SURVEY: Cryptocurrency--would you invest?

[ukrules]

On 23/04/2018 at 3:27 PM, Craig krup said:

That's called "The greater fool theory"

There's a never ending supply of 'greater fools'.

[Craig krup]

54 minutes ago, ukrules said:

There's a never ending supply of 'greater fools'.

Nearly! if it was literally never-ending I would invest - or "invest". It's when you can't find a solvent fool when you need one, and you're left holding Baby Bitcoin, that you realise the last fool was you. 

[Craig krup]

Above $9,000!! Quick, quick, buy, buy, buyyyyyyyyy.....

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/bitcoin-latest-updates-value-price-cryptocurrency-a8318501.html

 

I've got this year's ISA money to invest. £20,000. It'll either be a bog-standard investment trust with a 4.5% yield, or one with 3.7% yield, and the hope of a little more growth. So £740 a year, or £900, not guaranteed, and with the prospect of capital volatility. I'm rationally self-interested. Why wouldn't I buy Bitcoin?

 

The set of all Bitcoin numbers is finite, correct? So - unlike fiat currencies - they can't just create more? But if we took all 20m Bitcoin numbers and added 666 to the start we'd have another finite set, correct? This would be (perhaps) "Bitcoin Beast". If we took the same 20m Bitcoin numbers and added 007 to the start this would be another finite set, called (perhaps) "Bitcoin Bond". So the Bitcoin set is finite, but allows an infinite number of other finite sets. 

 

Scarcity, in and of itself, could be the basis of a currency, but all present currencies aren't rooted in scarcity they're rooted in economies: governments ask for their taxes in them, and so have an interest in ensuring they're worth something. If the state can grab 35% of what the people earn the means of exchange - dollar, pound, euro - shouldn't be debased because the state is going to buy its F15s and hotel rooms for politicians with it. What - precisely - is the analogous truth about Bitcoin? Who needs it to pay a tax bill? Who has to accept it? Who has to act to maintain its value? 

[cyberfarang]

15 years ago, a well off cousin bought a house for £900000 in an upper class leafy suburb of Surrey in England. He wasn`t new to the investment property game, very experienced and had made a lot of money in the past by buying and selling properties.

 

He said that what made the property so unique and highly desirable, was the splendid view of the lakes about an eighth of a mile from the property. Within the next 2 years this property will be worth double what I paid for it, he confidently told everyone. 

 

Then 1 year later, a building construction company built a massive housing estate between my cousin`s property and the lakes. Gone were the views of the lakes, and replaced by an unsightly view of blocks of apartments. Once the building construction started my cousin`s property literally halved in value, he lost thousands of pounds on his investment.

 

The motto of this story is: investments are like the weather, unpredictable, even the mighty have fallen. As for laymen like me, I would recommend don`t dabble in cryptocurrency unless you really understand what the process involves and especially those that don`t have money they can afford to lose.

[phycokiller]

6 hours ago, Craig krup said:

Who has to act to maintain its value? 

8 hours ago, Craig krup said:

It's when you can't find a solvent fool when you need one, and you're left holding Baby Bitcoin, that you realise the last fool was you. 

 

the market maintains its own value, and its big and getting bigger. selling them is not a problem at this stage , the price sure wouldnt be $9000 if people couldnt cash them in when they wanted

 

 

[Craig krup]

9 hours ago, phycokiller said:

the market maintains its own value, and its big and getting bigger. selling them is not a problem at this stage , the price sure wouldnt be $9000 if people couldnt cash them in when they wanted

 

 

 

It may interest you to know that back before the property bust I made a complaint regarding "A Place in the Sun". This was a British TV show with the presenter telling people that if they bought a flat in Spain, Portugal, wherever, for £100,000 then on present trends it would be worth £440,000 (or whatever) in fifteen years. I pointed out that it was actually inconceivable that such a claim could be made about shares. Substitute goods theory told us that it was a bubble, and - inevitably - it burst. If you saw the last series you'd have seen the disclaimer at the start - "This is not investment advice", and so on. I caused that. 

 

Your piece of reasoning - there's a quoted price so I must be able to sell - is false. Indeed, it is precisely because so many speculators are involved that any uptick reduces liquidity and serves to cause further rises, just as any fall produces a wave of selling and further falls. Last night's Keiser Report - annoying but funny - had the owner of some crypto exchange being interviewed. Very enlightening. He said that the exchange's biggest problem was liquidity. Few bid and offer, so there's no real market. He only trades volatility - he couldn't care less about the direction of change. He said that anyone who tells you that they know the value of these cryptos, and it'll be higher (or lower) in the future, is kidding themselves. 

 

What is the obvious substitute good for Bitcoin? A substitute good is something that serves the same, or similar, function. Substitute goods should serve similar functions. Pasta and rice are near substitutes. Now very obviously dollar bills are quite a good substitute for Bitcoin, with far fewer problems. Gold is a substitute. The Bitcoin exchange owner on Keiser said that in China almost everybody pays with an app on a phone. It's way better than any crypto and could make all crypto currencies redundant. The only possible thing you can say about Bitcoin is that if it becomes a stable and widely accepted token of exchange then it might serve a function for some who absolutely need anonymity: criminals. But I think most criminals can and do use better ways. British Asians can send money abroad through networks of trusted brokers. You hand £500 to the bloke in Leeds and one text later your relative in Pakistan can walk up to the other trusted party and receive £480. A Western Union of no records. Why on Earth would anyone bother their backside with Bitcoin? If you had to guess would you say that the technology and skills involved in hiding transactions through the legitimate system would increase more or less quickly than the authorities' ability to find out who is using Bitcoin exchanges? If the former advances more quickly than the latter then even the most serious criminals have no need of crypto currencies. 

 

Now anything's possible. But working out all the possibilities, ascribing weights to them, and then acting on that basis is something that people can't do when they're blinded by the thought of money for nothing. It has been going on since the dawn of time. All cons work on that basis: you cannot con an honest man. The person needs to be looking for something for nothing in order for them to be reeled in. Bitcoin could establish itself, but why on earth - given the fundamental facts - would it? What utility - what human use - does it deliver which couldn't be produced more simply and cheaply? 

[phycokiller]

3 hours ago, Craig krup said:

 

It may interest you to know that back before the property bust I made a complaint regarding "A Place in the Sun". This was a British TV show with the presenter telling people that if they bought a flat in Spain, Portugal, wherever, for £100,000 then on present trends it would be worth £440,000 (or whatever) in fifteen years. I pointed out that it was actually inconceivable that such a claim could be made about shares. Substitute goods theory told us that it was a bubble, and - inevitably - it burst. If you saw the last series you'd have seen the disclaimer at the start - "This is not investment advice", and so on. I caused that. 

 

Your piece of reasoning - there's a quoted price so I must be able to sell - is false. Indeed, it is precisely because so many speculators are involved that any uptick reduces liquidity and serves to cause further rises, just as any fall produces a wave of selling and further falls. Last night's Keiser Report - annoying but funny - had the owner of some crypto exchange being interviewed. Very enlightening. He said that the exchange's biggest problem was liquidity. Few bid and offer, so there's no real market. He only trades volatility - he couldn't care less about the direction of change. He said that anyone who tells you that they know the value of these cryptos, and it'll be higher (or lower) in the future, is kidding themselves. 

 

What is the obvious substitute good for Bitcoin? A substitute good is something that serves the same, or similar, function. Substitute goods should serve similar functions. Pasta and rice are near substitutes. Now very obviously dollar bills are quite a good substitute for Bitcoin, with far fewer problems. Gold is a substitute. The Bitcoin exchange owner on Keiser said that in China almost everybody pays with an app on a phone. It's way better than any crypto and could make all crypto currencies redundant. The only possible thing you can say about Bitcoin is that if it becomes a stable and widely accepted token of exchange then it might serve a function for some who absolutely need anonymity: criminals. But I think most criminals can and do use better ways. British Asians can send money abroad through networks of trusted brokers. You hand £500 to the bloke in Leeds and one text later your relative in Pakistan can walk up to the other trusted party and receive £480. A Western Union of no records. Why on Earth would anyone bother their backside with Bitcoin? If you had to guess would you say that the technology and skills involved in hiding transactions through the legitimate system would increase more or less quickly than the authorities' ability to find out who is using Bitcoin exchanges? If the former advances more quickly than the latter then even the most serious criminals have no need of crypto currencies. 

 

Now anything's possible. But working out all the possibilities, ascribing weights to them, and then acting on that basis is something that people can't do when they're blinded by the thought of money for nothing. It has been going on since the dawn of time. All cons work on that basis: you cannot con an honest man. The person needs to be looking for something for nothing in order for them to be reeled in. Bitcoin could establish itself, but why on earth - given the fundamental facts - would it? What utility - what human use - does it deliver which couldn't be produced more simply and cheaply? 

its money without a middle man, it will work out cheaper, it is at the moment, and those apps from china, thats what a bitcoin wallet is and they are simple to use. and as far as value, I can sell anytime I want, maybe not millions, I dont intend trying, but living expenses are fine. daily volume is about a billion $ a day, thats just bitcoin on the exchanges, I wouldnt call it no real market. or a bubble. thats like calling emails or cars or TVs a bubble, it will reach a limit but theres no need for it to crash unless a better option is found, which is very possible but not going to happen anytime soon. in any case, it works well for me, and the profit is a bonus

[Craig krup]

17 minutes ago, phycokiller said:

its money without a middle man, it will work out cheaper, it is at the moment, and those apps from china, thats what a bitcoin wallet is and they are simple to use. and as far as value, I can sell anytime I want, maybe not millions, I dont intend trying, but living expenses are fine. daily volume is about a billion $ a day, thats just bitcoin on the exchanges, I wouldnt call it no real market. or a bubble. thats like calling emails or cars or TVs a bubble, it will reach a limit but theres no need for it to crash unless a better option is found, which is very possible but not going to happen anytime soon. in any case, it works well for me, and the profit is a bonus

 

In what way is it "money without a middle man"? Once in circulation there's no middle man with physical cash, and even if a middle man is needed to transfer it the costs aren't that high. The cost of all these computers "mining" this nonsense, and maintaining the ledgers, is astronomical. The exchange owner on Keiser last night actually said - apropos the Bitcoin wallet - that people are lazy, and once an app allows them to pay in normal currency they will do. Why bother your backside with Bitcoin? 

 

Bitcoin is 1) limited, and 2) expensive to recover. Like rocks from the moon. If everyone agreed that moon rocks were valuable then we'd have a currency which certainly couldn't be produced like Reichsmarks. But this fear of "when money dies" is - I think - less of a problem than the reasonable fear of people saying "What's the real value of a moon rock/Bitcoin?" To reiterate, legal tender is needed to pay your taxes, so countries manage theirs to maintain purchasing power parity. They don't debase it because they get paid in it. Or. more accurately, they control the rate of debasement. 

 

The only difference between Bitcoin and the series of figures 1 to 20,000,000 is that there's a cost of discovery. The bloke on Keiser last night was talking about that also. Some currencies just rely on "proof of claim" rather than "proof of work". But "claim" makes the madness obvious. If I declared that I have created the Craigcoin - there are twenty million, and I own them all - I could also offer to provide the clearing facility. So you pay me £1,000 and I give you numbers 1,000 to 1,999. You pay someone using number 1344, and I electronically record the transaction. They can now pay someone using 1344. But it's all horse jobbies. People don't see what's special about legal tender. They don't want to think about purchasing power parity. They don't want to see that all the world's currencies - all the free-floating trading ones, anyway - constitute essentially one currency. Folk can't be bothered. There's money to be paid. They'll almost certainly find out that there's money to be lost as well, and it's the writers, boosters and owners of exchanges who'll make the only real dough, just like the sellers of shovels and sandwiches during the '49 gold rush.  

[Bluespunk]

Not a chance in hell of doing so.

[Johnniey]

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Not a chance in hell of doing so.

You missed the boat buddy, sour grapes.

 

I bought a new car last year with 1/4 of my profits for 1 year. 

[Craig krup]

20 minutes ago, Johnniey said:

You missed the boat buddy, sour grapes.

 

I bought a new car last year with 1/4 of my profits for 1 year. 

Profit or gain? If I'm sure that a machine is about to pay out, or that Black 7 is about to come up, and I act on that belief and win, have I made a profit, or have I made a gain? Is there a difference? 

 

Why would some people say that a casino can make profits while the punters can only make gains?  

[Bluespunk]

32 minutes ago, Johnniey said:

You missed the boat buddy, sour grapes.

 

I bought a new car last year with 1/4 of my profits for 1 year. 

Not your buddy. 

 

No sour grapes either, done very well over the years and have no need to gamble on cryptowhatevers. . 

Edited April 25, 2018 by Bluespunk

[Johnniey]

41 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Not your buddy. 

 

No sour grapes either, done very well over the years and have no need to gamble on cryptowhatevers. . 

Charming. God, try to be friendly to someone. Why on earth are you on a discussion thread about cryptos then? get a life.

[Johnniey]

49 minutes ago, Craig krup said:

Profit or gain? If I'm sure that a machine is about to pay out, or that Black 7 is about to come up, and I act on that belief and win, have I made a profit, or have I made a gain? Is there a difference? 

 

Why would some people say that a casino can make profits while the punters can only make gains?  

Investment is different from playing roulette, which is pure chance.

 

I did the research, believed in my BTC, Ripple, KNC, OMG, and a few more. 

 

Now I'm only playing with the house's money which is great, taking out some when I want to buy something special.

 

 

[Craig krup]

1 hour ago, Johnniey said:

Investment is different from playing roulette, which is pure chance.

 

I did the research, believed in my BTC, Ripple, KNC, OMG, and a few more. 

 

Now I'm only playing with the house's money which is great, taking out some when I want to buy something special.

 

 

 Yes, but the "research" i) couldn't have amounted to much, and ii) isn't enough to persuade people like Buffett. If Capita asks shareholders for money - a rights issue - you can look at what projects they've got, what they'll gross, what they'll net, how the competition might change...People needs drugs to cure malaria. There's a genuine human need.

 

What does research amount to when we're talking about these cryptos? The whole thing amounts to, "Anything accepted as a means of exchange or a store of value is a means of exchange or a store of value. Gold has few industrial applications. Cowry shells can be used as money. Here's something limited - these number sequences. Let's try to get a head of steam behind the idea that, i) it's money, or ii) soon to be money, or iii) should be money". 

 

What's "research"? It can't be about the thing itself, so it has to be about human psychology. I don't doubt there's a genuine skill in working out what's likely to be the next exercise in collective lunacy. I can still remember Nicola Horlick saying of NASDAQ stocks that had no net earnings nor prospect of them, "Well, we'll just have to find another way to value them". Yes. At this point Buffett was buying carpet makers and brick manufacturers at very low prices. people howled about the "profits" they'd missed out on through Buffett's unwillingness to buy NASDAQ stocks: "Cat au Vin - The Internet Wine for Your Cat". He said that if you didn't like his management of Berkshire you should vote him out or sell your stock. Those who trusted the old rogue were richly rewarded, and those who ran with the crowd went over the edge. 

 

Men think in herds. It will be seen that they lose their minds in herds. But they recover their senses slowly, and one at a time. 

 

My uncle bought illiquid small companies with wide bid-offer spreads, sold into a rising market, and bought a new Merc. He wouldn't listen: didn't know what a bid-offer spread was, what the market size was, what the market makers could do in a downturn, why this mattered, or anything else. He got away with it. He'll never know how close he came.  

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/10/buffett-says-cyrptocurrencies-will-almost-certainly-end-badly.html

 

Edited April 25, 2018 by Craig krup

[ukrules]

4 hours ago, Johnniey said:

You missed the boat buddy, sour grapes.

 

I bought a new car last year with 1/4 of my profits for 1 year. 

I also bought a new car but it was 5 years ago with a small fraction of my Bitcoin (and many altcoin) profits which I made in the space of a few months.

 

I guess you could say I put about $15k into it, made a massive profit then withdrew about $20k and bought a regular run of the mill car with it.

 

The rest of the profit is still floating around in cyberspace somewhere - this means I still have it and there is no original money at risk because I withdrew it all and more : much, much more.

 

It's very different thinking of buying these things today as opposed to years ago when they were really cheap.

 

Edited April 25, 2018 by ukrules

[Bluespunk]

3 hours ago, Johnniey said:

Charming. God, try to be friendly to someone. Why on earth are you on a discussion thread about cryptos then? get a life.

Got one thanks, and I didn’t see any friendliness in your post. 

[Johnniey]

10 hours ago, ukrules said:

I also bought a new car but it was 5 years ago with a small fraction of my Bitcoin (and many altcoin) profits which I made in the space of a few months.

 

I guess you could say I put about $15k into it, made a massive profit then withdrew about $20k and bought a regular run of the mill car with it.

 

The rest of the profit is still floating around in cyberspace somewhere - this means I still have it and there is no original money at risk because I withdrew it all and more : much, much more.

 

It's very different thinking of buying these things today as opposed to years ago when they were really cheap.

 

Much the same as me as although I just started over 1 year ago, and bought a $30k car.

[bearpolar]

Craig is amazing, comparing bitcoin to his friend jumping in real estate with no knowledge and using some guy he saw on a crappy tv show for his source on everything.. 

 

Then quoting a crappy buffet article when it links to a bunch of other articles by big finance names saying the same thing, yet getting caught trading cryptos or admitting going into crypto just a few weeks after.

 

Craig krup sounds like people in the early 2000's that were saying WHEY powder is steroids and should be banned.  He's just spewing away whatever he's hearing on useless talk shows run by dinosaurs with a bunch of added words to make it seem like it has substance.

 

like what is even proof of claim? You mean proof of stake?  

 

Maybe do a bit of research, not by watching stupid tv shows and reading cnn or cnbc, but by reading what actual developers are doing/thinking.

 

https://medium.com/@jimmysong  One of the bitcoin dev, a bit 1 sided for btc but very informative.

 

 

Every finance higher up execs are really excited by cryptos, they all know its the future(unless they own traditional payment companies, then they are scared as you can see on C-SPAN when senators and representatives have stakes in such companies, they spew retarded misinformation)

Yes its too risky without active research to jump all in when you are older, but not jumping in at all is ludicrous. 

Edited April 26, 2018 by bearpolar

[phycokiller]

those cars arent going to make any money for you

[Craig krup]

49 minutes ago, bearpolar said:

Craig is amazing, comparing bitcoin to his friend jumping in real estate with no knowledge and using some guy he saw on a crappy tv show for his source on everything.. 

 

 

I typed a massive reply to this and then "Aw snap - something went wrong". Still, a message from the gods, perhaps. Mai phen rai. I'm breaking my own rule and trying to reason. 

 

Good luck. Hope it all works out. I'll take the sixteen dividends a year my four trusts give me and others can do whatever they think is wise. 

[Craig krup]

Second attempt, after "Aw snap". I said that when it happened, but I didn't say "snap". 

 

1) Anything can function as money. If it's accepted for the purpose of facilitating exchange then - during that time - it's money.

2) Some money has intrinsic value: sovereigns, silver dollars,

3) Some money is/was backed by things with intrinsic value - pound and dollar on the gold standard, Bully Marks in POW camps, Swiss franc until recently.

4) Fiat money is just loaned into existence, but governments receive their taxes in it, and (therefore) have every reason to ensure that it retains its value. The functioning of their economies depends on money retaining its value. 

5) Concerns over the fiat money of developed economies are vastly overblown. 

6) Fiat money converts easily from one type to another, is readily accepted, and transaction costs are low. 

7) Some people don't like records of their transactions. They might dislike using formal banking systems and standard currencies. 

8) If a currency i) has no intrinsic value, ii) isn't backed by something with intrinsic value, iii) isn't legal tender in a country committed to free-floating currency convertibility and price stability, and iv) isn't readily usable as a means of exchange, a reasonable person might look askance.

 

Like Burns' "man o' independent mind" they could afford to "look and laugh at a' that". 

 

If it says "Aw snap" again I'll be annoyed 

[ukrules]

7 hours ago, phycokiller said:

those cars arent going to make any money for you

It's the 100's of Bitcoin that make the money, not the car.

[bearpolar]

8 hours ago, Craig krup said:

blahblahblah

 

Most crypto's arent actual currencies. They are: tokens used to validate information(including OFFLINE THAI BAHT TRANSACTIONS in mcdonalds/pizza company and others by this company that is in deals with the finance ministry of thailand: http://news.ch3thailand.com/economy/50555 ), securities, dividend coins, use token for platforms or marketplaces of products or information. 

You have no idea what you're talking about and don't try to sound cool by having worked all your life as a slave and having dividends, me and most of the people i know havnt had to work a single day in their adult life because we understand technology.

 

Also why are you talking about having your transactions recorded? There's tons of privacy coins with no records of your transactions.. There's even a very popular one in Thailand called zcoin(very small, 200 million $ market cap and it gives dividends if you own enough or live in Thailand https://masternodes.online/currencies/XZC/ ).. You're talking out of your ass.

 

 

Edited April 27, 2018 by bearpolar

[Hummin]

 

Bitcoin’s energy usage is huge – we can't afford to ignore it

 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/17/bitcoin-electricity-usage-huge-climate-cryptocurrency

 

A step bakwards if you ask me. Bitcoin feed the creed, and continue waste and consume. 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2018 by Hummin

[Craig krup]

6 hours ago, bearpolar said:

 

Most crypto's arent actual currencies. They are: tokens used to validate information(including OFFLINE THAI BAHT TRANSACTIONS in mcdonalds/pizza company and others by this company that is in deals with the finance ministry of thailand: http://news.ch3thailand.com/economy/50555 ), securities, dividend coins, use token for platforms or marketplaces of products or information. 

You have no idea what you're talking about and don't try to sound cool by having worked all your life as a slave and having dividends, me and most of the people i know havnt had to work a single day in their adult life because we understand technology.

 

Also why are you talking about having your transactions recorded? There's tons of privacy coins with no records of your transactions.. There's even a very popular one in Thailand called zcoin(very small, 200 million $ market cap and it gives dividends if you own enough or live in Thailand https://masternodes.online/currencies/XZC/ ).. You're talking out of your ass.

 

 

You've worked your entire life without apparently learning to read things closely. 

 

A token used to validate information needn't be similar to other token to validate information. A token that says I have a ton of physical gold in a vault, if that gold is there and I have a property right over it, enforceable in court, is a "token". A token, like a share certificate, which says that I own a fractional share of a company and am entitled to a share of the net earnings, and a share of the assets (if any) on wind up is a token. A token which says that everyone who runs the distributed exchanges agrees that I "own" a sequence of numbers, and the right to transfer that ownership, is another token. These are all token, in the same way that your sentences and mine are composed of words, but they needn't be otherwise similar. What you own when you own Bitcoin is the present right to say you own Bitcoin, and have those who are held to matter agree with you. If the courts said that creating a parallel exchange with the same "mined coins" - sequences - and calling it "Britscoins" was a case of passing off, then (maybe) you could have some intellectual property or trademark protection. But that's what you (at best) own. My remark about secrecy - you'd think it was obvious - addresses the issue that some criminals like these supposed means of exchange because they fear the transparency of bank transactions. As I say, I'd have thought that was obvious. 

 

Do you really understand technology? Because I'll tell you, my pal was the head of applications support at Network Rail. He had an MSc in IT, and a degree in computing and genetics. He and I can talk about this and it doesn't seem to him like "blah, blah, blah". The wife of my pal next door has just left Cisco for another job. None of this is "blah, blah, blah" for her. You don't strike me as someone with a degree in computing. You strike me as an app developer, a free lance programmer: someone making a little go a long way, with none of the patience and attention to detail that a decent university would have forced on you. You - fundamentally - aren't prepared to think this through. 

 

If it all goes South and Bitcoin is worth $2 I'll wager you'll be on here telling us that you sold out at the top, knew it was going to happen, and weren't affected. Your pride will demand it.  

[Craig krup]

2 hours ago, Hummin said:

 

Bitcoin’s energy usage is huge – we can't afford to ignore it

 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/17/bitcoin-electricity-usage-huge-climate-cryptocurrency

 

A step bakwards if you ask me. Bitcoin feed the creed, and continue waste and consume. 

 

 

 

 

I like this - "..the network as a whole will reinvest almost all the bitcoin paid out as mining rewards back into its electricity consumption". 

 

So basically the entire group of "miners" are also making nothing, considered as a group. So unless you've some reason to suppose you're more efficient - able to get more "coins" per unit of electricity - then it's an entire waste of time for the "miners" as well. They're in a casino, and haven't the sense to see it. The average miner, when all this lunacy stops, will have "coins" worth less than their electricity bill, assuming that the present ratios hold. The might, of course, just have the electricity bill. Jesus wept. 

[Craig krup]

At 11:35 you can watch the interview with the banker who, once "let go" from corporate slavery (and all that awful salary, pension, status stuff) set up an exchange. 

 

https://www.rt.com/shows/keiser-report/424939-episode-max-keiser-1218/

 

The Independent's running a story about a bankrupt exchange possibly causing a price collapse as its stocks are sold. 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/bitcoin-cryptocurrency-price-crash-predicted-mt-gox-exchange-latest-a8324026.html

 

Here's the interesting quote. "Mt Gox has previously offloaded around $500 million worth of bitcoin, with each sale usually being reflected by severe drops in cryptocurrency markets." So you can't move $500 million without "severe drops". Not exactly the dollar, is it? 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2018 by Craig krup

[seancbk]

3 hours ago, Hummin said:

 

Bitcoin’s energy usage is huge – we can't afford to ignore it

 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/17/bitcoin-electricity-usage-huge-climate-cryptocurrency

 

A step bakwards if you ask me. Bitcoin feed the creed, and continue waste and consume. 

 

 

 

 

 

Take a look at Burst Coin.    

 

940 kWh

Electricity consumed per transaction (Bitcoin)

0.2 kWh

Electricity consumed per transaction (Burst)

 

http://www.burst-coin.org/

 

 

 

[Hummin]

It continue to remind me of World Game inc in the 2000. The same debate and the same arguments. New shit new vending. You can bottle air and sell air, but it is still air inside the box and it is what people think is special about the air, that gives it a value. Voss water is still water, and not even from Voss. It is called branding!