Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[smoothie]

News flash:  What cypherdoc likes or does not like has just about exactly zero impact on that will happen.

You mean his call for this being the "finale" bull run of gold might be complete shit?  Gasp!  I'll let China know right away.

you sound scared.

anyone who names themselves "trader" must have a pretty high view of oneself and their "trades.  let's test that out:

i propose a 1BTC bet that sometime in the next year, Bitcoin will catch gold (hence outperform) and go to parity once again in USD terms as it did in November.  if it does, i win, if it doesn't, you win.  we can each put 1BTC in escrow, hopefully in a smart contract on the blockchain as i've been wanting to test that out.  we can have someone like Smoothie or Melbustus act as the escrow agent who can sign the winnings over to one of us if they are agreeable.

capiche?

Sure, I'd act as an escrow agent to that (3rd sig on a blockchain contract or just normal escrow). Always love a good btc/gold bet. Let's agree beforehand what price-quote sources both parties consider valid.

Oops. If you end up escrowing the bet then that's awesome as well. I love a good bet like this.

[1714110849]

1714110849

[1714110849]

1714110849

[1714110849]

1714110849

[1714110849]

1714110849

[ErisDiscordia]

To be honest, I think Doge has more viability long-run than litecoin (as an interesting experiment in viral marketing).

And here I thought I might be the only person in the world thinking this... 

[cypherdoc]

well, there you have it:

Japan lays down the Bitcoin law: Treat it like gold

if the Japanese say so, then it is.

[World]

SecondMarket has already been looking at ways to solve this volatility problem on its planned exchange by slowing down the trading of Bitcoin. "We are actually looking to the gold, FOREX, and Libor models, specifically the gold spot-pricing process," Silbert said. "Instead of having a 24-7 market, the price would be set once, twice, or four times a day, via a more traditional sealed bid or Dutch auction... If we go this route, intraday volatility is eliminated, but day-to-day volatility will remain the same."

Read more: http://www.minyanville.com/trading-and-investing/currencies/articles/After-Board-Approval-SecondMarket-Moves-Forward/3/5/2014/id/54033

[miscreanity]

Anyone notice how quiet this thread got while gold was rising?

it's a matter of what's going to run up the fastest and the furthest with time.

Regarding subsequent discussion, at times I fear the noose may be Bitcoin.

A handful of power players is all that's needed to realize the impossibility of controlling Bitcoin, and that the best course of action is therefore to own the lion's share. Silk Road and Gox confiscations measure up to this nicely.

With more being shunted through major exchanges, coloring coins for legal purposes is a foregone conclusion -- we can't be so naive as to think it is an issue of whether it will happen.

As for bank-supported exchanges, there is the strong desire to remain as gatekeepers by leveraging Bitcoin while trading meatspace interactions. In other words: track everything.

Multisig, blind transactions, DEXes, etc. These things cannot come soon enough.

i propose a 1BTC bet that sometime in the next year, Bitcoin will catch gold (hence outperform) and go to parity once again in USD terms as it did in November.  if it does, i win, if it doesn't, you win.  we can each put 1BTC in escrow, hopefully in a smart contract on the blockchain as i've been wanting to test that out.  we can have someone like Smoothie or Melbustus act as the escrow agent who can sign the winnings over to one of us if they are agreeable.

Sure, I'd act as an escrow agent to that (3rd sig on a blockchain contract or just normal escrow). Always love a good btc/gold bet. Let's agree beforehand what price-quote sources both parties consider valid.

Try Counterparty

[User705]

well, there you have it:

Japan lays down the Bitcoin law: Treat it like gold

if the Japanese say so, then it is.

It's funny watching gov grasping at trying to define new revolutionary tech by applying old metrics.  It's like trying to tax email by making people buy a stamp for every email.  Good luck with that.  LOL

[tvbcof]

Regarding subsequent discussion, at times I fear the noose may be Bitcoin.

A handful of power players is all that's needed to realize the impossibility of controlling Bitcoin, and that the best course of action is therefore to own the lion's share. Silk Road and Gox confiscations measure up to this nicely.

Brings back an old memory:

  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=23443.msg295024#msg295024

With more being shunted through major exchanges, coloring coins for legal purposes is a foregone conclusion -- we can't be so naive as to think it is an issue of whether it will happen.
...

I don't see the exchanges as being as much of a problem as the retailers who are in a position to be pressured to honor tainting.  I do expect that even relatively small  loss of function of tainted coins (e.g., not usable at TigerDirect) will have a significant negative impact on the values that these dirty coins can command.  That will have a significant impact on the exchanges without the authorities even bothering to lift a finger.

It is true that the exchanges are a place to pin individual identities to specific addresses though.  Once tainting is in place, however, I've little doubt that most people will self-register (if the alternative is to see one's coins tainted.)  I certainly will.

The main question in my mind is what would be the impact on clean coins and what kinds of timings are we looking at for these impacts.  I could imagine clean coins being in some demand for a time.  Hope so because I'll make a relatively big move if it happens.

Unlike many participants in this forum I do not expect a sharp and immediate collapse of Bitcoin if/when tainting is rolled in.  Tainting may seem like an anathema to many of us, but to probably a majority of folks on the street it will probably be seen as a good thing.  Thwarting crime, terrorism, etc.  With a little of the Bitcoin Foundation marketing magic it will be even more the case.

[marcus_of_augustus]

well, there you have it:

Japan lays down the Bitcoin law: Treat it like gold

if the Japanese say so, then it is.

It's funny watching gov grasping at trying to define new revolutionary tech by applying old metrics.  It's like trying to tax email by making people buy a stamp for every email.  Good luck with that.  LOL

Nice analogy ... 

I cant wait to see them try AML/KYC with zerocoin ... gonna be best helping of go fuck yourself this century to date.

[User705]

Regarding subsequent discussion, at times I fear the noose may be Bitcoin.

A handful of power players is all that's needed to realize the impossibility of controlling Bitcoin, and that the best course of action is therefore to own the lion's share. Silk Road and Gox confiscations measure up to this nicely.

Brings back an old memory:

  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=23443.msg295024#msg295024

With more being shunted through major exchanges, coloring coins for legal purposes is a foregone conclusion -- we can't be so naive as to think it is an issue of whether it will happen.
...

I don't see the exchanges as being as much of a problem as the retailers who are in a position to be pressured to honor tainting.  I do expect that even relatively small  loss of function of tainted coins (e.g., not usable at TigerDirect) will have a significant negative impact on the values that these dirty coins can command.  That will have a significant impact on the exchanges without the authorities even bothering to lift a finger.

It is true that the exchanges are a place to pin individual identities to specific addresses though.  Once tainting is in place, however, I've little doubt that most people will self-register (if the alternative is to see one's coins tainted.)  I certainly will.

The main question in my mind is what would be the impact on clean coins and what kinds of timings are we looking at for these impacts.  I could imagine clean coins being in some demand for a time.  Hope so because I'll make a relatively big move if it happens.

Unlike many participants in this forum I do not expect a sharp and immediate collapse of Bitcoin if/when tainting is rolled in.  Tainting may seem like an anathema to many of us, but to probably a majority of folks on the street it will probably be seen as a good thing.  Thwarting crime, terrorism, etc.  With a little of the Bitcoin Foundation marketing magic it will be even more the case.

Keep in mind that spreading taint is easy.  Someone who's coins are "tainted" can send dust to hundreds or thousands of random wallets.  It would be hard for the average consumer after that to spend but exclude the taint if not impossible.

[tvbcof]

Keep in mind that spreading taint is easy.  Someone who's coins are "tainted" can send dust to hundreds or thousands of random wallets.  It would be hard for the average consumer after that to spend but exclude the taint if not impossible.

I don't see that as a problem.

For one thing, being tainted with a piece of dust would make one's otherwise clean coins 0.000001% tainted (for example.)  For all intents and purpose they are still pure...line 99.999 gold to bring things OT

For two, it ought to be possible to selectively gather transactions and spend highly tainted inputs in a special spend with a little software development and thus clean up a wallet.  I'd envision services who would buy tainted BTC for a discount and strip out the clean stuff and sell the dirty stuff to whoever would buy it.  In fact the tainting authority themselves might go ahead and remove taint if the coins are submitted to them.  For a fee of course.  Coin Validation will be a hugely lucrative business for those who can get a government charter, and will give such businesses immense power in the ecosystem.

[BitOnyx]

15% drop is nothing new. Price of gold was always artificial in some way. It was global agreement to put price on this rather useless metal. When we look on growth of bitcoin transactions, meta currencies might have to do something about it

[BitcoinAshley]

The authorities in charge of deciding which coins get tainted... whose crime is worthy of a taint... what is considered a crime and in which jurisdiction (if I buy pot with bitcoins in Amsterdam and then the coins are sent to the US for an unrelated purchase or transfer, will they get tainted, thus screwing the innocent person who received them? If current government behavior is any indication - yes.)

Sooo many issues with tainting. The people who are like "Oh, taint wouldn't be so bad... those libertardian anarchist bitcoin culters need to lighten up, it might actually be good, you know, to stop terrorism, money laundering, theft" I want to see the looks on their faces after a taint program is actually attempted and we see the many instances of error, corruption, and outright fraud, as well as the general confusion resultant from trying to implement the laws of single multiple jurisdictions upon a global currency... I imagine it will be the same as the looks on Obama voters' faces as they slowly realize what he is actually doing in office... I'm not overdramatacizing, these are legitimate issues which the pro-tainters haven't even begun to address. Which countries' laws are we talking about here? Will taiwanese businesses be prevented from accepting coins which have been used to break Taiwanese laws, but what if they are sent to Kazakhstan or the US? Will the governments of those countries have a treaty with Taiwan that specifies adding taint to those coins that have broken laws in other countries that are not on the books in the US? Or what about if a Colorado citizen receives coins for pot in a store (legal by Colorado law) but then sends those coins to a relative in Florida - then the coins are tainted after the relative receives them. Then does the relative need to pay $500 for an appeals process for a coin transfer that was worth $400? The red tape will be hilarious.

Perhaps one will need to hire a lawyer or pay a large fee to appeal fraudulent taint? Then there is an unrealistic burden on low-income folks with lower transfer amounts. If I make $1000 a month and I receive a $200 transfer from a relative which happens to be tainted because of some jurisdictional technicality, I can't afford the $100 appeals fee! No I'm sure all of this will go smoothly without any problems or corruption ;-)

[cypherdoc]

The authorities in charge of deciding which coins get tainted... whose crime is worthy of a taint... what is considered a crime and in which jurisdiction (if I buy pot with bitcoins in Amsterdam and then the coins are sent to the US for an unrelated purchase or transfer, will they get tainted, thus screwing the innocent person who received them? If current government behavior is any indication - yes.)

Sooo many issues with tainting. The people who are like "Oh, taint wouldn't be so bad... those libertardian anarchist bitcoin culters need to lighten up, it might actually be good, you know, to stop terrorism, money laundering, theft" I want to see the looks on their faces after a taint program is actually attempted and we see the many instances of error, corruption, and outright fraud, as well as the general confusion resultant from trying to implement the laws of single multiple jurisdictions upon a global currency... I imagine it will be the same as the looks on Obama voters' faces as they slowly realize what he is actually doing in office... I'm not overdramatacizing, these are legitimate issues which the pro-tainters haven't even begun to address. Which countries' laws are we talking about here? Will taiwanese businesses be prevented from accepting coins which have been used to break Taiwanese laws, but what if they are sent to Kazakhstan or the US? Will the governments of those countries have a treaty with Taiwan that specifies adding taint to those coins that have broken laws in other countries that are not on the books in the US? Or what about if a Colorado citizen receives coins for pot in a store (legal by Colorado law) but then sends those coins to a relative in Florida - then the coins are tainted after the relative receives them. Then does the relative need to pay $500 for an appeals process for a coin transfer that was worth $400? The red tape will be hilarious.

Perhaps one will need to hire a lawyer or pay a large fee to appeal fraudulent taint? Then there is an unrealistic burden on low-income folks with lower transfer amounts. If I make $1000 a month and I receive a $200 transfer from a relative which happens to be tainted because of some jurisdictional technicality, I can't afford the $100 appeals fee! No I'm sure all of this will go smoothly without any problems or corruption ;-)

translation:  in aggregate, Bitcoin participants won't be able to afford validation; thus they will ignore it.

[tvbcof]

translation:  in aggregate, Bitcoin participants won't be able to afford validation; thus they will ignore it.

People who ignore coin taint will end up with mostly tainted coins, and will get very little for them if they wish to buy something from a 'licensed' vendor.

I suspect that the coin validation services will offer an API which will evaluate a compiled spend (collection of inputs) and produce a valuation.  Anyone will be able to use it for free and a wallet extension will do the grunt work.  Or alternately they will act as a broker and pass along the clean portion of the BTC to the receiving party.  If I'm receiving BTC I won't really care what the taint authority does with the tainted coins.  I'll only care that I end up with the agreed upon value in clean BTC.

I will be using coin validation if doing otherwise results in a significant loss or loss of utility of the coins in my wallet.  Probably you will as well when the rubber actually hits the road.

[Bagatell]

If I'm receiving BTC I won't really care what the taint authority does with the tainted coins. 

Congatulations. Startpage only has one link for "taint authority".

[jojo69]

good grief the FUD today...even this thread   

[tvbcof]

good grief the FUD today...even this thread   

One of my favorite quotes:

  "Doubt is the beginning of wisdom...and often it's end."

I forgot were I picked that one up.  I think maybe from this book which a friend of mine had kicking around:  http://johncholden.com/custom.html

[Carlton Banks]

I suspect that the coin validation services will offer an API which will evaluate a compiled spend (collection of inputs) and produce a valuation.  Anyone will be able to use it for free and a wallet extension will do the grunt work. 

Sure, CV racketeers will assess the taint for free, and charge you for the process. You're painting a fairly benevolent picture of what is actually a fairly trollish, abusive concept.

I will be using coin validation if doing otherwise results in a significant loss or loss of utility of the coins in my wallet.  Probably you will as well when the rubber actually hits the road.

If you do that, you stand to lose both value and utility.

Tell me something, what's the big argument against instituting the taint/validate scheme in the incumbent monetary system? The same risks apply, so why are we not consulting a list of tainted monetary units before we accept it, right now? There's nothing practical stopping that system from being developed (just assign all coins and digital transfers an identifier, like with paper bills and cryptocurrency). If anything, it could work better, being a closed system.

[tvbcof]

I suspect that the coin validation services will offer an API which will evaluate a compiled spend (collection of inputs) and produce a valuation.  Anyone will be able to use it for free and a wallet extension will do the grunt work. 

Sure, CV racketeers will assess the taint for free, and charge you for the process. You're painting a fairly benevolent picture of what is actually a fairly trollish, abusive concept.

In this day-n-age it is quite inexpensive to do a great amount of processing, particularly if one can leverage the principles of economies of scale.  I suspect that taint analysis will be able to do this quite effectively.

What is more difficult to come by is good individualize intelligence data.  That is why we see very valuable and useful services 'given away for free' by entities who run football field sized datacenters.  There is no 'free lunch' in this world and everyone knows that intuatively but it is relatively easy to ignore.

I don't doubt for a minute that many parties would be delighted to off-load the burdon of running the Bitcoin economy and do it for 'free'.  Nor do I doubt that a certain number of them could do it with ease even if if the block chain size were effectively unlimited.

I will be using coin validation if doing otherwise results in a significant loss or loss of utility of the coins in my wallet.  Probably you will as well when the rubber actually hits the road.

If you do that, you stand to lose both value and utility.

Not before I have made some bucks out of the deal.  This is exactly the same principle that drives 'the tragedy of the commons'.  In short, it works.  Doubt it if you dare.

Tell me something, what's the big argument against instituting the taint/validate scheme in the incumbent monetary system? The same risks apply, so why are we not consulting a list of tainted monetary units before we accept it, right now? There's nothing practical stopping that system from being developed (just assign all coins and digital transfers an identifier, like with paper bills and cryptocurrency). If anything, it could work better, being a closed system.

Political resistance and options.  I don't doubt that there are many who would like to do just that, and I suspect that there are schemes in the works to attempt it.  The trouble is that it is a somewhat thorny problem in that the harder one pushes, the stiffer the resistance.  And the resistance could spill over into other areas.  If it is ever attempted it would have to be during troubled times when the infrastructure to enforce it has a chance.

To be a little bit more positive vis-a-vis Bitcoin:  I suspect that my ideas for how to destroy Bitcoin would actually be highly effective.  But destroying Bitcoin at this juncture (and maybe forever) could very well be highly counterproductive if it is replaced by a stronger system which is very likely.  Thus, destroying Bitcoin might not be attempted.  If I put my 'evil strategist' hat on, my strategy would actually be to leave Bitcoin alone or even prop it up and try to damage the competition.

[Erdogan]

People who ignore coin taint will end up with mostly tainted coins, and will get very little for them if they wish to buy something from a 'licensed' vendor.

Have you considered what would happen if most people only wants the tainted coins, and refuse to receive the clean coins?