ITS OVER! BITCOIN IS FINISHED! ETHEREUM IS FINISHED!
CHINA CENTRAL BANK TO RELEASE OWN CRYPTO-CURRENCY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE
DUMP COINS NOW
This is the beginning of the end. I don't even mean the end of Bitcoin (although this signals that too), I mean the end of everything. Only those who understand what cryptocurrencies really are and why fiat must ultimately be purely digital will know what the implications of this is. This was planned many decades ago and is finally coming to fruition. We live in dangerous times gentlemen. Now we are at the point where you must be more observant or you will miss the writing on the wall.
Only people who know what Bitcoin really is know what he's saying lol.
ELI5. Blockchain tech is like
Nsa on crack etc just read what blocduxjdibcos
>Whole point of cryptocurrencies is to avoid getting fucked by governments
>Anyone ever giving a shit about a chinese cryptocurrency
>This guy knows
>This guy has no clue.
You think you know what the point of cryptocurrencies are because they created a persona for you to believe in with an ideology that lined up with yours. You don't find it interesting that we don't hear a peep from Nakamoto while all of this is going on? Because you should.
Tell me what they are good for, then.
I never even owned cryptos, and im not a libertarian.
We dont even know who Nakamoto is or what his motives are so theres literally no reason to bring him in.
Cryptos are being used to avoid all kinds of governmental influence and for speculation right now, theres next to no lawful purchases with them.
Satoshi nakamoto is Nick Szabo. A hungarian jewish british academic. A pretty humble guy.
You can read his blog, Google "unenumerated" "blogspot".
There's nothing sinister about cryptocurrency. Just a way of transmitting the information we humans call "money"
>Cryptos are being used to avoid all kinds of governmental influence
This is exactly they would like you to believe. How else would they introduce a technology that is so blatantly intrusive and anti-privacy as a public blockchain? It's a trojan horse. Either way it played out, it was meant to be, Once you put a train in motion...
China won't be the last to create a crypto. In less than 20 years every government will follow suit until there is one world currency and fiat is done away with entirely. If you didn't see this coming then you aren't looking hard enough.
Yeah privacy is really shit when people can see your public key instead of your real name like in "normal" transactions. Oh wait you just talk dumb shit and still cant explain what the fuck you are talking about.
You know that "normal" bank transactions are not public right? Just because the blockchain doesn't contain your full name doesn't mean your public key linking to all your transaction information shouldn't be private. We as people go to great lengths to keep telephone numbers, social security numbers, bank account information, identification numbers, etc. out of the reach of snoopers and thieves but yet because Bitcoin is supposed to be "anonymous" it is somehow different? Do you know that Bitcoin exchanges store your public keys along with dozens of other identifying information? Exchanges servers have been hacked before and they will be hacked again. Then you say "well just don't use exchanges then", but doesn't that defeat the whole purpose if you have to meet up in person to buy and sell Bitcoin?
That's all beside the point though. Bitcoin's pseudo-anonymity and public blockchain is intrusive but it is nothing compared to the government run cryptocurrencies that will eventually supersede Bitcoin. Pandora's box is already open.
Maybe you should go to an IRL bitcoin meetup in your local area instead of speculating randomly based on the paranoid ramblings of clueless idiots on the internet. At least do some reading.
I went to london meetups back in '13 met mike hearn, gavin anderson, andreas antonopoulos those guys are genuine people. Pretty common knowlege who SN was even in those days. Obviously there's no way to PROVE it because he doesn't want to prove it because it's not gonna help him in any way.
You're just a clueless noob watching from the sidelines.
>meet up with nut jobs and shills who's sole interest is Bitcoins price and why it should rise
Haha. Wait... You're serious, aren't you? You really think that's going to be an unbiased and reasonable conversation? I'd probably get stabbed for blasphemy.
Also, I got a good chuckle out of your pic. Don't be too hard on yourself. Not too many people are able to see things from outside of their tiny realm of influence.
Granted. Shareholder meetings can be pretty big circlejerks. Negative publicity affects shareholder confidence and since everyone there has skin in the game, it doesn't allow much for open discourse. I'm not sure how that somehow makes Bitcoin forums and meetups any less unscrutinized. Even on /r/bitcoin even a slight amount of anti-bitcoin sentiment gets responded to with angry, hateful bashing and name calling. All I did was offer a differing opinion and even in this thread it was implied I was autistic, paranoid, clueless, an idiot, a noob (lol haven't heard that one in a while), and retarded. It's almost as if I killed your dog or something.
If you understand the implications of where that could go you gotta admit, that's a smart decision for a central bank to make. It's awful hard to have a bank run if you decided to rob the masses with negative rates when there's nothing physical to withdrawal. Absolute control.
Now if only they could get the masses to adopt it as a good thing before they roll it out en mass.. oh wait
the only interesting aspect of bitcoin is its decentralize nature
if a government controls the underlying block chain its just digital money, something which has existed for years
governments are fucking dumb
>new world order and mark of the beast
I alluded to neither. It's not new, it's the same world order its always been. These aren't conspiracies, they are fully documented events that are happening in our world today. Government officials would love for you to think there is a shadow government operating behind the scenes because it takes the scrutiny off of them. When I talk of the push towards a cashless society and one world currency, I'm not getting my information from Infowars or Zerohedge, no this is readily available in mainstream media (CNN, CNBC, Reuters, etc). At the last G20 summit meeting they made a provision that would allow the IMF to act as a central bank and provision SDRs to increase global liquidity. Since then there have been over $300 billion worth of SDRs created out of thin air. This isn't something you should be concerned about only if you are a religious nut job, this is something that affects you personally and your financial freedom.
We live in an ever evolving world and the government use of civil forfeitures is on the rise. Even in the US, they have been been intruding on the financial payments of US citizens and companies without due process (something that is fully unconstitutional). Banks own you. The only way to combat this is to decrease your debit and credit card use and spend cash. Cryptocurrencies sound like a good idea because they are decentralized and give the illusion of being outside the governments realm of influence, when in reality they are not. Just the sheer fact that cryptocurrencies require connectivity make them susceptible to monitoring. The US Senate has made decisions about the envelopment of cryptocurrencies in to the existing currency transaction surveillance laws and methods, meaning they can use the non public information you provide to cryptocurrency exchanges to track your use of such currencies. The solution to government control of our finances through digital means is not to go more digital.
It's not just digital money, its "new" digital money. Just like Bitcoin was created to generate wealth out of nothing, so will a new Chinese digital currency. The only difference from a Chinese controlled crypto and yuan (for example), is that paper yuan allows for a certain amount of anonymity and concealment, whereas digital currencies can be fully controlled. There is nothing dumb about it. The only dumb part about the article is that it makes the assumption that the second largest bank in the world all the sudden decided to do this after one study and in response to some perceived threat from Bitcoin. This has been in the works for a long time, gentlemen. Don't be so naive.
SDR's and XDR is creepy as anything
The idea that money will never move fully into the digital space is rudiculous. It will happen one way one another. Power structures will always exist, so you can whine or get in while BTC, ETH and NXT are cheap.
Or build services using those systems to profit off the growth of crypto.
But you wont. You are the poorfag of the future, blaming circumstance till you die.
It's baffling to what they can get away with it. I shouldn't really be surprised, however. When the US gave away $200 billion in bank bailouts and a total amount of $466 billion to other companies, agencies and mortgage lenders, the public outcry was pretty much limited to some people mulling around on Wall street. Nice.
Everything you posted in this thread sounds stupid and I wasn't buying it so earlier today I went fact checking with the intent of debunking you. You know what I found out? The more I'm researching it the more you are starting to make sense.
There are still some assumptions you make that I can't tell are true or not so maybe you can explain them. How do you know that Bitcoin is a Trojan horse? Also, how do you know all this crap? Why the interest?
Duhhhhhhhhhh when people tell you to buy Bitcoin, were just to lazy to articulate that Bitcoin is just another Trojan horse for control.
If anyone on this board spends at least 30 minutes learning what a blockchain is you'd invest quickly.
The price movements and lame news is just to create context to makes it seem less boring.
>How do you know that Bitcoin is a Trojan Horse?
I can't know with complete certainty but there are many factors that point to it. Bitcoin is the perfect vehicle to usher in a global currency. The NSA has been interested in how to make anonymous electroinc cash since at least 1996, however there was no cryptography standard strong enough at the time to secure it (this was before SHA-2). Eventually the NSA creates SHA-2 in 2001 because of known vulnerabilities in SHA-1. Later, SHA-2 becomes the standard for which the Bitcoin blockchain model is built. Interestingly enough, a year before the NSA whitepapers for an anonymous digital currency were published, what was called The Crypto Wars was happening. This was when the NSA wanted to take "Clipper Chips" and force tech companies to distribute them in hardware so the NSA could have a backdoor to cryptographic hash functions for any tech that held one of their chips. They also paid the RSA $10 million under the table to make elliptical curve technology, which they had known backdoors to, the standard in cryptographic security. They have a lock on all modern day cryptography. There is a law that the BIS (Bureau of Industry and Security) must be notified before any open-source cryptographic software is made publicly available on the Internet. This directive comes from the highest levels. Both UK Minister David Cameron and US President Obama called for a ban on all non-backdoored cryptography saying that there should be no "means of communication" which "we cannot read". The real question then is which current use cryptography already has backdoors?
Cryptocurrencies have been around long before Bitcoin. The first known type of cryptocurrency was called Digicash and it was light-years ahead of its time. David Chaum, who was in the top 5 experts of cryptography at the time, had created Digicash as a cryptographic anonymous electronic currency. Before he created Digicash, Chaum had worked specifically with intelligence agencies. In a declassified internal NSA communication dating back to '95, Chaum had been mentioned multiple times relating to security. In addition, the NSA has cited him as an expert in their whitepapers and used his work as a basis for their own. Unfortunately there is not enough information to tell if he was working with them in tandem or not at the time that they were creating the blueprints for an electronic digital currency. The only thing that is certain is that they had a good working relationship. It is interesting to note that Chaum sides with the NSA on many issues, including privacy and security. In his latest venture, PrivaTegrity (which is essentially an anonymous instant messaging app), he wants to purposely create a backdoor so that a committee can trace criminals and decrypt their communications. In his own words: "You have to perfect the traceability of the evil people and the untraceability of the honest people". If you are unclear as to his influence and importance in the crypto world, some of the leaders in the cryptography space were at one point employees of Chaum (including Nick Szabo). Eventually Digicash became E-cash and Chaum wouldn't sell it to Microsoft for $180 million dollars which was a lot of money for a startup back then. He also had interest in buying his company from Visa, ING, and Netscape but he refused all of them.
So here comes the kicker and why I think David Cham, or a group of people including him (maybe in tandem with NSA?), are the real Satoshi. What I posted previously could all be contributed to coincidence but this is a little more meaty. Wei Dai (who developed b-money) and had personal correspondence with Nakamoto says flatly that Nick Szabo isn't Satoshi and explains why. Nick Szabo was still fielding questions about his Bitgold when the papers for Bitcoin were released. Also, Nick wasn't known for being a C++ programmer. The interesting part is that Wei made his early emails with Satoshi public the information contained in them is startling. Here is the gist:
>Bitcoin was initially named E-cash
In the email to Wei Dai, Satoshi posted a link to download the early Bitcoin papers. The link was "http://www.upload.ae/file/6157/ecash-pdf.html". Notice that the filename says "ecash-pdf" and not the final published filename of "bitcoin-pdf". It was changed later. The old prerelease draft link is broken and doesn't work anymore. The PDF is also unavailable in the archive. According to the dates, the ecash draft was earlier than the final one uploaded to bitcoin.org.
>The title of the Bitcoin papers used to be "Electronic cash Without a Trusted Third Party"
He since has changed it to “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”. Pic related is proof that there was an earlier draft (although nobody seems to have a copy of it). I have a feeling that the email to Wei Dai was an oversight and that he (or they) had been referring to the concept of Bitcoin as E-cash up until that point but probably realized that it too closely resembled the name of Chaums digital currency and would draw suspicion.
tl;dr It's all speculation, you can't prove anything you're asserting. While you do make some interesting points, I don't see them adding up to the conclusions you're jumping to.
Just another Internet prophet, pretending to know the future.
Which is exactly why I said "I can't know with complete certainty but there are many factors that point to it". If there was concrete proof then we wouldn't be having this conversation would we?. Also the only speculation is the last portion of what I posted as to if the NSA is behind Bitcoin. Everything else is common knowledge. Yes, governments are already in the works of creating cryptocurrencies. Thats why we even have this thread in the first place. It's not some crystal ball type prophecy; these are real events.
Yeah I went back and read your OP and I'm not convinced by your 'reasonable guy' facsimile.
I'm willing to look at any hard evidence you care to present, but that does not include the bs you've thrown up so far. I mean how much time do we really have to indulge your pet theory? Here's an alternate: blockchain tech will enable the proliferation of multitudes of competing currencies, ultimately decentralizing money completely. I also, as you, assert my claim without evidence.
You are asking for extra evidence and sources to back up my claims and these are good places to start. Also, let me know anything you are incredulous about and I can provide extra sources. I doubt you will read any of these because I have a hunch that your interest in Bitcoin is mostly only relative to positive news and price predictions, but if you do, we can talk further
Because government institutions can manipulate their currency with things like interest rates. But gold and silver cannot be manipulated as easy because it is a physical thing, except when some bronze age states mandated an exchange ratio of gold to silver. Naturally this ratio is like 1:16 to 1:20, but I think the romans fixed it to 1:5. There were capital outflows of one metal.
The definition of fiat money from wikipedia is:
>Fiat money is a currency established as money by government regulation or law. The term derives from the Latin fiat ("let it be done", "it shall be") used in the sense of an order or decree
Using this definition, if a cryptocurrency were to be created and sanctioned by a government it would therefore be fiat. Bitcoin is believed to be free from central authority which means it wouldnt fall under this definition.
Fun fact: the Greeks used the Trojan Horse to breach the walls of the Trojans undetected. Once they were inside and destroyed the city, there would therefore be no use for the horse anymore and it was probably broken down to create more wooden shields for the army.
People that get hard on crytpocoins:
>shills who have desperately been shilling for so long now, praying for another bubble that will never come, that they started to belief in their own bullshit
>the worst type of conspiracy theorists, those that think that because they were sort of correct 1% of the time, now think they understand the entire world, and believe every single thing thats posted on a conspiracy site, without even doing 5 minutes of research
Normal people are just fine with using regular cash, if that means they can avoid having to waste time on learning some edgy autistic and unnecessarily complicated technology.
>Sorry to ruin your dreams, maybe go back to your shit dayjobs.
He is referring to his vision of the future.
Once money is purely digital people will be chipped.
The chip will contain their banking account and other personal info. With money being purely digital, if your assets get frozen you are completely fucked.
Thus it will be used whenever people protest against the system.
Yada yada new world order
Imagine a boot stomping on the face of humanity for eternity. Etc. Etc.
normal transactions are only between you and the other party involved and the gov. if they feel like checking you out for whatever reason
digital currencies are automatically public and a unique identifier is used and you can track "someones" purchases historical and in real time, knowing what is known about the current information mining tech it is very possible that certain groups could put them together, also there is more room for abuse of odigital currencies then there are of fiat money(central banks arent retarded they want to crash the worlds economies so they can get everyone to play a new game)
>You have to perfect the traceability of the evil people and the untraceability of the honest people
Wtf? Chaum really said that? How the hell does the government know the difference between honest people and evil people? That's a fucking slippery slope he's treading on.
The first 2 links are pretty eye opening in light of everything else you posted. So if your theory is true and Bitcoin was created by the NSA with help from Chaum, or the other way around, what is the purpose? Why create Bitcoin if they have plans to eventually create a cryptocurrency through the central bank? Wouldn't Bitcoin be a competitor to it?
Yes. He did.
There are any number of purposes. Bitcoin started off as just a proof of concept and the white papers read like an unrealized prototype. They needed a demonstration of principle to see if the concept could be sustained on a large scale. You don't want to roll out a new digital currency without testing to see if the theory of cryptographic exchange using digital coins was sound. Because of the decentralized nature of Bitcoin, they couldn't feasible create a development environment before mitigation to production, so everything was done on the fly. Within a year of creation, an exploit was found in the early Bitcoin client where you could artificially create bitcoins. This was fixed and they rolled back the bad chain, but it would have been disastrous if it happened to a "live" currency.
This link shows some of the hacks and thefts that Bitcoin was plagued by. The best way to discover vulnerabilities within the code is to open up your technology to users in beta phase and see how it responds. Now they have a fairly good idea of how well cryptocurrency stands up to public use and what weaknesses exist and how those deficiencies can be mitigated and improved on.
Another purpose I can see offhand is that a government created cryptocurrency wouldn't have been too well received. There is a lot of mistrust of the Fed (for good reason) and there was no way that they could spin this in the media to make it more acceptable to the general public. They needed a Trojan Horse to breach the walls of public confidence. Enter Bitcoin stage left. Although financially intrusive on many levels, they could use the pseudo-anonymity aspect of it to appeal to libertarians and the ilk that would normally oppose use of a financial ledger that kept a public record of all of their transactions.
I just imagine all the currency manipulation that will be available to governments. Inflation will be invisible, everything will be just vapid numbers on computers that can be altered in a second without any actual physical worth.
that's a lot that can go wrong in a very small amount of time
>Wouldn't Bitcoin be a competitor to it?
I hinted at an explanation here. >>1055943
The way to break down Bitcoin after it has outlived its usefulness isn't to ban it. That would just make it recede into to the darknet and TOR. There would have to be a dual focus to undermine Bitcoin entirely and this would be done by crashing the price and destroying trust in the underlying technology, which are the two things that Bitcoin enthusiasts care about most. Crashing the price would be fairly easy. All they would have to do is hack in to Bitcoin exchanges and steal coins (something that has already been done by cyberpunks). This would also partially serve the second focus of sabotaging credibility and trust of the system. They could also allude to the fact that there is a backdoor in the random number generator used to create the private keys and leak this to mainstream media. If people were to suddenly discover that their private keys weren't safe, it would cause a panic.
These are hypothetical situations. There are plenty of other ways that the government could kill the Bitcoin project.
Exactly. The implications are enormous. I find it extremely unsettling that the Central Bank of China just announced they are creating a cryptocurrency and nobody within the public realm seems to care. I don't think they understand exactly what this means for the future of money.
Not really. It's not even worth arguing with you. You're too many standard deviations below our IQs.
The technology behind Bitcoin/Ethereum is open source and the network has to be adopted by PEOPLE. The government is not insane enough to start assassinating people and unleashing the CIA to make the world adopt an Ethereum fork that has some backdoor.
YOU ARE A FOOL. Like I said, you'll be the first to be shot when the day of the retards comes.
>You're too many standard deviations below our IQs.
The best way to not have to provide a well thought out response as to why I am misinformed is to attack my character or intelligence. The standard way to do this is to say "it's not worth arguing with you", and yet you felt the need to respond to me regardless, but without providing any information to back up your assertions.
>The government is not insane enough to start assassinating people and unleashing the CIA
This is not even close to resembling anything that I have posted or even hinted at in this thread. All of the information I have posted can be readily verified by multiple links and sources. In the cases where I am unsure or can't prove my theory, I have said so.
I'm so glad that my parents taught me to read at the age of 3. Maybe that was it idk? There must be something that made this guy turn out like this and made me turn out the way I am. Some early developmental influence perhaps. Maybe his mother drunk alcohol while pregnant or smoked.
Anyway, I'm thankful that I'm not you.
Yeah, it's not worth arguing with you. I'm predicting like a 2% chance of changing your mind even if I tried.
>Exactly. The implications are enormous. I find it extremely unsettling that the Central Bank of China just announced they are creating a cryptocurrency and nobody within the public realm seems to care. I don't think they understand exactly what this means for the future of money.
>This is not even close to resembling anything that I have posted or even hinted at in this thread.
You think that somehow a government/central bank is going to create a centrally-controlled protocol that will replace current blockchain technology.
>So here comes the kicker and why I think David Cham, or a group of people including him (maybe in tandem with NSA?), are the real Satoshi.
You are seriously /x/-tier idiocy.
>You think that somehow a government/central bank is going to create a centrally-controlled protocol that will replace current blockchain technology.
No, that's where you are wrong. I don't think that this is going to happen, it is already happening. If you read the OPs initial link you would see that this isn't some far-fetched theory, this is something that is already in the works.
There are a couple errors in your statement though. The Central Bank of China isn't trying to replace blockchain technology. They are using blockchain technology to create a digital currency. They aren't creating a new protocol, they are using the one that has already been created. This isn't even up for debate. It is plastered all over mainstream media.
4chan is full of dumbasses these days.
Nice collection of gay as fuck gifs btw. In addition to having the critical faculties of a potato, the knowlege of world affairs as a 4 year old girl you have the sense of humour of a cartoon nazi.
WHY is the market closed in weekend?
What the fuck I WANT TO TRADE.
Get the fuck away with this sabbath shit
I think my responses to you are going to be limited from here on out. You offer no arguments just personal attacks and you are trying to devolve this conversation to your level. I'm not going to bite. If you ever do have anything meaningful to say and can intelligently defend your position, I might be inclined to respond more to you. Until then, take care.
Eventually a decentralized exchange will be released and bring Bitcoin, and other cryptocurrencies to their full, proper potential (pretty obvious that Bitcoin was designed to thrive on one, not on a centralized model). Think about how that effects your points, and cryptocurrency use in general.
Lot of tinfoiling going on in this thread.
Nobody us going to use China's stupid state-run cryptocurrency except a handful of morons who don't know any better.
>he assumption that the second largest bank in the world all the sudden decided to do this after one study and in response to some perceived threat from Bitcoin. This has been in the works for a long time
If you look at the history of Chinese currency over the last, oh, 3,000 years you'll see that their government (no matter who was in charge) has an absurd history of making sudden, drastic, misguided and uninformed changes to their currency, always with the opposite of their intended effect. They have done this on average approximately every forty years for the last couple THOUSANDS of years. They're fucking clueless.
I'm full aware of the possibility of a decentralized exchange. It should theoretically work with escrow accounts since you need somewhere to hold the fiat. With a true peer-to-peer currency exchange this would probably solve issues of government intervention. The real question though is how do you decentralize trust, accountability, and insurance against default? User ratings? We have seen in the case of eBay that it is not foolproof even with the most reputable sellers. Can you offer any insight to a working model?
>Nobody us going to use China's stupid state-run cryptocurrency except a handful of morons who don't know any better.
Why wouldn't they? The yuan has been losing value in relation to USD for quite a while now. Why wouldn't they use a government sanctioned digital currency to hedge against that?
Myself and other individuals in a project have working software that successfully executes trades. Decentralized, pure peer to peer.
Fiat is a work in progress, but there are ways to keep the third parties that hold/supply the fiat from meddling.
And we aren't even the first to accomplish any of this, as such. There are/have been other projects with different p2p exchanges (inferior workarounds to achieve decentralization, I must say, but still p2p). It's only a matter of time until decentralized exchanges are numerous and accessible. They're coming, count on it.
why would it need to be deflationary? they can centralize creation and still have it be digital , tin foil hat anti federal reservers forget that "fractional reserve banking" oils this whole damn economy, good luck getting a loan for anything ever without it
I like the people who draw a distinction between crypto and fiat currencies. Forgive me for not assuming that having expensive computers brute forcing private keys until they have money represents some physical commodity.
It's painfully obvious to me that none of you have any clue what you're talking about. Do any of you know how a one-way hash function works or what an elliptic curve does? Do you know about the homomorphic properties of ECDSA? What about how Bitcoin solves the byzantine generals problem or what proof of work is? Public key cryptography? Smart contracts? Deflationary economics? No?
Reading all of this /pol/-tier shit has been laughable. If you people spent any where near as much time learning how cryptography and economics work instead of trying to prove the existence of the tooth fairy maybe you would know just what the fuck you were discussing. Until then: thanks for the good LOL /biz/. It's always amusing watching uninformed people discuss something far above their pay-grades.
Also, nice short OP.
Cool. I really didn't think there were any working models yet. That does open up some possibilities. I think the real challenge would be how to anonymously get fiat in, not get cryptos out. Banks are in the habit of restricting transactions based on government interference (gambling sites in the US, for example). Then you have the problem of merchants accepting cryptos which could be regulated with KYC to extreme levels or banned entirely. I think a fully decentralized marketplace would have to accompany the decentralized exchange or else you would have nowhere to actually "spend" your coins. I'm not saying that any of this is not possible, just that it looks to be challenging from a number of different perspectives. No sarcasm when I say that I hope you guys pull it off.
>Do any of you know how a one-way hash function works or what an elliptic curve does? Do you know about the homomorphic properties of ECDSA? What about how Bitcoin solves the byzantine generals problem or what proof of work is? Public key cryptography? Smart contracts? Deflationary economics? No?
Yes. Which of any of these would you like to know? Also, are you aware that the NSA has known back doors to elliptical curve cryptography used in random number generation?
You got it backwards. The NSA has supposedly doped random number generation to allow a backdoor in eliotic curve cryptography.
See? I know more about your conspiracy theories than you do. Shouldn't that tell you you don't know kack shit?
>All currency is digital, so in effect they would be scapping the already digital yuan and creating a new digital yuan?
If it helps serve the aim of eliminating cash? Yes.
I'm confused though. Do you think this article is satire? Do you somehow believe that this isn't going to happen and that when the Central Bank of China releases news that they are creating a digital currency that they are not being genuine?
>all currency is digital
Stop fucking posting, please. I own Bitcoin and think it has future potential but shut the fuck up. You are wrong and sound like an idiot. You aren't doing our cause any favors.
The yuan is already a digital currency though. How do you think international bank transfers work? Do you think they ship truckloads of cash internationally?
How will creating a new digital yuan that conpetes with the old digital yuan benefit the chinese government?
You do know that digital currency doesnt mean the same thing as cryptocurrency right?
Thats regulating physical businesses not regulating bitcoin transactions. I'm asking how will government stop me from sending bitcoins to someone else short of abolishing internet connections.
Almost correct. The yuan is not purely digital. It is comprised of a digital portion and of cash. Instead of eliminating cash through legislative process, it is much easier for them to create an entirely new currency that doesn't have any paper tied to it, and slowly transition through those particular means. This would also serve the purpose of them better controlling the inflation rate.
It won't. This new development just signals government intent to control personal finance on a global level. If they are dedicated to eliminate cash which is fully sanctioned by governments because of "criminal elements that seek to use anonymous transactions to evade taxes and sponsor terrorism", where do you think that leaves Bitcoin at the end of the day? If the current aim is to create new digital currencies that will become legal tender, what becomes of the non-legal tender? The destruction of Bitcoin isn't due to this, but merely a byproduct of the end goal.
What is your thought on NEM, XEM, New Economy Movement?
"Loss of freedom seldom happens overnight. Oppression doesn't stand on the doorstep with toothbrush moustache and swastika armband -- it creeps up insidiously... step by step, and all of a sudden the unfortunate citizen realizes that it is gone."
You're going to make me re-type it? I thought you got the hint. The answer is nothing. I doubt they can stop you from sending Bitcoins. They can just limit you from buying bitcoins, selling bitcoins and buying goods or services with those bitcoins. If you do end up doing any of these things, they can monitor and track its usage.
If they want to destroy Bitcoin entirely they would go to greater means. See >>1056360
Lucky for you they haven't seemed to do any of this yet.
Nope. Think of it like an e-mail. The government can't stop you from sending an e-mail but they can monitor and track what's sent through them. They can also prosecute you if the email contains evidence of any activity that they deem illegal. Those emails can be subpoenaed in a court hearing to determine your guilt. E-mails are also considered binding contracts.
If you want to compare this to Bitcoin, it is the same concept. In the case of DPR and Silk Road, he was prosecuted, not for his use of Bitcoin, but the manner in which they were used. Because of this they were able to seize his Bitcoin wallet and send him to prison. This goes to prove that there is no reprieve from government laws and regulations and that decentralization is not a not a means of escape. They are a step ahead of you.
Thanks for the support. There are actually a few decentralized exchanges out already, and a handful that are well into development. None are seeing meaningful use however, and I put this down to two things: these projects have failed/are unable to advertise on the required scale to get the word out and say "hey, decentralization is here, so get the fuck away from the inherently flawed centralized model", or much worse, people just don't care as long as they can trade their coins with ease on busy markets. If that's the case, then decentralized exchanges are basically a brilliant accomplishment being glossed over by everyone except the hardcore enthusiasts who do care about things like the exchange not being hackable by not holding coins, and issues of that nature. I'm not sure what to think, but I really hope the problem is that most people just don't know about the existence of decentralized exchanges and their benefits. Kind of in the dark here...
>I really hope the problem is that most people just don't know about the existence of decentralized exchanges and their benefits
I think this is the case but that's just my guess. I've been following cryptocurrencies since 2010 and even I wasn't aware that there were currently any fully functioning decentralized exchanges. I always thought it was vaporware and still in a conceptual stage. If they do exist, it could possibly be a game changer. Are there any specific ones that you think might have merit?
They do. I think dark markets will continue to exist as long as there is demand for illegal goods and services. That's a niche market and a far-cry from mainstream use, however. If Bitcoin ever does retreat into Tor and the darknet, the NSA will probably have a hard time doing anything about it until someone figures out a way to crack Tor. I found it funny that the Russian government is offering $100k or so for someone to do that. I thought it was such an insignificant amount for the difficulty required to pinpoint Tor user identities.
Some better than others in terms of how they achieve decentralization. I'm not fully informed about any of them since my project is on serious hiatus, mostly due to a complete lack of funds and myself and the other main guy being busy with a bunch of other stuff. Really discouraging actually, because I know what we've got on our hands, and it's a potential world changer. It would bring Bitcoin to 100% potential, rather than it being held down by centralized trading/use.
Are you a software dev, or involved in a tech industry? Seems like it.
Cool! Thanks, I'll check these out and also see if I can use them to buy a small amount.
>Are you a software dev
I used to be. I also used to develop web applications for corporate use. Right now I am a consultant for financial compliance and risk management in the banking and tech sectors (mostly ISO, SOX and GLB). I have also worked with cryptocurrency companies as an advisor about AML regulations.
>this is the type of person advising companies about crypto
Awesome. Which of those projects stands out to you?
Also, would you be interested in exchanging contact details? If/when the project I'm part of gets revived, I'd be very interested in collaborating with you in some fashion. My main working partner is a very talented dev, and between us we may come up with a project to work on together.
I'm just about to start a software dev degree with a minor in economics. Studied finance at uni, but my interests are now mostly in cryptocurrencies and startups, hence the new study path.
I'm not advising them about crypto, thats their specialty. In relation to these companies, my expertise is limited to Anti-Money Laundering. My qualifications are through the Association of Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists and ABA International.
I think I have heard about Coinffeine before in passing conversation. It's probably worth another look. I'll check out the other ones as well though.
>exchanging contact details
Sure. Shoot me a throw-away email address.
Please nobody listen to this guy.
Read the ethereum white paper. Watch some youtube videos about blockchain databases. yes this will take some effort, and having to look up terms, and re-reading difficult technical white paper.
Make up your own mind.
They're all reasonable for trading a handful of cryptocurrencies, which is a great start, but that's just part of the puzzle. Ironically, I'm holding all of the other pieces and can't do a damn thing because zero funding :/.
Why all the sudden interest in Ethereum? It has been around since July of last year and hasn't really been mentioned here much except this avalanche of posts within the last week. Is it because of the price spike? I haven't heard of any fundamental changes to the technology itself?
Thanks. Will reach out to you soon.
2. A couple britcucks (one?), some other dude and I have shilled the fuck out of it
3. Mike Hearn/R3 most recently which has driven the price spike and sent interest into overdrive
There's a coordinated Etherium pump going on right now (not related to the Etherium developers it seems, but some other investors). There's a bunch of Reddit accounts being purchased to PM spam people there, as well as other places.
if i start mining ether today, will i be late for the train?
how much can you get a month of mining?
There's a currency I want to own.
When it's value starts to drop they will just refuse to allow me to sell it or at any arbitrary point they feel like they will remove it from me and claim I never owned it to begin with.
Communist countries are stupid places to put money unless your friends with the govt.
I will answer your question in full because of the picture.
No, if you start mining ether today you won't be late for the train. Ether will switch to a proof of stake algorith for coin generation in the later part of this year. So the window to mine with a computer is about 9 months.
You will need a graphics card with at least 4gb onboard vram. how much ETH you generate depends on the speed of your card.
More info here:
ive got a:
amd radeon r7 260x 2gb
8 gig ram
intel g3258 3.2ghz
can i still play emulator games while mining and shit? sometimes the microwave knocks out my wifi connection, will that be a problem mining or can the mining continue if there are hiccups? how can i be secure in mining?
the girls name is iiniku btw
im deciding my passphrase for my account and i dont know what to do to protect it from hackers from deciphering it.
did you guys just make up numbers or did you just make it a normal password?
im fucking worried. how many characters do you have? im thinking like using 43 or something. im a fucking noob to all this shit man. im reading about security and other shit people getting hacked.
im treating it like an mmo. like runescape. i have nothing to lose right now and im curious. but then again if i made some ether, how can i be sure that im secure? im researching all i can.
Idk man, i don't use geth. I'm just a shill not tech support. Go and ask on leddit.
keep in mind though that deflationary systems are good for people with lots of money. The people agitating to keep the gold standard were the super rich at the time, because having lots of money is a lot better if there isn't as much of it around.
If there are logical inconsistencies then point them out? It's fairly easy to call anyone a conspiracy theorist or a retard, but normally that will fall on deaf ears unless you actually provide some proof to debunk what they are saying. It's a cop-out to say someone isn't worth responding to on the basis that you won't change their mind anyways. That way you don't ever really have to have a justification for anything that you say. If you want people to take you seriously, you might try backing up your statements with an intelligent argument.
In response to conspiracy theories - did you know that there are instances where people actually do conspire? The word "conspire" is in fact a real word in the dictionary and isn't just some mythical act that unicorns do. Go figure. It's not paranoia if people really are out to get you.
>can not into ROI
Show me some math first son.
>what is electricity
>what is difficulty
I did my math on KNC Jupiter days and shit never pays, expect for the actual machines. I was smart enough to sell 3 units on ecuck for a lot of money on retards thinking this shit would pay off
I could get into a really long explanation but the relatively short answer is this: A push towards purely digital currencies and the elimination of cash destroys personal privacy and forces you to be beholden to a central bank. Cash allows for a certain amount of anonymity and freedom of spending. Government sponsored digital currencies will mean your whole financial record is kept on one public ledger that the government has unlimited control of. What if they decide to take re-tax you as they please and itemize your own deductions for you? IRS audits will be a thing of the past. What if they force you to get health insurance and then limit your spending on what they deem are bad habits? What if they seize all your currency and assets without due process on suspicion of criminal activity (something they already attempt to do through civil forfeitures)? What if they don't stop there? A blockchain can technically store any information, not just financial. This will eventually be used to store all medical records, employment history, education, criminal records, spending habits, location, records of assets, all outstanding debt, credit history, psychological profile, religious affiliations, internet browsing history, political views, etc. The list goes on...
Of course there are some people that don't mind that this is the direction the world is head in.
>"I'm not a criminal, why do I care?"
>"I'm not a Muslim, why do I care?"
>"I don't mind being taxed 40% of my income, why do I care?"
>"I don't browse 4chan, why do I care?"
That's fine. There are some of us who do care, however. Blockchain technology in the wrong hands is intrusive and ultimately a threat to every citizen's freedom. Even if you don't feel like you are being controlled or intruded on because your views happen to align with theirs, that doesn't mean you won't ever be targeted.
fucktard you had me excited then.
i would put all my pennys into it, and the couple of nickles i got too. if i t was real.
then i read the link 'STUDYS PROSPECT OF' i dont even need to go there i understand english correctry.
Try this link >http://www.pbc.gov.cn/goutongjiaoliu/113456/113469/3008070/index.html
It's the official source. They already studied the prospects of and are past the decision phase. It's already in the works. They want to roll this out ASAP
TL;DR: will the chines go full 1984 and fuck up the cryptocurrency?
>Cash allows for a certain amount of anonymity and freedom of spending.
I thought BTC offered even greater anonymity. Unless the future of all cryptocurrencies have great detail(inc. personal) for every transaction
Tax is debatable since income is traceable via blockchain transaction.
Healthcare? How does this even relate with currencies? This is up to healtcare companies
>I thought BTC offered even greater anonymity
Cash is fully anonymous. Blockchain tech is pseudo-anonymous as it stands now. When it is in the hands of the government it might still be pseudo-anonymous to other users but non-anonymous in terms of what the government can see.
>Tax is debatable since income is traceable via blockchain transaction.
Not sure what you mean here. This statement is too vague for me to catch your drift.
>Healthcare? How does this even relate with currencies? This is up to healtcare companies
I'm not even talking about healthcare. I am talking about government subsidized health insurance.
> What if they decide to take re-tax you as they please and itemize your own deductions for you?
Explain this please
>I'm not even talking about healthcare. I am talking about government subsidized health insurance.
I would rather have poor fucks on obamacare not eat mc-dicks and tacobell, but I get the implication. Government control is not a good thing as it limits our freedom.
>Explain this please
I just mean that as of right now there are many ways to decrease your taxable income and find loopholes in tax laws. Sometimes I think that the only reason more people are not up in arms about extreme tax rates is that the ones that care are the ones that have found ways to avoid paying taxes. We have come a long way from the US having no federal income tax in 1912. There would be no need for you to itemize your own deductions if all your business expenses, charitable contributions, use of ofshore companies, limited partnerships, etc. are all kept on a singular ledger. They will just assess your financial information and tax you accordingly, either pulled directly from your paycheck or your account. The only reason the IRS doesn't do this now is they don't have full records of all of your personal and financial expenses and business arrangements. If they decide to perform an audit, they can readily pull all this information together but everything is disconnected and they have to get records from multiple locations since banks don't have a central database for their ledgers.
So individuals and corporations who were underwriting revenue for tax reduction purposes are the only group that should fear this right?
Really interesting so far. Where can I read more about this subject?
>So individuals and corporations who were underwriting revenue for tax reduction purposes are the only group that should fear this right?
As far as the tax aspects, yes. It will probably impact average citizens, however, in that taxes will be most likely be forced contemporaneously on you as you recieve income, instead of you having the option to minimize your withholdings and file at the end of the year. Tax withholdings would be decided on the spot according to your financial profile. Most people don't know that payroll withholdings and quarterly tax payments are fairly recent, having been started in WWII. It was done mostly to reduce transparency on the tax and make it easier to increase taxes in the future. It also gives the government the added benefit of you giving them an interest free loan if you overpaid taxes and penalize you if you underpaid and miscalculated withholdings on your taxable income.
This is just one small aspect. Most legislation within the last hundred years hints at what the end goal is, and it is the erosion of personal and financial freedom.
>Where can I read more about this subject?
Not too sure anyone is addressing this that I am aware of. Mainstream media paints a picture that only serves the purposes of its sponsors and owners. You might be able to find information on alternative media but then you would have to sift through piles of junk. I think the best bet is to do your own research and then try to take it to the logical conclusion.
So a lot of Chinese money has been converted (illegally) into Bitcoin. The reason is the Chinese do not trust their own currency which seeks to become a global reserve currency. The Chinese government starting their own crypto currency will result in a crypto currency that Chinese people still will not want. So I'm wondering how much of this stuff you people understand.
Buying ethereum now, gonna wait to see if it goes up. If it does, swim is gonna buy drugs with it and resell the drugs for 3 times the value.
Essentially if ether goes up by x3 swim can make the investment x9
>seeks to become a global reserve currency
This used to be the case. At this point the Chinese are just content that the IMF made the decision to include it in SDRs. China has been pushing for central bank reform as the yuan has been severely losing value in relation to USD and other currencies. Inclusion into SDR baskets is just as momentous for Chinese financial reform as the admission into the WTO was. This new decision to create a digital currency is just the next step in this progression.
>result in a crypto currency that Chinese people still will not want
Not sure how you made this determination.
What are you talking about? The Chinese want a reserve currency and that is their stated goal for 2020 or so. The problem is they also want control one of those controls involves restricting convertibility of the currency. The Chinese have been since the Chinese market implosion been shoveling money out of China pushing the currency down. China has increased capital controls while supporting the currency by buying it up. This has cause people to want to move money out of China faster
Whether it is in paper, coin or crypto the same currency is the same. Chinese people want dollars, pounds, EUR and Bitcion (still the case) not Chinese currency.
>The Chinese want a reserve currency
The RMB is already a reserve currency. As far as having a *global* reserve currency (RMB Internationalization) they still have a long way to go. For RMB to become a more widely held reserve currency there needs to be more global liquidity and wider cross-border flow channels, among other things. Inclusion into SDRs will be a step in the right direction but because it is not a petrocurrency it will never hold the weight of other global reserve currencies.
>Chinese people want dollars, pounds, EUR and Bitcion (still the case) not Chinese currency.
Still not sure how you made this determination.
>2nd largest altcoin marketcap
>Still only 3% of Bitcoin's market cap
When Ethereum started trading with any volume it had a price of around .005 BTC and now 6 months later it has a price of .0059 BTC. The reality is that /biz/ is attempting to make Ethereum seem more significant than it really is. Will it ever gain traction in any meaningful way? Not sure. As it stands right now, though, it is an unrealized pipe dream with no real world value, as most alt coins are.
But >>1062541 already knew I was going to say that.
Honestly I think you are on crack. The Chinese want a reserve currency but they want to control it and that doesn't. THEY HAVE STATED by 2020 that is there goal. I don't care what you say it what they say that matter.
London, New York, San Fran real estate full of Chinese money because the Chinese people know that the RMB is worthless they want "real money"
Look troll these boards all you want but know some shit before you do.
Doesn't bitcoin just transfer power from govts and bankers to the programmers who design these systems? How is that even remotely better? Serious question, especially since these people don't necessarily specialize in finance.
Would bitcoin even work if there weren't other currencies with actual backing? It sounds like fiat on crack because anyone can create currency and nothing about the process seems intuitive.
Bitcoin is supposed to work by consensus between the mining nodes.
The programmers can program what they like but if no one installed their software then it wont happen.
Its the cause of the impasse in btc at the moment
No one is forced to use btc thats the beauty of it. If you dont like the deflationary nature of the economy then just walk away.
Unlike the us dollar you are not forced to use it at gunpoint , figuratively speaking
How are laypeople supposed to understand their programs though? To me, it sounds like a bunch of people spend money on expensive computers that sit around consuming energy. If everyone used cryptocurrencies, wouldn't programmers basically be bankers who take fees in the form of their rewards from mining and enabling the system to function? Why would I want such a system?
Isn't this just a digital version of ancient banking where local kings manipulated weights and measures of regional currency with private smiths and the threat of force?
As you will probably see I barely understand these technical terms so pardon me if I say something terribly stupid.
>2020 that is there goal. I don't care what you say it what they say that matter.
What goal? Where are you even getting this from? All I can seem to find is this publication:
that essentially says RMB might make up 3 percent of global foreign exchange reserves by 2020. Can that even be considered an end goal? Even then, there needs to be a total overhaul on the central banks financial policies and a complete reform of the capital markets which are ridden with insider trading and rampant market manipulation for this to happen.
>RMB is worthless they want "real money"
I am still unsure as to how you even came to this conclusion.
Thats an inaccurate description and a gross oversimplification.
I'm so mentally fatigued from explaining these same points to thousands of people who have asked me these same questions about cryptocurrencies that the thought of typing out another paragraph on the subject makes me feel physically ill.
All I'll say is that bitcoin despite its flaws is infinitely better than the system we currently "enjoy". Please learn more about it.
This guy makes my toaster look like einstein
None of it makes sense though because I'm not technically inclined. I study finance, not programming. I see no advantage outside of a political agenda based on conspiracy theories about banks and inherent defeatist assumptions regarding human nature. Its like gold, way too speculative and volatile to maintain a consistent measure of value. That's the whole point of owning currency; trading REAL items. If one cow is worth a hundred apples, I want a currency that represents that, not something that could represent a hundred apples tonight and five two months later.
The fuck are you smoking? Money isn't information, its a representation of value. There's something inherently real in using it. People realized that a shoe maker can't trade shoes for everything he needs, so they assign a value to shoes, sells his shoes to those who need them, and receives a transferable unit of value that allows him to pay for what he needs. Someone (govt, bank) regulates the supply of these units so people don't get fucked over, but like any currency, stupid users can counteract monetary policy.
Cryptos are crazy techno babble that people keep trading and speculating. I wouldn't even call it a currency. It sounds more like a commodity and the only reason anyone buys into it is because someone buys into it.
A $20 note is just proof that that person owns $20
The note itself isnt worth $20. There is nothing inherently "twentydollarsy" about a piece of paper with 20 on it. It just tells other people that the person holding it owns $20.
>It is very possible right?
Anything is possible, however unlikely it may be.
>Why all the verbal attacks?
They are under the impression that verbal abuse towards me strengthens their point of view. By insinuating that I am a moron they don't actually have to provide a meaningful response and can deflect any facts that I have presented as not valid because of the source they come from.
>The note itself isnt worth $20
Actually, the note itself is worth exactly $20 and will always be worth $20 as long as the government says it is. The purpose of having notes is in the first place is that the monetary value doesn't change. The only thing that changes is the amount of buying power the $20 note holds.
That is your prerogative.
>that essentially says RMB might make up 3 percent of global foreign exchange reserves by 2020. Can that even be considered an end goal? Even then, there needs to be a total overhaul on the central banks financial policies and a complete reform of the capital markets which are ridden with insider trading and rampant market manipulation for this to happen.
Look harder. You'll find.
>I am still unsure as to how you even came to this conclusion.
With My USD or GBP I can purchase safety, shelter, food, real estate. Anywhere on the planet. With the Chinese RMB theoretically I can only buy $50,000 worth of those important commodities a year in places outside of China. Capital controls combined with historic devaluation makes it nearly impossible to use RMB legally as a medium of exchange outside of China. This is basic shit my friend which you should be familiar with. How then does a Chinese citizen purchase a home in Sunnyside Queens in NYC for $1,500,000? And why? First answer smuggling money out of China, converting illegally into dollars cash. Second answer so that when the shit hits the fan in China because the petrochemical company he owns is found to have poisoned an entire village he isn't captured, paraded around for three months and then shot in the head on a dirt heap.
Grow the fuck up.
>Look harder. You'll find
You're going to have to do better than that. Unless you can provide proof I am going to have to disregard the previous statement.
>Capital controls combined with historic devaluation makes it nearly impossible to use RMB legally as a medium of exchange outside of China
Chinese citizens live in China. Is there something I am missing here? If they were to go outside of China wouldn't it be prudent for them to use a global currency or the currency for which country they frequent?
>How then does a Chinese citizen purchase a home in Sunnyside Queens in NYC for $1,500,000?
With USD? Isn't that obvious that you would use the currency for which country you are purchasing assets from?
This still doesn't prove your assertion that Chinese citizens "know that the RMB is worthless and want 'real money' ". The RMB is the national currency of China. It is not worthless. Yes, it is losing value in relation to USD, but that does not mean everyone is seeking to rid themselves of RMB. Certain Chinese citizens with wealth may be hedging themselves against inflation and the falling yuan by exchanging said wealth to other currencies and assets, but that does not mean that RMB use within China is faltering.
I was hoping someone would mention the barter system because it is a low tech solution. The more technology you use, the easier it is for them to monitor you. Some of the recent technological developments have gained acceptance so quickly that people don't stop to question how they are used. Simple everyday activities like using smartphones apps, checking your email or browsing the internet, using your credit card or bank card, etc. can be tapped by Homeland Security, the CIA and the the NSA. Your every movement and activity is stored as data somewhere. It used to be that you were able to relocate to an underdeveloped country to escape watchful eyes but this may no longer be an option under a global digital currency system.
Fourth Amendment to the Constitution:
>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
Even in 1789, there was a public wariness about the power of the government to infringe on a citizens right to privacy and personal possessions. This amendment was followed by the Fifth Amendment which provided a right to protection of personal information and the Fourteenth Amendment which included: "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". Liberty has a broad definition here that has since been solidified under recent privacy laws with strict guidelines regarding what constitutes invasion of privacy. These laws are the backbone of our personal rights and they are being violated by the government that is supposed to protect them. The due process clause is there to prevent arbitrary denial of our rights outside the sanctions of the law yet it is being disregarded.
Who are you? Are you on smart drugs or something? If so where do I get them? How old are you? What kind of job do you work? Why do you know all of this?
Do you trade stocks? Why are you on 4chan?
>This is a /biz/ness board after all
Trends are easy to spot if you look for them, the real talent is being able to get out before bubbles burst or spotting investment opportunities in the wake. The dotcom boom was unsustainable. When it happened I was doing software development for eToys (which eventually went under). Through this, I learned a valuable lesson about how to adapt to an ever changing market and eventually went into corporate compliance because of Enron and the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2002. Blockchain technology an ever expanding field and the real money does not lie in the cryptos themselves but in the infrastructure surrounding it (exchanges, services, cloud mining, hardware, etc.). There is a market for consultancy services for these newly formed tech companies which need to comply with complex financial regulations that normal non-fintech startups would not have to worry about. This is where I come in and can provide value, although it isn't the only niche surrounding technology innovations in the financial service industry. We are seeing that more and more legacy financial institutions are getting on board with fintech and driving innovation within their sector. You just have to know where to look. Eventually innovation will catch up to current technology and this trend will ebb but I think we have about another decade before banks fully replace legacy systems.
How to profit? I know you want the easy answer but I don't have one. There will be many fintech companies that fall by the wayside. My personal aim isn't to invest in any individual company or technology but to target the financial technology sector as a whole.
Could someone help me understand how bitcoins actually work?
Why is a blockchain needed?
Is a single BTC just a structure/node that points to the previous BTC? Like a linked list?
I don't understand how this keeps BTC safe. Could you just make a "fraudulant" coin and just tack it on to the end and have it point to some already generated coin?
>How old are you? What kind of job do you work? Why do you know all of this?
>Do you trade stocks? Why are you on 4chan?
That's a lot of questions. I own a boutique finance consulting firm which specializes in corporate compliance, risk management and audit for Fortune 500 companies. I don't normally trade stocks, no. I have a Vanguard mutual fund and a lot of business investments. I'm on 4chan because I enjoy being here. There are a few things that I have learned here that I wouldn't have otherwise. Even earlier in this thread some anon was telling me about the prospect of fully decentralized cryptocurrencies exchanges (which I was unaware were already in use).
All the blockchain is, is essentially a public ledger. Everyone who uses Bitcoin downloads this public ledger which keeps a record of all transactions. This is required for it to be decentralized, otherwise a central database would be needed to store all the encrypted data. A single BTC is just a unit of account, much like any other currency. There was a point in 2010 where an exploit was used to create "fraudulent" coins but this was remediated when the bad chain was replaced by a "good" one.
Naw it's going to be Eth man were going mainstream
Nobody has been listening for the last couple years when I have been saying there is nothing proprietary about blockchain technology and that first mover advantage doesn't apply. Think of it as any other technology, except this one has no individual or entity claiming it as intellectual property. For this reason, it can be copied, stolen, pirated, misused, etc. There wouldn't even be any prosecution if someone tried to crack the encryption. I think most of the focus within the crypto community has been on which altcoin has a chance of superseding BTC, but I think that is a rather limited way of looking at it. They are all essentially the same thing with minor differences in what the blockchain is used for, even though there are major divisions among the community (mainly as to how the wealth is distributed).
Blockchain tech will eventually reach the level of full government involvement and then it will all be a moot point. The financial regulations currently infringing on Bitcoin are just the beginning, and they are stringent because they are eventually meant to encompass financial institutions and banks that will utilize blockchain tech. The question I have been asked numerous times on this board is "Who would use a bank run cryptocurrency?" which is not the right question to be asking. Banks will use blockchain tech as the backend to their already established ecosystems. These will be closed-loop because of the outside risk involved with the volatility inherent in decentralized transactions. You will not even know that they have transitioned over, save a few press releases. On the front-end your banking experience will seem exactly the same except that it will be easier and faster to exchange money between banks. It will only be a matter of time before all banks (including Central Banks) are using the same technology. The next step would be to create a new digital currency on the blockchain which is ultimately meant to end all other currencies.
>Chinese President Hu Jintao and former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger attend a luncheon in Washington. (Saul Loeb / AFP/Getty Images)
It originated from Getty Images. What are you hinting at? That OP frequents tabloids?
I read it on Bitcoin talk, it was something about raising the block size limit would eliminate small user nodes for small uses as in not cost effective, so centralization for verified transactions would be only verified by the huge miners, so business can get eliminated quick by slowing there transactions. It's like Comcast and time Warner oligarchy shit.