What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Bitcoins - anyone else mining? (1 Viewer)

Jojo the circus boy said:
Mob: You people that believe in bitcoins are so dumb it's Tulip 2.0, the Government won't stand for currency that isn't regulated.

Bitcoin-bugs: The backers of Bitcoin want regulation.

Mob: That's so dumb, why would anyone want bitcoins if they are regulated!
Dude, I realize you're standing on your soap-box screaming at the top of your lungs cheerleading Bitcoins, but your "opposition" isn't some galvanized force up in arms dying to suppress the upcoming revolution.Oh, and if Bitcoins are so decentralized and immune to all the ills of fiat currency, why does it need backers?
:potkettle: Yeah you are not standing on a soap box across the street...

the people making the most noise against bitcoin *cough* really are clueless about the technology and think just by using bitcoin their transactions are anonymous and untraceable by the government
You are hysterical in this thread. We aren't clueless and not up on technology, we are just amused at your cheerleading. You just keep posting misleading stuff trying to cheerlead bitcoins. First, posting something about someone suggesting it would be interesting for Facebook to do something and making it seem like there was a partnership. Then you post that you can buy anything on Amazon with bitcoins and that is complete BS. My analogy of oldshoes is 100% correct, because it is a buying service that takes bitcoins and they could take anything. LOL at your "who cares about returns, I never have to do that." Crazy old school me actually shops online, shocking huh? I am an Amazon prime member and I just returned something this week that was past the return date, but Amazon being awesome as always let me return it when I sent support and email about the issues I had. Lastly, you throw up the chart of bitcoin value as some sort of proof and then laugh it off when I throw up a very similar chart of a market crash that actually happened. Keep living in your bubble and ignore the possibility that it may crash.My last, last point is that the reason I am very skeptical is because everyone rah-rahing bitcoins in all your links are guys who have a vested interest in bitcoins. The Winklevosses own lots of bitcoins, the board members in your foundation include people who own businesses that depend on bitcoins. If you don't see any similarity to the owners of MLM schemes then you are ignoring the potential risks. Not saying it is a Ponzi scheme, but if you think the "founders" of bitcoins aren't going to cash in well if they take off is silly. Anyone posting anything negative riles you up so I don't see someone who is open to discussion, just a cheerleader. Happy mining.
You call it cheerleading, I call it pointing out ignorance and trying to educate the masses that are afraid of bitcoins. I never said there was a partnership with Facebook, but keep spewing that nonsense. If all you have access to is bitcoins yes you can buy anything you want on Amazon, that is true. I never said it couldn't crash, in fact I had asked what the odds that the value of the bitcoin market cap could surpass the market cap of the US money supply of the USD, but keep thinking those mean the same things :loco: However I will say you are learning, because in fact you did say it reminds you of a ponzi scheme, so even someone as thick skulled as yourself, if you get corrected enough times you finally see the light. Why should I care if someone owns more bitcoins than me, you make it sound like it is dumb to invest in gold because people own more of it than I do, you probably think gold is a ponzi sheme too. Have you learned what a ponzi scheme is yet and recognize it is impossible for bitcoins to be a ponzi scheme so drawing parallels to it is ignorant?

A few more "scary" links for you:World Money Supply vs. Industrial ProductionOne more since you are so fascinated with this "pattern"

a third...
:lmao: Wow, you really are just an ###. Thickskulled? You have no idea who I am and what I do, but keep thinking you are smarter than me.Saying it reminds me of a ponzi scheme <> me saying it is a ponzi scheme. Is it really that hard to admit that the founders/spokespeople of bitcoins will benefit the most from the market cap of bitcoins going up? Hmm, what happens in MLMs and Ponzi schemes? Gee, I think the first ones to develop it are the ones that actually make money off of it and the newbies are the ones left holding the bag. Did you look at the people running that foundation and did you notice that most own/are involved with businesses that would profit the most? Can you wrap your head around that one? Seems pretty simple to me.

I also still can't believe you are holding on to the Amazon paying with bitcoins thing. Pretty sure there are some bright people in this thread, including me, that are laughing at a buying service that accepts bitcoins as not being the same thing as Amazon actually accepting bitcoins at Amazon.com. Oh well, no sense arguing with someone like you. I get the concept, I thought (and still do think) that your links and cheerleading were misleading if you actually looked at the fine print.
Loooool you don't know who you're messin' with, jojo
 
A good interview from PC World with an engineer that just started working with Bitpay:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2039184/bitcoin-developer-talks-regulation-open-source-and-the-elusive-satoshi-nakamoto.html

It looks like the top shops will start to steal engineers from Google / Facebook / Microsoft / Yahoo.

It would pretty dumb for the U.S. government to try to extinguish Bitcoin (aside from the Prisoner's Dilemma that I already mentioned) since there are a number of businesses popping up garnering VC Capital and thus contributing to the (U.S.) economy by providing jobs and services. It would be like shutting down Google, eBay, or Facebook in its infancy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So we just ignored the feds action entirely? I'd say someone has an issue with seeing the writing on the wall.
We covered that on page 4, two days before you "broke" the news penguin.
So you covered and explained away a federal seizure and blithely run on with how this is the best thing since sliced bread? Guess I missed it, my bad.
Yes. It sounds like you are clearly on top of what the "federal seizure" was all about so you don't need anything explained to you. Try clicking on the interview I just posted since you are so well-informed on the topic to post about it a week after it happened. And when I say well-informed, I mean you are able to regurgitate whatever news reel you saw broadcast on CNN a week after it occurred.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A good interview from PC World with an engineer that just started working with Bitpay:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2039184/bitcoin-developer-talks-regulation-open-source-and-the-elusive-satoshi-nakamoto.html

It looks like the top shops will start to steal engineers from Google / Facebook / Microsoft / Yahoo.

It would pretty dumb for the U.S. government to try to extinguish Bitcoin (aside from the Prisoner's Dilemma that I already mentioned) since there are a number of businesses popping up garnering VC Capital and thus contributing to the (U.S.) economy by providing jobs and services. It would be like shutting down Google, eBay, or Facebook in its infancy.
If Bitcoin were to actually become successful, it would be a huge NEGATIVE impact to the US economy.

This is because the dollar being the world's reserve currency, we must net export dollars, or else there wouldn't be the growth necessary in the world's reserve currency for countries to continue using it as the world's reserve currency. In other words, if dollars became hard to come by (because we're not growing the base of dollars in circulation through out the world) countries would begin trading in other currencies that are not as hard to come by as the dollar.

Because of this, we run a trade deficit and cosnume more than we export. The net effect is more product comes in to the US than goes out SO THAT more dollars can go out into the world than come in. This is why many Americans are able to live the way they do. Nice large house. Two recent model cars. Vacations to Disneyworld. Etc, etc... Americans consume more than they produce so that the world can use the US dollar as the world's reserve currency.

Bitcoin's success would threaten the dollar, especially if Bitcoins success occurs within the US. The more US citizens begin to migrate to Bitcoin and migrate away from the dollar, the more other countries will be motivated to migrate away from the US dollar too. They already have plenty of reason to do this today without success of Bitcoin. In fact, that process has already started, and may be beyond the point where the US can do anything to stop it. But assuming it is not, success of Bitcoin ain't going to help at all.

To suggest that the government would be dumb to extinguish Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is birthing companies that will help the US economy is insane. If Bitcoin companies were to become the size of Google, eBay or Facebook, then half the S&P would crash, if not nearly all of it.

 
For Politician Spock who thinks Bitcoins is just a currency based on nothing:

http://www.whyisntbitcoinworthless.com/
I'll be sure to send that link to my senator and congressman, so they are informed as to why success of Bitcoin companies wouldn't kill the petrodollar system and the worlds reserve currency status of the dollar. Very informative stuff on there. It had to have been written by a doctor of macro economics.

 
A good interview from PC World with an engineer that just started working with Bitpay:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2039184/bitcoin-developer-talks-regulation-open-source-and-the-elusive-satoshi-nakamoto.html

It looks like the top shops will start to steal engineers from Google / Facebook / Microsoft / Yahoo.

It would pretty dumb for the U.S. government to try to extinguish Bitcoin (aside from the Prisoner's Dilemma that I already mentioned) since there are a number of businesses popping up garnering VC Capital and thus contributing to the (U.S.) economy by providing jobs and services. It would be like shutting down Google, eBay, or Facebook in its infancy.
If Bitcoin were to actually become successful, it would be a huge NEGATIVE impact to the US economy.

This is because the dollar being the world's reserve currency, we must net export dollars, or else there wouldn't be the growth necessary in the world's reserve currency for countries to continue using it as the world's reserve currency. In other words, if dollars became hard to come by (because we're not growing the base of dollars in circulation through out the world) countries would begin trading in other currencies that are not as hard to come by as the dollar.

Because of this, we run a trade deficit and cosnume more than we export. The net effect is more product comes in to the US than goes out SO THAT more dollars can go out into the world than come in. This is why many Americans are able to live the way they do. Nice large house. Two recent model cars. Vacations to Disneyworld. Etc, etc... Americans consume more than they produce so that the world can use the US dollar as the world's reserve currency.

Bitcoin's success would threaten the dollar, especially if Bitcoins success occurs within the US. The more US citizens begin to migrate to Bitcoin and migrate away from the dollar, the more other countries will be motivated to migrate away from the US dollar too. They already have plenty of reason to do this today without success of Bitcoin. In fact, that process has already started, and may be beyond the point where the US can do anything to stop it. But assuming it is not, success of Bitcoin ain't going to help at all.

To suggest that the government would be dumb to extinguish Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is birthing companies that will help the US economy is insane. If Bitcoin companies were to become the size of Google, eBay or Facebook, then half the S&P would crash, if not nearly all of it.
As you've already stated, this is already happening. If the U.S. does not recognize Bitcoin (it actually already has recognized it) then you are left with the Prisoner's Dilemma whereby when every other sizeable country increases usage of Bitcoin but the U.S. remains stubborn and creates legislation making it illegal to own (as you and others here are proposing) then the U.S. and its law-abiding citizens are left out in the cold. This isn't a U.S. specific currency this is global. Even if the U.S. somehow successfully extinguishes Bitcoin from the planet, they are going to have a hard time keeping up with the next Bitcoin that emerges so they would be better off to adapt now or the consequences could be worse down the road. I don't think anyone here is expecting Bitcoin to usurp the USD in the immediate future so there really isn't any reason for people here to get all up in arms over advancement in technology. Bitcoin isn't legal tender so there's nothing to fear, right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A good interview from PC World with an engineer that just started working with Bitpay:http://www.pcworld.com/article/2039184/bitcoin-developer-talks-regulation-open-source-and-the-elusive-satoshi-nakamoto.html

It looks like the top shops will start to steal engineers from Google / Facebook / Microsoft / Yahoo.

It would pretty dumb for the U.S. government to try to extinguish Bitcoin (aside from the Prisoner's Dilemma that I already mentioned) since there are a number of businesses popping up garnering VC Capital and thus contributing to the (U.S.) economy by providing jobs and services. It would be like shutting down Google, eBay, or Facebook in its infancy.
If Bitcoin were to actually become successful, it would be a huge NEGATIVE impact to the US economy.

This is because the dollar being the world's reserve currency, we must net export dollars, or else there wouldn't be the growth necessary in the world's reserve currency for countries to continue using it as the world's reserve currency. In other words, if dollars became hard to come by (because we're not growing the base of dollars in circulation through out the world) countries would begin trading in other currencies that are not as hard to come by as the dollar.

Because of this, we run a trade deficit and cosnume more than we export. The net effect is more product comes in to the US than goes out SO THAT more dollars can go out into the world than come in. This is why many Americans are able to live the way they do. Nice large house. Two recent model cars. Vacations to Disneyworld. Etc, etc... Americans consume more than they produce so that the world can use the US dollar as the world's reserve currency.

Bitcoin's success would threaten the dollar, especially if Bitcoins success occurs within the US. The more US citizens begin to migrate to Bitcoin and migrate away from the dollar, the more other countries will be motivated to migrate away from the US dollar too. They already have plenty of reason to do this today without success of Bitcoin. In fact, that process has already started, and may be beyond the point where the US can do anything to stop it. But assuming it is not, success of Bitcoin ain't going to help at all.

To suggest that the government would be dumb to extinguish Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is birthing companies that will help the US economy is insane. If Bitcoin companies were to become the size of Google, eBay or Facebook, then half the S&P would crash, if not nearly all of it.
As you've already stated, this is already happening. If the U.S. does not recognize Bitcoin (it actually already has recognized it) then you are left with the Prisoner's Dilemma whereby when every other sizeable country increases usage of Bitcoin but the U.S. remains stubborn and creates legislation making it illegal to own (as you and others here are proposing) then the U.S. and its law-abiding citizens are left out in the cold. This isn't a U.S. specific currency this is global. Even if the U.S. somehow successfully extinguishes Bitcoin from the planet, they are going to have a hard time keeping up with the next Bitcoin that emerges so they would be better off to adapt now or the consequences could be worse down the road. I don't think anyone here is expecting Bitcoin to usurp the USD in the immediate future so there really isn't any reason for people here to get all up in arms over advancement in technology. Bitcoin isn't legal tender so there's nothing to fear, right?
What if the U.S., or some other nation, actively ties to undermine the bitcoin, either by dollar manipulation or by electronic means?
 
A good interview from PC World with an engineer that just started working with Bitpay:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2039184/bitcoin-developer-talks-regulation-open-source-and-the-elusive-satoshi-nakamoto.html

It looks like the top shops will start to steal engineers from Google / Facebook / Microsoft / Yahoo.

It would pretty dumb for the U.S. government to try to extinguish Bitcoin (aside from the Prisoner's Dilemma that I already mentioned) since there are a number of businesses popping up garnering VC Capital and thus contributing to the (U.S.) economy by providing jobs and services. It would be like shutting down Google, eBay, or Facebook in its infancy.
If Bitcoin were to actually become successful, it would be a huge NEGATIVE impact to the US economy.

This is because the dollar being the world's reserve currency, we must net export dollars, or else there wouldn't be the growth necessary in the world's reserve currency for countries to continue using it as the world's reserve currency. In other words, if dollars became hard to come by (because we're not growing the base of dollars in circulation through out the world) countries would begin trading in other currencies that are not as hard to come by as the dollar.

Because of this, we run a trade deficit and cosnume more than we export. The net effect is more product comes in to the US than goes out SO THAT more dollars can go out into the world than come in. This is why many Americans are able to live the way they do. Nice large house. Two recent model cars. Vacations to Disneyworld. Etc, etc... Americans consume more than they produce so that the world can use the US dollar as the world's reserve currency.

Bitcoin's success would threaten the dollar, especially if Bitcoins success occurs within the US. The more US citizens begin to migrate to Bitcoin and migrate away from the dollar, the more other countries will be motivated to migrate away from the US dollar too. They already have plenty of reason to do this today without success of Bitcoin. In fact, that process has already started, and may be beyond the point where the US can do anything to stop it. But assuming it is not, success of Bitcoin ain't going to help at all.

To suggest that the government would be dumb to extinguish Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is birthing companies that will help the US economy is insane. If Bitcoin companies were to become the size of Google, eBay or Facebook, then half the S&P would crash, if not nearly all of it.
As you've already stated, this is already happening. If the U.S. does not recognize Bitcoin (it actually already has recognized it) then you are left with the Prisoner's Dilemma whereby when every other sizeable country increases usage of Bitcoin but the U.S. remains stubborn and creates legislation making it illegal to own (as you and others here are proposing) then the U.S. and its law-abiding citizens are left out in the cold. This isn't a U.S. specific currency this is global. Even if the U.S. somehow successfully extinguishes Bitcoin from the planet, they are going to have a hard time keeping up with the next Bitcoin that emerges so they would be better off to adapt now or the consequences could be worse down the road. I don't think anyone here is expecting Bitcoin to usurp the USD in the immediate future so there really isn't any reason for people here to get all up in arms over advancement in technology. Bitcoin isn't legal tender so there's nothing to fear, right?
The US has left its law-abiding citizens out in the cold before. Starting in 1933 and continuing for four decades US citizens could NOT own gold while the rest of the world could. And gold was not legal tender during those four decades either.

The US did this because a great demand by US citizens to own gold was a huge threat to the dollar, Just as Bitcoin could become a huge threat to the dollar if it becomes successful and there becomes a great demand by US citizens to own Bitcoins.

I am far from being an evangelist of the US dollar. I'm pretty convinced its days are numbered and change to it is imminent. But to think that the US government and the banking industry is just going to allow the free market to solve the problem is insane. We are where we are today because the US government and the banking industry has spent the 2 centuries+ history of the United States extinguishing the free market, as well as nature, and even the constitutional right of the government, from doing exactly what Bitcoin is trying to do right now. You can see this process of extinguising those sources from the process of commercial exchange in 1791, 1811, 1816, 1836, 1863, 1873, 1913, 1933, 1944, 1971, and 1973. Bitcoin, if it begins to become successful, will become the next date on that timeline.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A good interview from PC World with an engineer that just started working with Bitpay:http://www.pcworld.com/article/2039184/bitcoin-developer-talks-regulation-open-source-and-the-elusive-satoshi-nakamoto.html

It looks like the top shops will start to steal engineers from Google / Facebook / Microsoft / Yahoo.

It would pretty dumb for the U.S. government to try to extinguish Bitcoin (aside from the Prisoner's Dilemma that I already mentioned) since there are a number of businesses popping up garnering VC Capital and thus contributing to the (U.S.) economy by providing jobs and services. It would be like shutting down Google, eBay, or Facebook in its infancy.
If Bitcoin were to actually become successful, it would be a huge NEGATIVE impact to the US economy.

This is because the dollar being the world's reserve currency, we must net export dollars, or else there wouldn't be the growth necessary in the world's reserve currency for countries to continue using it as the world's reserve currency. In other words, if dollars became hard to come by (because we're not growing the base of dollars in circulation through out the world) countries would begin trading in other currencies that are not as hard to come by as the dollar.

Because of this, we run a trade deficit and cosnume more than we export. The net effect is more product comes in to the US than goes out SO THAT more dollars can go out into the world than come in. This is why many Americans are able to live the way they do. Nice large house. Two recent model cars. Vacations to Disneyworld. Etc, etc... Americans consume more than they produce so that the world can use the US dollar as the world's reserve currency.

Bitcoin's success would threaten the dollar, especially if Bitcoins success occurs within the US. The more US citizens begin to migrate to Bitcoin and migrate away from the dollar, the more other countries will be motivated to migrate away from the US dollar too. They already have plenty of reason to do this today without success of Bitcoin. In fact, that process has already started, and may be beyond the point where the US can do anything to stop it. But assuming it is not, success of Bitcoin ain't going to help at all.

To suggest that the government would be dumb to extinguish Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is birthing companies that will help the US economy is insane. If Bitcoin companies were to become the size of Google, eBay or Facebook, then half the S&P would crash, if not nearly all of it.
As you've already stated, this is already happening. If the U.S. does not recognize Bitcoin (it actually already has recognized it) then you are left with the Prisoner's Dilemma whereby when every other sizeable country increases usage of Bitcoin but the U.S. remains stubborn and creates legislation making it illegal to own (as you and others here are proposing) then the U.S. and its law-abiding citizens are left out in the cold. This isn't a U.S. specific currency this is global. Even if the U.S. somehow successfully extinguishes Bitcoin from the planet, they are going to have a hard time keeping up with the next Bitcoin that emerges so they would be better off to adapt now or the consequences could be worse down the road. I don't think anyone here is expecting Bitcoin to usurp the USD in the immediate future so there really isn't any reason for people here to get all up in arms over advancement in technology. Bitcoin isn't legal tender so there's nothing to fear, right?
What if the U.S., or some other nation, actively ties to undermine the bitcoin, either by dollar manipulation or by electronic means?
I believe that is one of the biggest concerns of the btc community, whereby one entity purchases all outstanding Bitcoins before the marketcap becomes unwieldy, I put that in italics since the USD to BTC ratio would have to become pretty attractive (10,000:1 or so, pick your payout) for that to happen. I can't think of any electronic means that would pose a risk but I'm all ears if you have an example of what you mean. As you can see while it may be a concern for btc's future, anyone owning btc doesn't have a problem profiting off of such a move, they'll just have that much more monopoly money to invest in the btc 2.0.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mike Hearn is an engineer at Google and one of the world's foremost experts on Bitcoin. He is also a very bright guy. He spoke at the Bitcoin meeting i attemded last week. Below is a link to a presentation he gave in London in December. It describes his vision of bitcoins future.

 
Jojo the circus boy said:
Prisoner's Dilemma
You keep misusing this term.
How so?

Any early adopters of Bitcoin among the Rich will be VERY wealthy. Any that delay (such as if the U.S. were to make it illegal to own Bitcoins) could be seriously reduced in wealth. So even though it might be in the best interest of the very wealthy to oppose Bitcoin, it may be too much to expect that they will.

 
Mike Hearn is an engineer at Google and one of the world's foremost experts on Bitcoin. He is also a very bright guy. He spoke at the Bitcoin meeting i attemded last week. Below is a link to a presentation he gave in London in December. It describes his vision of bitcoins future.

LinkWow didn't realize you can get screwed receiving payment from paypal when selling something like on craigslist where there is no proof of postage.

Just another reason to hate on paypal.

That's a really good presentation, I liked the section about P2P Investment Funds.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bitcoin, Chncoin, Devcoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, Ixcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Novacoin, Ppcoin (my favorite) and Terracoin... Plus a few more, I'm sure. I need to hop on this and invent my own coin. I'll be rich!

 
What effect do you foresee BTC 2.0 having on the value of BTC?
This much
Bitcoin, Chncoin, Devcoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, Ixcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Novacoin, Ppcoin (my favorite) and Terracoin... Plus a few more, I'm sure. I need to hop on this and invent my own coin. I'll be rich!
You forgot BBQCoin, ByteCoin and SolidCoin.
Am I wrong in thinking that the ease with which alternatives to Bitcoin (even Bitcoin 2.0 as you called it) can be created is something of an impediment to its long-term value and in direct contrast to one of your key arguments in favor of BTC's value over USD?
 
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
What effect do you foresee BTC 2.0 having on the value of BTC?
This much
>>

Bitcoin, Chncoin, Devcoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, Ixcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Novacoin, Ppcoin (my favorite) and Terracoin... Plus a few more, I'm sure. I need to hop on this and invent my own coin. I'll be rich!
You forgot BBQCoin, ByteCoin and SolidCoin.
Am I wrong in thinking that the ease with which alternatives to Bitcoin (even Bitcoin 2.0 as you called it) can be created is something of an impediment to its long-term value and in direct contrast to one of your key arguments in favor of BTC's value over USD?
What is my key argument, that it is immune to competition, really?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
What effect do you foresee BTC 2.0 having on the value of BTC?
This much
>

Bitcoin, Chncoin, Devcoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, Ixcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Novacoin, Ppcoin (my favorite) and Terracoin... Plus a few more, I'm sure. I need to hop on this and invent my own coin. I'll be rich!
You forgot BBQCoin, ByteCoin and SolidCoin.
Am I wrong in thinking that the ease with which alternatives to Bitcoin (even Bitcoin 2.0 as you called it) can be created is something of an impediment to its long-term value and in direct contrast to one of your key arguments in favor of BTC's value over USD?
:goodposting:

While jojo seems to think that those of us not hopping on the bandwagon are out of touch and still using Windows 95, this is my biggest concern. I understand the "mining" aspect, but really the $billion+ that bitcoins are worth overall was created from nothing. There is a new one called Ripple, check out this info:

A few Ripples are already in circulation—OpenCoin did an initial giveaway to Bitcoin enthusiasts—and trade at almost 1,000 per $1 on Bitstamp, a Bitcoin exchange. Starting today, OpenCoin will begin to seed a broader market by putting 100 billion Ripples in circulation: It will gradually distribute 50 billion to users who sign up on the site; it will hold the other 50 billion. (The company hopes its Ripple reserves will appreciate.)
What is stopping more of these things? OpenCoin just "created" $100M and I am assuming they are hoping it goes up a bit as well.

Oh and jojo, somehow I stumbled on this. I thought you would appreciate it. http://buttcoin.org/is-mtgox-manipulating-the-bitcoin-market

 
You guys realize Bitcoin is open source and a lot of these currencies are variants of Bitcoin used for different purposes, right?

Ripple is in Beta and the founders are keeping 30% to themselves, I'm sure stbugs is a big fan of that business model, so that's why he's touting it. I'll let him explain how Ripple complements Bitcoin instead of compete against it since he is so knowledgable on the subject. :lmao:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
What effect do you foresee BTC 2.0 having on the value of BTC?
This much
>

Bitcoin, Chncoin, Devcoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, Ixcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Novacoin, Ppcoin (my favorite) and Terracoin... Plus a few more, I'm sure. I need to hop on this and invent my own coin. I'll be rich!
You forgot BBQCoin, ByteCoin and SolidCoin.
Am I wrong in thinking that the ease with which alternatives to Bitcoin (even Bitcoin 2.0 as you called it) can be created is something of an impediment to its long-term value and in direct contrast to one of your key arguments in favor of BTC's value over USD?
:goodposting:

While jojo seems to think that those of us not hopping on the bandwagon are out of touch and still using Windows 95, this is my biggest concern. I understand the "mining" aspect, but really the $billion+ that bitcoins are worth overall was created from nothing. There is a new one called Ripple, check out this info:

A few Ripples are already in circulation—OpenCoin did an initial giveaway to Bitcoin enthusiasts—and trade at almost 1,000 per $1 on Bitstamp, a Bitcoin exchange. Starting today, OpenCoin will begin to seed a broader market by putting 100 billion Ripples in circulation: It will gradually distribute 50 billion to users who sign up on the site; it will hold the other 50 billion. (The company hopes its Ripple reserves will appreciate.)
What is stopping more of these things? OpenCoin just "created" $100M and I am assuming they are hoping it goes up a bit as well.

Oh and jojo, somehow I stumbled on this. I thought you would appreciate it. http://buttcoin.org/is-mtgox-manipulating-the-bitcoin-market
Let's make some FBGcoins.

All we need to do is establish an agreement with middle east oil producing countries where we will provide them military protection in exchange for them only accepting FBGcoin for their oil. WHAM! Instant worldwide demand for the FBGcoins we create from nothing. It's genius! I can't believe no one has done this before.

 
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
What effect do you foresee BTC 2.0 having on the value of BTC?
This much
>>

Bitcoin, Chncoin, Devcoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, Ixcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Novacoin, Ppcoin (my favorite) and Terracoin... Plus a few more, I'm sure. I need to hop on this and invent my own coin. I'll be rich!
You forgot BBQCoin, ByteCoin and SolidCoin.
Am I wrong in thinking that the ease with which alternatives to Bitcoin (even Bitcoin 2.0 as you called it) can be created is something of an impediment to its long-term value and in direct contrast to one of your key arguments in favor of BTC's value over USD?
What is my key argument, that it is immune to competition, really?
No, this:
The production of bitcoins are capped, the full history of each coin is embedded within itself, cannot be duplicated or created from scratch. The chinese would be welcome to mine bitcoins like everyone else but the production of those coins are capped over time so that it is inflation-proof. Unlike the USD where they print as much of it as is needed.
Maybe "key argument" is too strong, or maybe I read that argument in some of the links you posted. Either way, the notion that this is a better store of value than the USD, because "they'll just print more USD" is silly.
 
You guys realize Bitcoin is open source and a lot of these currencies are variants of Bitcoin used for different purposes, right?Ripple is in Beta and the founders are keeping 30% to themselves, I'm sure stbugs is a big fan of that business model, so that's why he's touting it. I'll let him explain how Ripple complements Bitcoin instead of compete against it since he is so knowledgable on the subject. :lmao:
Hmmm, I thought you were the smart one in all of this? Touting? Really? Do you even read anything people are posting or do you just go find a new link about being able to buy gasoline with bitcoins because some guy accepts bitcoins if you drive by his house while he dispenses gas from red containers he filled up from the Exxon down the road? If you want me to interpret what I said at a 2nd grade level, here it goes. Ignoramus typed some letters and I did the same. We both sort of agreed that we were concerned, I mean worried, about all these nerds making new money on their computers and that there was no impediment, I mean no big wall stopping them. I then typed some letters about a company called OpenCoin that like magic created new electronic coins out of magic computer dust and said I see no big wall stopping them either. It is called an analogy where I said OpenCoin/Ripple was like Bitcoin and it worried me because anyone and their mom could do the same. Please feel free to point to the words or phrases in my statement below where I touted Ripple instead of saying that I don't see how they just created $100M out of thin air. Pretty sure that isn't touting, pretty sure that is consistent with my doubts on bitcoin (and any others) all along.
There is a new one called Ripple, check out this info:Quote

A few Ripples are already in circulation—OpenCoin did an initial giveaway to Bitcoin enthusiasts—and trade at almost 1,000 per $1 on Bitstamp, a Bitcoin exchange. Starting today, OpenCoin will begin to seed a broader market by putting 100 billion Ripples in circulation: It will gradually distribute 50 billion to users who sign up on the site; it will hold the other 50 billion. (The company hopes its Ripple reserves will appreciate.)
What is stopping more of these things? OpenCoin just "created" $100M and I am assuming they are hoping it goes up a bit as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
What effect do you foresee BTC 2.0 having on the value of BTC?
This much
>

Bitcoin, Chncoin, Devcoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, Ixcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Novacoin, Ppcoin (my favorite) and Terracoin... Plus a few more, I'm sure. I need to hop on this and invent my own coin. I'll be rich!
You forgot BBQCoin, ByteCoin and SolidCoin.
Am I wrong in thinking that the ease with which alternatives to Bitcoin (even Bitcoin 2.0 as you called it) can be created is something of an impediment to its long-term value and in direct contrast to one of your key arguments in favor of BTC's value over USD?
:goodposting:

While jojo seems to think that those of us not hopping on the bandwagon are out of touch and still using Windows 95, this is my biggest concern. I understand the "mining" aspect, but really the $billion+ that bitcoins are worth overall was created from nothing. There is a new one called Ripple, check out this info:

A few Ripples are already in circulation—OpenCoin did an initial giveaway to Bitcoin enthusiasts—and trade at almost 1,000 per $1 on Bitstamp, a Bitcoin exchange. Starting today, OpenCoin will begin to seed a broader market by putting 100 billion Ripples in circulation: It will gradually distribute 50 billion to users who sign up on the site; it will hold the other 50 billion. (The company hopes its Ripple reserves will appreciate.)
What is stopping more of these things? OpenCoin just "created" $100M and I am assuming they are hoping it goes up a bit as well.

Oh and jojo, somehow I stumbled on this. I thought you would appreciate it. http://buttcoin.org/is-mtgox-manipulating-the-bitcoin-market
Let's make some FBGcoins.

All we need to do is establish an agreement with middle east oil producing countries where we will provide them military protection in exchange for them only accepting FBGcoin for their oil. WHAM! Instant worldwide demand for the FBGcoins we create from nothing. It's genius! I can't believe no one has done this before.
It might be even easier. All we need to do is create 1 million FBGcoins and we won't ever create any more :winkwink:. We setup a facebook page for FBGcoins and send out articles to the major news agencies about Facebook partnering with FBGcoins. My kids can setup a web site accepting FBGcoins and mailing out stuff we buy with our Amazon Prime account (2 day free shipping, beat that bitcoin) for a small margin. Just need a little fine print about Facebook and Amazon not really endorsing FBGcoins. Then, we setup an exchange and rig the prices and bam, profit!

 
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
What effect do you foresee BTC 2.0 having on the value of BTC?
This much
>

>

Bitcoin, Chncoin, Devcoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, Ixcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Novacoin, Ppcoin (my favorite) and Terracoin... Plus a few more, I'm sure. I need to hop on this and invent my own coin. I'll be rich!
You forgot BBQCoin, ByteCoin and SolidCoin.lockquote>Am I wrong in thinking that the ease with which alternatives to Bitcoin (even Bitcoin 2.0 as you called it) can be created is something of an impediment to its long-term value and in direct contrast to one of your key arguments in favor of BTC's value over USD?
:goodposting:

While jojo seems to think that those of us not hopping on the bandwagon are out of touch and still using Windows 95, this is my biggest concern. I understand the "mining" aspect, but really the $billion+ that bitcoins are worth overall was created from nothing. There is a new one called Ripple, check out this info:

>A few Ripples are already in circulation—OpenCoin did an initial giveaway to Bitcoin enthusiasts—and trade at almost 1,000 per $1 on Bitstamp, a Bitcoin exchange. Starting today, OpenCoin will begin to seed a broader market by putting 100 billion Ripples in circulation: It will gradually distribute 50 billion to users who sign up on the site; it will hold the other 50 billion. (The company hopes its Ripple reserves will appreciate.)
What is stopping more of these things? OpenCoin just "created" $100M and I am assuming they are hoping it goes up a bit as well.

Oh and jojo, somehow I stumbled on this. I thought you would appreciate it. http://buttcoin.org/is-mtgox-manipulating-the-bitcoin-market
Let's make some FBGcoins.

All we need to do is establish an agreement with middle east oil producing countries where we will provide them military protection in exchange for them only accepting FBGcoin for their oil. WHAM! Instant worldwide demand for the FBGcoins we create from nothing. It's genius! I can't believe no one has done this before.
It might be even easier. All we need to do is create 1 million FBGcoins and we won't ever create any more :winkwink:.
I'm actually surprised most of the people can manage to log in here successfully on a regular basis let alone creating an online currency.

I'd give you about a week digging a hole in your backyard looking for fbgcoins before you gave up.
 
You guys realize Bitcoin is open source and a lot of these currencies are variants of Bitcoin used for different purposes, right?Ripple is in Beta and the founders are keeping 30% to themselves, I'm sure stbugs is a big fan of that business model, so that's why he's touting it. I'll let him explain how Ripple complements Bitcoin instead of compete against it since he is so knowledgable on the subject. :lmao:
Hmmm, I thought you were the smart one in all of this? Touting? Really? Do you even read anything people are posting or do you just go find a new link about being able to buy gasoline with bitcoins because some guy accepts bitcoins if you drive by his house while he dispenses gas from red containers he filled up from the Exxon down the road? If you want me to interpret what I said at a 2nd grade level, here it goes. Ignoramus typed some letters and I did the same. We both sort of agreed that we were concerned, I mean worried, about all these nerds making new money on their computers and that there was no impediment, I mean no big wall stopping them. I then typed some letters about a company called OpenCoin that like magic created new electronic coins out of magic computer dust and said I see no big wall stopping them either. It is called an analogy where I said OpenCoin/Ripple was like Bitcoin and it worried me because anyone and their mom could do the same. Please feel free to point to the words or phrases in my statement below where I touted Ripple instead of saying that I don't see how they just created $100M out of thin air. Pretty sure that isn't touting, pretty sure that is consistent with my doubts on bitcoin (and any others) all along.
>There is a new one called Ripple, check out this info:Quote

A few Ripples are already in circulation—OpenCoin did an initial giveaway to Bitcoin enthusiasts—and trade at almost 1,000 per $1 on Bitstamp, a Bitcoin exchange. Starting today, OpenCoin will begin to seed a broader market by putting 100 billion Ripples in circulation: It will gradually distribute 50 billion to users who sign up on the site; it will hold the other 50 billion. (The company hopes its Ripple reserves will appreciate.)
What is stopping more of these things? OpenCoin just "created" $100M and I am assuming they are hoping it goes up a bit as well.
You can stop trying to sound smart. You still don't have a clue what you are talking about. Ripple is a payment platform much like PayPal so before saying idiotic things like "Ripple created a new one" you should have half a clue of what you are saying. You can use Bitcoins on the Ripple network. You obviously can't understand sarcasm since you have been one of the more ignorant posters saying how the owners of the Bitcoin network are going to hoard all the coins for themselves and profit off of a Ponzi Scheme, hence the jab at Ripple's intentions of keeping 30% for themselves, a strike against Ripple from being accepted in the alternate currency community, the same complaint you incorrectly made about Bitcoin but were too blind to have researched before your "breaking news" about Ripple.

 
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
Ignoramus said:
Jojo the circus boy said:
What effect do you foresee BTC 2.0 having on the value of BTC?
This much
>>

Bitcoin, Chncoin, Devcoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, Ixcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Novacoin, Ppcoin (my favorite) and Terracoin... Plus a few more, I'm sure. I need to hop on this and invent my own coin. I'll be rich!
You forgot BBQCoin, ByteCoin and SolidCoin.
Am I wrong in thinking that the ease with which alternatives to Bitcoin (even Bitcoin 2.0 as you called it) can be created is something of an impediment to its long-term value and in direct contrast to one of your key arguments in favor of BTC's value over USD?
What is my key argument, that it is immune to competition, really?
No, this:
The production of bitcoins are capped, the full history of each coin is embedded within itself, cannot be duplicated or created from scratch. The chinese would be welcome to mine bitcoins like everyone else but the production of those coins are capped over time so that it is inflation-proof. Unlike the USD where they print as much of it as is needed.
Maybe "key argument" is too strong, or maybe I read that argument in some of the links you posted. Either way, the notion that this is a better store of value than the USD, because "they'll just print more USD" is silly.
That hurts you called my argument silly, welcome to http://mybfolder.com/pics/2113-1274736033.jpg]the bottom of the pyramid.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JdyDWlsq5mU/T1Onc9OkqQI/AAAAAAAABK4/MgG93t8-NxE/s1600/Gold+vs+Dollar+Chart.PNG]How's gold been doing against the dollar? The printing press is not really helping you here.

 
:lmao:

Yes, I called you a name... and reading comprehension is your strong suit.

You also did a good job showing us how BTC will be different and they won't just make more whenever they feel like it. Oh wait, no you didn't. Is there something on your pyramid for that?

 
I looked into BitCoins pretty seriously about a year ago, even went so far as to install the software and run it for a bit (never got any coins from mining though). I think it'll basically stay where it is today, accepted through exchanges but not really an everyday currency. Plus I see it being very volatile, so great if you get the coins through mining but I wouldn't ever "invest" in it. And with the cost to mine them always going up, it becomes an investment to do the mining.

Also, no concerns that the guy who created BitCoins is anonymous? I know that is attractive to some, and even a selling point, but as he is anonymous, no one can ask about the motives behind why he created them. Seemed like a big red flag to me. For all we know, it could be a number of people, and that has actually been speculated. As for keeping some for himself, no real way to know that he didn't, he did mine the first 50 coins, and no one can really say he didn't mine more along the way.

Also, what is to stop some nefarious soul from writing a virus targeting BitCoins? There are ways to destroy bitcoins, and even things like hard drive failure can render bitcoins unavailable to the owner.

Some other opinions:

CNN economist (opinion): http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/11/opinion/angel-bitcoin-currency

Moreover, it would not be good for the global economic system to have a totally fixed money supply. A growing economy needs a money supply that grows at the same rate to keep prices stable. Much as we love to criticize the governmental entities that control the monetary system, it does help to have some human judgment (armed with a checkbook) involved to deal with crises.

Our banking system is as safe as it is because there are lenders of last resort who can create more money in a crisis to protect the entire system from collapsing in a liquidity crisis. Iceland and Cyprus have discovered how painful it is to have a banking system without such a deep pocket lender of last resort.

A financial system based on Bitcoins would have no possibility of there being such a backstop. In short, Bitcoins look like quite a bit of trouble.
The Rise and Fall of Bitcoin: http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/11/mf_bitcoin/all/

Stefan Brands, a former ecash consultant and digital currency pioneer, calls bitcoin “clever” and is loath to bash it but believes it’s fundamentally structured like “a pyramid scheme” that rewards early adopters. “I think the big problems are ultimately the trust issues,” he says. “There’s nothing there to back it up. I know the counterargument, that that’s true of fiat money, too, but that’s completely wrong. There’s a whole trust fabric that’s been established through legal mechanisms.”
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top