the opposite(good reputation as people tend to have long memories when it comes to things like this, arrangement for a charity branch can also be made for tax purposes), not to say that when they need to sell significantly under the cost, there is not much money to be made anyway, leasing(for free) land to homeless farmers can not do much damage to them, and yeah, laws are changeable.

[miscreanity]

If there are no catastrophic events, the "Internet kill switch" will be a moot issue within three years. There may still be the potential for continental separation, but methods exist for communication even at transoceanic distances without relying on cables or satellites. With geographically diversified mining resources, Bitcoin will be effectively unbreakable at that point.

That is when Bitcoin will start truly eroding gold's position as a monetary asset, after fiat currencies have been proven bettered by crypto.

[cypherdoc]

If there are no catastrophic events, the "Internet kill switch" will be a moot issue within three years. There may still be the potential for continental separation, but methods exist for communication even at transoceanic distances without relying on cables or satellites. With geographically diversified mining resources, Bitcoin will be effectively unbreakable at that point.

That is when Bitcoin will start truly eroding gold's position as a monetary asset, after fiat currencies have been proven bettered by crypto.

what ever happened to your Meshnet project?

[NewLiberty]

Bitcoin will be effectively unbreakable at that point.

That would be quite nice, how and when do you imagine this will occur?  Or is this unbreakablility only with regard to network outages and not to the array of other existential threats to the protocol?

[just_me]

Gold might continue to be popular

[Spaceman_Spiff]

The internet hasn't been around all that long.
Long distance communication, and radio and television haven't been around that long either.
I believe these are just short term events on the earth that will come to an end someday.
Mankind may in fact, end up living like cave-dwellers some day, and forget all about all these inventions, as though
they never even existed.
And bitcoin? Bitcoin won't matter either.
But for a short time, perhaps while we are alive today.
But Gold has been around for a long time, and I think it will remain popular.

At some point in time, the wheel hadn't been around for long either. 

PS: And I bet there were a lot of people back then claiming that it was a fad, because there weren't enough roads on which it could be used (not that you are saying a similar thing now).

[miscreanity]

what ever happened to your Meshnet project?

It's developing rapidly, and will provide Bitcoin services in the near future. One sticking point is wallets - they still need to mature further before mass usage is realistically feasible.

[cypherdoc]

what ever happened to your Meshnet project?

It's developing rapidly, and will provide Bitcoin services in the near future. One sticking point is wallets - they still need to mature further before mass usage is realistically feasible.

Well done. Keep up the good work on a necessary and worthwhile project.

[cypherdoc]

Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[miscreanity]

That would be quite nice, how and when do you imagine this will occur?  Or is this unbreakablility only with regard to network outages and not to the array of other existential threats to the protocol?

Yes, network connectivity with no catastrophic events, including breakage of the crypto through any means. That would be solved by other methods, but there is enough flexibility to accommodate rapid updates.

Widespread proliferation expected within three years, regardless of which project takes the lead; who builds out doesn't matter, only that it happens. With numerous competing projects, some will undoubtedly be more prominent than others in certain areas.

[miscreanity]

Well done. Keep up the good work on a necessary and worthwhile project.

Absolutely. When I can say more than that it's a big project, I will.

[oakpacific]

If there are no catastrophic events, the "Internet kill switch" will be a moot issue within three years. There may still be the potential for continental separation, but methods exist for communication even at transoceanic distances without relying on cables or satellites. With geographically diversified mining resources, Bitcoin will be effectively unbreakable at that point.

That is when Bitcoin will start truly eroding gold's position as a monetary asset, after fiat currencies have been proven bettered by crypto.

Now you have brought up an interesting problem: can someone(e.g., superpowerful alphabet agencies) actually manage to exert control on the whole network by manipulating what's being sent through the cables? Maybe when we get all super-rich with bitcoins we need to construct our own submarine fiber systems, secured by quantum cryptography which is resistant to both sabotage and quantum computing.

[cypherdoc]

If there are no catastrophic events, the "Internet kill switch" will be a moot issue within three years. There may still be the potential for continental separation, but methods exist for communication even at transoceanic distances without relying on cables or satellites. With geographically diversified mining resources, Bitcoin will be effectively unbreakable at that point.

That is when Bitcoin will start truly eroding gold's position as a monetary asset, after fiat currencies have been proven bettered by crypto.

Now you have brought up an interesting problem: can someone(e.g., superpowerful alphabet agencies) actually manage to exert control on the whole network by manipulating what's being sent through the cables? Maybe when we get all super-rich with bitcoins we need to construct our own submarine fiber systems, secured by quantum cryptography which is resistant to both sabotage and quantum computing.

Well that's the thing. He's talking about radio waves.

Not sure how manipulable those are.

[oakpacific]

If there are no catastrophic events, the "Internet kill switch" will be a moot issue within three years. There may still be the potential for continental separation, but methods exist for communication even at transoceanic distances without relying on cables or satellites. With geographically diversified mining resources, Bitcoin will be effectively unbreakable at that point.

That is when Bitcoin will start truly eroding gold's position as a monetary asset, after fiat currencies have been proven bettered by crypto.

Now you have brought up an interesting problem: can someone(e.g., superpowerful alphabet agencies) actually manage to exert control on the whole network by manipulating what's being sent through the cables? Maybe when we get all super-rich with bitcoins we need to construct our own submarine fiber systems, secured by quantum cryptography which is resistant to both sabotage and quantum computing.

Well that's the thing. He's talking about radio waves.

Not sure how manipulable those are.

Yeah, I was thinking that building radio stations would be the more costing-save solution, compared with cables, assuming neutrinos remain unusable by then.

[NewLiberty]

That would be quite nice, how and when do you imagine this will occur?  Or is this unbreakablility only with regard to network outages and not to the array of other existential threats to the protocol?

Yes, network connectivity with no catastrophic events, including breakage of the crypto through any means. That would be solved by other methods, but there is enough flexibility to accommodate rapid updates.

Widespread proliferation expected within three years, regardless of which project takes the lead; who builds out doesn't matter, only that it happens. With numerous competing projects, some will undoubtedly be more prominent than others in certain areas.

Nice, at that point the existential threat scenarios may be limited to things like a major government using imminent domain over a leading chip fab company (Intel/TI/Samsung) and making them produce copious 14nm ASICs for use in a government takeover of the mining, smaller efforts would be doomed.  This is so unlikely and would expose too much weakness in the perception of the world that I don't see it as meaningful.