Quote from: FastBluff on March 22, 2014, 05:55:43 AM

Quote from: AlexGR on March 22, 2014, 04:28:28 AM

Quote from: contro on March 21, 2014, 10:46:42 AM

Both, but bitcoin are better, easier to keep and to use : )

Bitcoin is better than gold, as long as the NSA doesn't bring a few gazillionhashes/sec with an ASIC farm they own to gain 51% the network. All it'd take for the NSA is a ~50-100mn USD equipment contract with some ASIC manufacturer (which is peanuts for their standards).

Gold has no 51% attack problems or external uncertainties of what the NSA will do tomorrow. It has however other types of uncertainties like what will happen to gold production if the energy prices are somehow down by 80-90%, or what will happen if underseas mining start, or what will happen if gold can, at some point, by synthesized by low energy nuclear reactions etc.

Why does everyone keep posting about the NSA taking over bitcoin. Am i missing something? There is NO WAY that one could achieve 51% of the mining rate. It would be absurd and overall and not cost effective as they would continually have to reinvest in equipment to maintain their mining rate.

As the poster earlier than me replied, their cost would be negligible at this point.

What's at stake here, is the hegemony of the USD. If Bitcoin becomes an increasingly popular alternative, they may take the order to break it. That would be last resort though because it would indicate massive panic on their side that would lead people to Gold & Silver with greater intensity than ever.