Circle is a business. Businesses need to make money to survive. Bitcoin might have great potential but right now it's not perfect. Circle are not speculators or traders. The truth is that fiat businesses are more stable and profitable than Bitcoin ventures. Businesses don't care what Bitcoiners think, believe or dream of. It's capitalism.

Circle abandoned Bitcoin because they weren't making enough profit off it. Now they are trying to build a fiat wallet running on Blockchain technology with no fees. Everyone else who is sucking on Bitcoin's tit won't leave as long as the money keeps coming in.

Why didn't you post this thread from your main BitcoinSupremo account and went back to your alt smho_16? Is this an attempt at shameless self promotion or what? Talking to yourself in 3rd person wow  

What do you mean by that line? What buying things and paying for services mean to you? Only $1000+ bills?

But I specifically asked you above if you think your proposal would work for large as well as small transactions and you said yes. And I gave you a real world scenario and gave you an example of what I think is a common daily life transaction, too. I don't know what your bills are but mine aren't whole numbers all the time  Convenience is the selling point of new technology and if people feel inconvenienced by using it the idea will simply not take off.

There is nothing to assume about Bitcoin replacing fiat because this just isn't going to happen even in your wildest dreams. What we are speculating about in this thread is Bitcoin getting transacted offline which in itself is an oxymoron by the way. How can you be sure that Bitcoin's price will stabilize itself in the future? It could in 150 years from now when there is nothing more to mine but that's again an assumption. Also, how can you correlate Bitcoin adoption with price stabilization? Have you seen a Bitcoin live price ticker recently? I challenge you to watch one carefully and if you don't see the values changing in 5 minutes or less I will eat my shoe.

Well let's think about this issue again. I beg you pardon but I still believe this is going to be an issue. Let's assume I have deposited 12 coins and have gotten 100 bitnotes 0.1BTC each. Let's assume 0.1BTC is valued $10 fictitiously. Now let's assume we need to pay for our dinner which costs $27.99. On top of that let's assume that the Bitcoin price will be fluctuating like it is now and the price constantly changes every other couple of minutes or so. We don't have to tip the waiter and want to pay the exact sum it's on our tab. How would we manage to assemble the exact same amount with our bitnotes without going short or paying more? Mind you the Bitcoin price is changing as we are talking to the waiter and fiddling with our bitnotes.

The issue I find with the banks being the sole provider and processor of these Bitcoin certificates is that you could hold certificates denominated in just one face value. And one will need a lot of these papers in their wallet if they want to transact different amounts when buying stuff or services. Do you think this paper Bitcoin certification system would work for buying everyday items like a coffee and a sandwich at lunch or movie tickets or a bottle of water? Maybe parking tickets? Isn't it more convenient to grab a metal fiat coin and pay with that and be on your way?

Okay so if only the banks will be issuing these paper certificates, what denominations will these be issued in? Like $100, $500, $1000? And do you suggest these certificates be used only for securing loans and paying of debts or will there be other usage for them?

So who is going to issue these Bitcoin paper certificates? The banks themselves or people would be able to write themselves some certificates as well in the same fashion as we write checks today on a paper pad?

I haven't read it either. But you don't need to read it from top to bottom to understand the essentials of Bitcoin. But yeah I guess it would be a very interesting read for people with advanced knowledge about cryptography and mathematics. I should really free some time to read through it though. Maybe during the Christmas holidays  

Cloud mining is hit or miss because the yield you are getting depends on a lot of factors. And sometimes the projected figures of profit you are promised might not pan out as expected and you could possibly go into negative profit. I don't think anyone could give you a 100% correct answer as cloud mining companies differ a lot from each other.

I think the complete opposite would happen if Bitcoin replaced fiat which won't happen anyways as already noted above. Because when fiat is replaced by digital money the physical money would become obsolete and thus worthless. Their value from a collector's point of view will plummet because there would be no interest in keeping such outdated artifacts any more.

Guys did you see how nervous Mourinho was near the end of the match? I bet he was having flashbacks from the game last week lol   And I think the public even booed Fellaini when he walked on the pitch. Anyways congrats to United on finally getting a win and I think they owned Tottenham today and completely deserved it.

Why would you use Bitcoin offline, dude? Just reach in your pocket and get out paper fiat or your credit card. I think you are trying way too hard here. Plus the banks will have fees in place to process your Bitcoin 'cheques'. You want to feed the poor old banks I see?

Like I said, overly complicated and inconvenient.

P.S. please add punctuation to your posts because it's customary.

Overly complicated and inconvenient. The same thing can be achieved with a smartphone and an Internet connection. I don't know who in their right mind would run to the bank to deposit cheques and receive digital tokens in return. It's usually the other way around.

Basic income is not basic wage, guys. Basic income is the free money you get from the government while basic wage is the minimum salary you are guaranteed to receive by law IF you actually work the worst job ever. $3000/month in basic income is just too much.

I think taking under 2.5 goals is a risky bet for that match. If Tottenham score an early goal the game will open up fast because United will have their backs against the wall and Mourinho will command more attacking play which will lead to even more opportunities for goals by both teams. I think this game could go either way easily and it will be over 2.5 goals. Just look at the results of the EPL games from yesterday.

Guys do you even moderate the PrimeDice chat? I have been there for a couple minutes and had to close the window because of the barrage of swearing and nonsense that a couple of VIP members were spewing out. Or just because they have VIP status they are allowed to talk shit all the time?

This website lists libraries where this book could be borrowed from. There are some places in the Philippines where it's available I think:

http://www.worldcat.org/title/law-on-partnerships-and-private-corporations/oclc/24404754