Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 53 results by arabianights
The question is, how Atlantis already knew it a couple of days ago... FBI honeypot theory confirmed?
I'm guessing DPR tipped off Atlantis that he was being investigated and was about to go down. They then made an educated decision to not continue down the same path. Just a guess...
DPR got a knock and talk from HIS agents in June 2013 for the seized fake IDs he ordered. He must of known or had some idea that shit was about to hit the fan.
I take it we can assume some alphabet agency used the fake IDs to gain the dump of SR?
FBI agent
low orders on BTC
release news
picked them up cheap,
?
Profit
low orders on BTC
release news
picked them up cheap,
?Profit
I'm looking forward to the dump of 600 000 BTC at market.
I had the same initial reaction as almost everyone else here to the hitman claims - and personally now I've thought about it, I would never get a hitman for reasons explained later.
But instead of just condemning him for it, you should at least try to see where he was coming from. If many thousands of silk road users were revealed, I guarantee there would have been at least a few deaths and many lives ruined.
For a start, any users in Singapore or Malaysia or many other East Asian countries could have been looking at the death penalty.
Then there are those with addictions to benzodiazapenes and barbituates, and possibly some other drugs, where sudden forced cold turkey will kill them. You will be reading about some of them shortly.
Then there are the many addicts to other substances who are going to accidentally OD in the near future. To be fair this is going to be less likely than normal simply because silk road (by and large) was just so damn good - more likely is the addicts will not get enough and be, er, warm turkey (is that right?)
Then of course the many many many more addicts who will just have to go cold turkey. If you were buying drugs to sustain an addiction from silk road you were almost certainly a functioning addict, something that the anti drug groups try to pretend doesn't exist. To be a functioning addict you need a reliable supply. Lose that and many of these addicts are going to lose jobs and family. There will be suicides, not to mention suicides from withdrawal, including PWS.
All those are predictable consequences of stopping major drug suppliers, and are one reason the war on drugs is simply evil. But releasing the names of users would be far far worse - especially in places like america where they drug test employees. Anyone on that list would get that at a very minimum. More likely, just fired. And that's ignoring the police investigations, where tbh at least in America they will pay lip service to respecting your rights. Albania, not so much.
Combine all that and unless you always believe killing is wrong, no matter what, there is a perfectly reasonable argument for cold blooded murder.
Even so, I wouldn't order a hitman myself and for three major reasons - the users brought this on themselves by taking the risk of signing up for silk road. This, I think, would severely shift the balance of responsiblity away from me such that I wasn't forced to make a deal with the devil. Secondly, I would have no idea where to hire a hitman and am skeptical "real" ones even exist. Thirdly, the above analysis assumes the two options are murder or nothing. In reality there were plenty of other options that could be taken and he should have tried one of them.
P.S. @ the person who thinks it's appalling to think murder is an acceptable form of justice. Of course it's appalling. But you know who's supposed to enforce justice? The government. Do you think that I can take some guy to small claims court if he sells me oregano for $200/oz? It is precisely this, being forced to take justice into your own hands, which causes the worst practical side effects of the war on drugs.
But instead of just condemning him for it, you should at least try to see where he was coming from. If many thousands of silk road users were revealed, I guarantee there would have been at least a few deaths and many lives ruined.
For a start, any users in Singapore or Malaysia or many other East Asian countries could have been looking at the death penalty.
Then there are those with addictions to benzodiazapenes and barbituates, and possibly some other drugs, where sudden forced cold turkey will kill them. You will be reading about some of them shortly.
Then there are the many addicts to other substances who are going to accidentally OD in the near future. To be fair this is going to be less likely than normal simply because silk road (by and large) was just so damn good - more likely is the addicts will not get enough and be, er, warm turkey (is that right?)
Then of course the many many many more addicts who will just have to go cold turkey. If you were buying drugs to sustain an addiction from silk road you were almost certainly a functioning addict, something that the anti drug groups try to pretend doesn't exist. To be a functioning addict you need a reliable supply. Lose that and many of these addicts are going to lose jobs and family. There will be suicides, not to mention suicides from withdrawal, including PWS.
All those are predictable consequences of stopping major drug suppliers, and are one reason the war on drugs is simply evil. But releasing the names of users would be far far worse - especially in places like america where they drug test employees. Anyone on that list would get that at a very minimum. More likely, just fired. And that's ignoring the police investigations, where tbh at least in America they will pay lip service to respecting your rights. Albania, not so much.
Combine all that and unless you always believe killing is wrong, no matter what, there is a perfectly reasonable argument for cold blooded murder.
Even so, I wouldn't order a hitman myself and for three major reasons - the users brought this on themselves by taking the risk of signing up for silk road. This, I think, would severely shift the balance of responsiblity away from me such that I wasn't forced to make a deal with the devil. Secondly, I would have no idea where to hire a hitman and am skeptical "real" ones even exist. Thirdly, the above analysis assumes the two options are murder or nothing. In reality there were plenty of other options that could be taken and he should have tried one of them.
P.S. @ the person who thinks it's appalling to think murder is an acceptable form of justice. Of course it's appalling. But you know who's supposed to enforce justice? The government. Do you think that I can take some guy to small claims court if he sells me oregano for $200/oz? It is precisely this, being forced to take justice into your own hands, which causes the worst practical side effects of the war on drugs.
However, the court documents note that Canadian law enforcers have said there was no record of a homicide taking place in White Rock, British Columbia at the time.
Do you really think a person on the silk road just went up and shot someone. They probably used a poison method.
Death by poison would be considered a homicide as well, Sherlock..
Not if they aren't looking for it. Look up Robert "Iceman" Kuklinski, many of the people he killed were never linked due to the fact he used poison and it looked like a heart attack.
It is well known photos cannot be edited and there is no such thing as makeup or special effects
This could hurt Bitcoins...
not much happening in turns of exchange rateIt JUST happened.....I see btc going down a bit, but rebounding. Might be a nice time to buy
My thoughts exactly.
I was going to dump a hell of a lot of bitcoins but decided against it given the big money is clearly on the bid again. Still, I dumped a few...
However, the court documents note that Canadian law enforcers have said there was no record of a homicide taking place in White Rock, British Columbia at the time.
Do you really think a person on the silk road just went up and shot someone. They probably used a poison method.
Death by poison would be considered a homicide as well, Sherlock..
Not if they aren't looking for it. Look up Robert "Iceman" Kuklinski, many of the people he killed were never linked due to the fact he used poison and it looked like a heart attack.
The messages allegedly gave the blackmailer's "details".
And yeah I agree that if it wasn't a government, the blackmailer was definitely the "contract killer". Probably pissing himself laughing until he hears about this.
By the way, if I were trying to get DPR and were a shady spook, I would arrange this sort of thing so he can deny being responsible for the messages... at which point the question becomes which messages WERE you responsible for? After all denying responsibilty 100% ain't gonna wash. Plea bargain here we come...
pretty obvious TOR has a vulnerability that is being actively exploited - I suppose it's just about possible that freedom hosting was coincidentally found and then every other TOR site was screwed from TORMAIL... but I doubt it.
Wonder if the blackmailer was the prick behind freedom hosting. It's not as if he was a nice guy.
I have some unencrypted stuff on silk road but I have already had the joy of being convicted for it so I hope they waste many hours investigating me
(sniffer dog coincidentally finding something then watch put on my mail, combined with me not really giving a shit about consequences - not likely to have been a sophsiticated operation!)
As for putting a hit on someone, obviously it's not something that most of us could ever justify. But I can see how an idealist could. One prick blackmailer dead versus the many deaths and thousnads of ruined lives that would be an inevitable consequence of a massive silk road leak.
Remember the reason drug dealers (some of them) are so violent is ultimately because they cannot go to the police. It is a direct consequence of the state sponsored war on drugs and the blood is on the politicians' hands.
Wonder if the blackmailer was the prick behind freedom hosting. It's not as if he was a nice guy.
I have some unencrypted stuff on silk road but I have already had the joy of being convicted for it so I hope they waste many hours investigating me
(sniffer dog coincidentally finding something then watch put on my mail, combined with me not really giving a shit about consequences - not likely to have been a sophsiticated operation!)As for putting a hit on someone, obviously it's not something that most of us could ever justify. But I can see how an idealist could. One prick blackmailer dead versus the many deaths and thousnads of ruined lives that would be an inevitable consequence of a massive silk road leak.
Remember the reason drug dealers (some of them) are so violent is ultimately because they cannot go to the police. It is a direct consequence of the state sponsored war on drugs and the blood is on the politicians' hands.
Re: Bitcoins Direct - Private off exchange sales. (Update: PNC Bank now available)
As a resident I can be a silent partner and open the account for ya in return for a tenth of what you're paying per month 
(You would need to setup a company over here which again I can help with but after that I have no idea what is involved and it may be prohibitively expensive)
(You would need to setup a company over here which again I can help with but after that I have no idea what is involved and it may be prohibitively expensive)
Re: Bitcoins Direct - Private off exchange sales. (Update: PNC Bank now available)
Maybe I wasn't clear, it isn't available to business accounts at any cost. Bank Of America intentionally cripples that service so it can't ve used to send funds from or to business accounts. Banks have small business exactly where they want them. "Free checking" yeah not for businesses. Transaction fee, deposit fee, withdraw fee, ACH fee, check fee, bank wire fee, monthly fee, account data fee, and every bank's favorite the credit card fees. Business accounts are even charged to use cash (no I am not kidding)!
So Bank Of America (and every other major bank) cripples all these instant transfer services to make sure businesses can't bypass their fee empires. If a customer wants to pay a business the banks want them to use a CC so the bank can get 3% or maybe a bank wire so the bank can collect $10 to $30. IIRC last month we paid almost $2,000 in banking fees and we still can't use instant account transfers.
So Bank Of America (and every other major bank) cripples all these instant transfer services to make sure businesses can't bypass their fee empires. If a customer wants to pay a business the banks want them to use a CC so the bank can get 3% or maybe a bank wire so the bank can collect $10 to $30. IIRC last month we paid almost $2,000 in banking fees and we still can't use instant account transfers.
How about opening a dollar bank account here where I live on the Isle of Man? Obviously business banking still ain't free but it's a hell of a lot cheaper than that!
Rather good news in my opinion, as hopefully it will bring some more intelligent (and even better,stupid) investors with serious money into looking at things... or perhaps not, but can't do any harm.
Link to article
Link to article
Quote from: Reuters
(Reuters) - Financial traders have a new toy: Bitcoin, a digital currency variously dismissed as a Ponzi scheme or lauded as the greatest invention since the Internet.
Unlike conventional fiat money and other digital currencies, Bitcoin runs through a peer-to-peer network, independent of central control. Bitcoins are currently worth $4.88 each on online currency exchanges, where they can be bought and sold for about 15 world currencies.
Users - an odd assortment of uber-geeks, anarchists, libertarians, scammers and forex traders - sent about $4.3 million worth to each other in the last 24 hours.
Banking and payment expert Simon Lelieveldt believes they are living on borrowed time.
"There is always a power base underlying a currency," he said, speaking at the Digital Money Forum in London in March.
"Bitcoin is not going to fly because there is no central bank or power base. It's doomed to fail."
But its separation from power is precisely what attracts many users.
"Bitcoin is not run by people with hot sexual appetites for hotel maids. It is not run by corporations. It is not governed by people with budgets to meet. It is governed by a mathematical formula," one trader and Bitcoin enthusiast told Reuters over a pint of Guinness in London's financial district.
He also likes that there is an absolute limit of 21 million Bitcoins built into the system.
"If you try to print more than 21 million Bitcoins, you will be rejected by cold, loveless computers whirring away in nerds' garages. It is a better form of money than we have right now, or than anyone has designed so far."
The trader, who was not willing to be named, said he spent four hours a day on Bitcoin, describing it as his second job. He estimated 90 percent of traders have bought it, most "looking for a quick 2,000 percent".
He, however, is playing the long game, accumulating as much as possible in the belief that one day, he will own a small but significant percentage of a world currency with a fixed supply.
He and three other traders are currently seeking Bitcoin startups to invest in, he said, adding he was hoping to put in $300,000 worth.
WILD WEST FINANCE
He is not alone. Workers at Morgan Stanley (MS.N) and Goldman Sachs (GS.N) in London and New York have been visiting online Bitcoin exchanges as often as 30 times a day, according to documents seen by Reuters. Neither bank wanted to comment.
Employees at almost all the major international banks and numerous trading and investment firms have shown interest.
Bitcoin has become the Wild West of finance, with a proliferation of websites offering loosely regulated replicas of the services familiar to those in the financial industry.
There is a Bitcoin stock exchange, where companies can make initial public offerings and pay dividends in Bitcoin.
One website offering Bitcoin options trading was listed' this month for an implied valuation of half a million dollars.
Perhaps the most notorious is Bitcoinica, a platform offering margin trading, short selling and stop orders run by 17-year-old Chinese high school student Zhou Tong.
Users can leverage their bets up to a ratio of 10:1 on Bitcoinica, meaning they can lose more than their initial investment.
Zhou Tong, who is professionally advised by a forex trader and the head of a Singapore-based algorithmic trading firm, now lends his name to international slang.
To be "Zhou Tonged" is to be wiped out financially.
The chorus of a YouTube rap laments a Bitcoin day trader rash enough to hold a position with no stop loss protection: "It's so silly, how come you just lost funds? You got Zhou Tonged!"
THE ANTI-BANK SYSTEM
Its popularity with financial professionals highlights an irony at the heart of the Bitcoin usership; suspicion of the banking system is written into the program's DNA.
It was released in January 2009 by a developer using the probable pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto. Embedded in the code of its first block of transaction history are the words The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks'.
This was a way of time-stamping the first Bitcoin transaction, but also a clue to the developer's motivation.
Before disappearing as an online presence in January 2010, Nakamoto made clear his disapproval of quantitative easing measures and blamed banks for creating credit bubbles.
Such sentiments are common among users.
"There are no bailouts of banks on Bitcoin," one put it.
WHAT IS IT FOR?
The Greek owner of an island bar and restaurant who accepts payment in Bitcoin alongside euros told Reuters he liked the currency because it was the opposite of a banking system.
"I don't put money in the banks," said Gerald, who did not give his surname. "I trust the euro as a note, but I don't trust banks. I don't want them making money out of my earnings."
Digital money consultant Jon Matonis, former head forex trader at Visa, said Bitcoin was a natural fit for societies that prefer cash payments.
"Try tell the Italians that they can't use cash any more. Try tell the Greeks!" he said.
Bitcoin payments are difficult to trace back to a person's identity, offering an anonymity that protects users from data-mining by advertising companies, but also facilitates illicit trade and has obvious potential for money launderers.
The currency gained notoriety alongside a website named Silk Road, where vendors offer to send heroin, LSD, or 9mm Beretta handguns in the post in exchange for Bitcoin.
Yet there are signs Bitcoin is finding a niche among ordinary people for everyday, legitimate transactions.
One British businessman in China said he regularly used it to deal with businesses in Asia, Europe and the Americas because of local restrictions on sending currency to foreign companies.
"I've been able to have cash in my bank account in a matter of hours using Bitcoin, rather than three days with traditional banking," he said.
Quietly, a growing list of businesses are starting to accept it for a wide range of goods, from legal services to food.
Matonis says it could be a perfect digital poker chip' for online gambling and a competitive way for immigrants to send money back home.
REGULATION LOOMS
Bitcoin poses a puzzle for regulators. It does not fit the UK Financial Services Authority's definition of e-money as it is not issued on the receipt of funds, according to an FSA response to a Bitcoin business that requested to be regulated in the UK.
But the creation of Bitcoin could amount to "issuing payment instruments" as long as Bitcoins in fact count as money, which is "if and when they become widely used", the FSA concluded.
A spokeswoman for the German Bundesbank told Reuters it was not classifying Bitcoins as e-currency.
She said EU law required only euros to be accepted as legal tender, but this was superseded by German law that allows those involved in a contract to determine its content. So Bitcoin is at least not illegal there.
The situation in the United States is even more complex, where financial regulation differs from state to state.
As Bitcoin is a huge distributed peer-to-peer system, any effort to enforce regulation would be difficult, though the exchanges, where Bitcoin is swapped for real-world currency, are potentially vulnerable.
A legal precedent could come from France, where the biggest online exchange, Mt Gox, is in dispute with Credit Mutuel's Credit Industriel et Commercial.
Mt Gox sued CIC after the bank closed its account. CIC said the company was illegally behaving as a financial intermediary and that using their account made the bank an accomplice, according to court documents.
The court told the bank to reopen the account and compensate Mt Gox, but it was unable to determine whether Bitcoin is a virtual currency under French law and thus subject to relevant regulation. It has referred the question to another court.
"If exchanges which are trying to walk the path of legality are being closed, then less law-friendly exchanges will thrive," commented Mt Gox head Mark Karpeles.
"This won't stop Bitcoin. It may just kill any chance Bitcoin has to become a clean way of paying merchants, friends and family."
Credit Mutuel declined to comment on the ongoing case.
ECONOMIC ENIGMA
The existence of Bitcoin is also an economic puzzle, raising questions about the definition of money itself.
Its value depends on users' belief that it is worth something. So does all money, but in the case of Bitcoin this faith could be more fragile.
It also runs up against standard economic theory that people will not spend money if they expect it to increase in value; the 21 million limit means once all Bitcoins are in circulation, there are no internal inflationary pressures to devalue it.
More of a threat is the tsunami of other digital forms of money that are beginning to be offered by states and companies.
The Royal Canadian Mint, for example, is exploring how to issue digital currency in the future. Its chief financial officer Marc Brule said Bitcoin's biggest problem was that it is not backed by anything.
"The system we would bring in would be backed by a fund," he told Reuters. "Bitcoin may work for the small group of people that believe in its value, but that could change very suddenly."
Without that backing or a similar power base, Bitcoin lives with the ever-present risk of failure.
"To be clear, I would say the same about the euro," said payment expert Lelieveldt.
(Reporting By Naomi O'Leary; Editing by Will Waterman)
Unlike conventional fiat money and other digital currencies, Bitcoin runs through a peer-to-peer network, independent of central control. Bitcoins are currently worth $4.88 each on online currency exchanges, where they can be bought and sold for about 15 world currencies.
Users - an odd assortment of uber-geeks, anarchists, libertarians, scammers and forex traders - sent about $4.3 million worth to each other in the last 24 hours.
Banking and payment expert Simon Lelieveldt believes they are living on borrowed time.
"There is always a power base underlying a currency," he said, speaking at the Digital Money Forum in London in March.
"Bitcoin is not going to fly because there is no central bank or power base. It's doomed to fail."
But its separation from power is precisely what attracts many users.
"Bitcoin is not run by people with hot sexual appetites for hotel maids. It is not run by corporations. It is not governed by people with budgets to meet. It is governed by a mathematical formula," one trader and Bitcoin enthusiast told Reuters over a pint of Guinness in London's financial district.
He also likes that there is an absolute limit of 21 million Bitcoins built into the system.
"If you try to print more than 21 million Bitcoins, you will be rejected by cold, loveless computers whirring away in nerds' garages. It is a better form of money than we have right now, or than anyone has designed so far."
The trader, who was not willing to be named, said he spent four hours a day on Bitcoin, describing it as his second job. He estimated 90 percent of traders have bought it, most "looking for a quick 2,000 percent".
He, however, is playing the long game, accumulating as much as possible in the belief that one day, he will own a small but significant percentage of a world currency with a fixed supply.
He and three other traders are currently seeking Bitcoin startups to invest in, he said, adding he was hoping to put in $300,000 worth.
WILD WEST FINANCE
He is not alone. Workers at Morgan Stanley (MS.N) and Goldman Sachs (GS.N) in London and New York have been visiting online Bitcoin exchanges as often as 30 times a day, according to documents seen by Reuters. Neither bank wanted to comment.
Employees at almost all the major international banks and numerous trading and investment firms have shown interest.
Bitcoin has become the Wild West of finance, with a proliferation of websites offering loosely regulated replicas of the services familiar to those in the financial industry.
There is a Bitcoin stock exchange, where companies can make initial public offerings and pay dividends in Bitcoin.
One website offering Bitcoin options trading was listed' this month for an implied valuation of half a million dollars.
Perhaps the most notorious is Bitcoinica, a platform offering margin trading, short selling and stop orders run by 17-year-old Chinese high school student Zhou Tong.
Users can leverage their bets up to a ratio of 10:1 on Bitcoinica, meaning they can lose more than their initial investment.
Zhou Tong, who is professionally advised by a forex trader and the head of a Singapore-based algorithmic trading firm, now lends his name to international slang.
To be "Zhou Tonged" is to be wiped out financially.
The chorus of a YouTube rap laments a Bitcoin day trader rash enough to hold a position with no stop loss protection: "It's so silly, how come you just lost funds? You got Zhou Tonged!"
THE ANTI-BANK SYSTEM
Its popularity with financial professionals highlights an irony at the heart of the Bitcoin usership; suspicion of the banking system is written into the program's DNA.
It was released in January 2009 by a developer using the probable pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto. Embedded in the code of its first block of transaction history are the words The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks'.
This was a way of time-stamping the first Bitcoin transaction, but also a clue to the developer's motivation.
Before disappearing as an online presence in January 2010, Nakamoto made clear his disapproval of quantitative easing measures and blamed banks for creating credit bubbles.
Such sentiments are common among users.
"There are no bailouts of banks on Bitcoin," one put it.
WHAT IS IT FOR?
The Greek owner of an island bar and restaurant who accepts payment in Bitcoin alongside euros told Reuters he liked the currency because it was the opposite of a banking system.
"I don't put money in the banks," said Gerald, who did not give his surname. "I trust the euro as a note, but I don't trust banks. I don't want them making money out of my earnings."
Digital money consultant Jon Matonis, former head forex trader at Visa, said Bitcoin was a natural fit for societies that prefer cash payments.
"Try tell the Italians that they can't use cash any more. Try tell the Greeks!" he said.
Bitcoin payments are difficult to trace back to a person's identity, offering an anonymity that protects users from data-mining by advertising companies, but also facilitates illicit trade and has obvious potential for money launderers.
The currency gained notoriety alongside a website named Silk Road, where vendors offer to send heroin, LSD, or 9mm Beretta handguns in the post in exchange for Bitcoin.
Yet there are signs Bitcoin is finding a niche among ordinary people for everyday, legitimate transactions.
One British businessman in China said he regularly used it to deal with businesses in Asia, Europe and the Americas because of local restrictions on sending currency to foreign companies.
"I've been able to have cash in my bank account in a matter of hours using Bitcoin, rather than three days with traditional banking," he said.
Quietly, a growing list of businesses are starting to accept it for a wide range of goods, from legal services to food.
Matonis says it could be a perfect digital poker chip' for online gambling and a competitive way for immigrants to send money back home.
REGULATION LOOMS
Bitcoin poses a puzzle for regulators. It does not fit the UK Financial Services Authority's definition of e-money as it is not issued on the receipt of funds, according to an FSA response to a Bitcoin business that requested to be regulated in the UK.
But the creation of Bitcoin could amount to "issuing payment instruments" as long as Bitcoins in fact count as money, which is "if and when they become widely used", the FSA concluded.
A spokeswoman for the German Bundesbank told Reuters it was not classifying Bitcoins as e-currency.
She said EU law required only euros to be accepted as legal tender, but this was superseded by German law that allows those involved in a contract to determine its content. So Bitcoin is at least not illegal there.
The situation in the United States is even more complex, where financial regulation differs from state to state.
As Bitcoin is a huge distributed peer-to-peer system, any effort to enforce regulation would be difficult, though the exchanges, where Bitcoin is swapped for real-world currency, are potentially vulnerable.
A legal precedent could come from France, where the biggest online exchange, Mt Gox, is in dispute with Credit Mutuel's Credit Industriel et Commercial.
Mt Gox sued CIC after the bank closed its account. CIC said the company was illegally behaving as a financial intermediary and that using their account made the bank an accomplice, according to court documents.
The court told the bank to reopen the account and compensate Mt Gox, but it was unable to determine whether Bitcoin is a virtual currency under French law and thus subject to relevant regulation. It has referred the question to another court.
"If exchanges which are trying to walk the path of legality are being closed, then less law-friendly exchanges will thrive," commented Mt Gox head Mark Karpeles.
"This won't stop Bitcoin. It may just kill any chance Bitcoin has to become a clean way of paying merchants, friends and family."
Credit Mutuel declined to comment on the ongoing case.
ECONOMIC ENIGMA
The existence of Bitcoin is also an economic puzzle, raising questions about the definition of money itself.
Its value depends on users' belief that it is worth something. So does all money, but in the case of Bitcoin this faith could be more fragile.
It also runs up against standard economic theory that people will not spend money if they expect it to increase in value; the 21 million limit means once all Bitcoins are in circulation, there are no internal inflationary pressures to devalue it.
More of a threat is the tsunami of other digital forms of money that are beginning to be offered by states and companies.
The Royal Canadian Mint, for example, is exploring how to issue digital currency in the future. Its chief financial officer Marc Brule said Bitcoin's biggest problem was that it is not backed by anything.
"The system we would bring in would be backed by a fund," he told Reuters. "Bitcoin may work for the small group of people that believe in its value, but that could change very suddenly."
Without that backing or a similar power base, Bitcoin lives with the ever-present risk of failure.
"To be clear, I would say the same about the euro," said payment expert Lelieveldt.
(Reporting By Naomi O'Leary; Editing by Will Waterman)
The only reason people are losing shitloads on bitcoinia is cause they're idiots.
There are both enormous transaction fees and forced price taking. This means there is a huge cost in both putting on and taking off positions, and consequently the only suitable usage of bitcoinia is for longer term trades.
But people are trying to trade intraday using it!
Then they wonder why they blow up.
Blaming zhou tong for ones stupidity is sour grapes tbh.
There is only one reason to use bitcoinia, and it is for the leverage. I have a small position there for that reason, and no other one. And even that is roughtly 2x leverage. Nothing else would work with the volatlity and spreads.
There are both enormous transaction fees and forced price taking. This means there is a huge cost in both putting on and taking off positions, and consequently the only suitable usage of bitcoinia is for longer term trades.
But people are trying to trade intraday using it!
Then they wonder why they blow up.
Blaming zhou tong for ones stupidity is sour grapes tbh.
There is only one reason to use bitcoinia, and it is for the leverage. I have a small position there for that reason, and no other one. And even that is roughtly 2x leverage. Nothing else would work with the volatlity and spreads.
To register it in the Isle of Man he needs a Manx address.
He can use mine and I'll pay the filing fee, in return for 2% share in it...
I can also be a "man on the ground" for another couple of percent.
These offers are not designed to make me money by the way, they will have a considerable opportunity cost... they are because I believe in bitcoin.
He can use mine and I'll pay the filing fee, in return for 2% share in it...
I can also be a "man on the ground" for another couple of percent.
These offers are not designed to make me money by the way, they will have a considerable opportunity cost... they are because I believe in bitcoin.
You likely don't. However most Boomers will be dead within 20 years which is how long I think it will take Bitcoin to become as mainstream as Paypal, twitter, or ebay.
twenty years!?!?
paypal took about five
I iz asked a question
Of course they can't be expected to switch to bitcoin over paypal... but imagine if they did... could be just what bitcoin needs...
Of course they can't be expected to switch to bitcoin over paypal... but imagine if they did... could be just what bitcoin needs...
Intersango already does this.
So it does.
I may have a go at market making on it in a couple of weeks when I have some spare time.
Even so... the fees they are charging are still far too high, if I understand them correctly. They should be comparable to the tick size in an instrument of this volatility .
That's pretty much the question I'm asking in this thread!
Do you know how a traditional brokerage account would act in regards to that leverage question?
I've never heard of adjustable leverage with one
I've an idea, shamelessly stolen from many other non bitcoin exchanges.
Start paying liquidity providers - or at least letting them trade for free. You can do this by increasing the trading fee for people demanding liqudity.
This will hugely benefit everyone by massively increasing liquidity and bringing market volatility down. It will also benefit you by increasing trading volumes.
Start paying liquidity providers - or at least letting them trade for free. You can do this by increasing the trading fee for people demanding liqudity.
This will hugely benefit everyone by massively increasing liquidity and bringing market volatility down. It will also benefit you by increasing trading volumes.
I am not advocating trading 10:1 leverage... with that spread you would immediately die.
But why not trade 2:1 leverage with the account left in 10:1?
We need a proper exchange where you can earn the spread.
But why not trade 2:1 leverage with the account left in 10:1?
We need a proper exchange where you can earn the spread.