All posts made by dasein in Bitcointalk.org's Wall Observer thread
1.
Post 2062508 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_10.57h):
While overly rigid regulations are of course bearish for bitcoin, some regulations would actually be bullish. Government regulation removes uncertainty about bitcoin's legality, and provides a framework that can be relied upon by investors. Regulations can also potentially reduce risks for consumers and thereby help make bitcoin more viable for the mass-market.
2.
Post 2158739 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_10.59h):
Maybe is just a continuation of the limitations in United States against online gambling

If is something related to gambling and the warrant issuer feds from Maryland continue their war against online gambling the bad news might not be so severe in the way that it might not be worldwide (they have limited gambling related sites from usa but not from the rest of the world), so the damage to bitcoin might not be "global" with warrant requests all over the world like they requested from New Zealand to fight against K. Dotcom. Also fighting against gambling might not have the same popular backing as calling a war against bitcoin in order to fight terrorism, child abuse or some other things so might be quite impopular for them to just declare war on bitcoin. That is not reason enough for a total war against bitcoin and I hope for that reason we won't see requests to ban MtGox on Japan or continuation of seizures with other US exchanges.
Based on the warrant, the seizure seems to be solely caused by Gox's failure to register as a MSB.
3.
Post 2920731 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.13h):
Scrutiny by regulatory bodies is bullish because either (1) legit operators emerge with government approval or (2) it becomes clear that the government is unable to control bitcoin.
4.
Post 2920749 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.13h):
Scrutiny by regulatory bodies is bullish because either (1) legit operators emerge with government approval or (2) it becomes clear that the government is unable to control bitcoin.
It is still a prob with we are left with 1 or 2 legit operators but it turns out only ~5% of traders are legit (not involved in illegal stuff).
1 or 2 legit operators is all it will take to open the flood gates to the mainstream
5.
Post 2920829 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.13h):
Scrutiny by regulatory bodies is bullish because either (1) legit operators emerge with government approval or (2) it becomes clear that the government is unable to control bitcoin.
It is still a prob with we are left with 1 or 2 legit operators but it turns out only ~5% of traders are legit (not involved in illegal stuff).
1 or 2 legit operators is all it will take to open the flood gates to the mainstream
if it is revealed that only a small minority are 'legit' traders and the winklevii are solely responsible for bid-walling (start sept-oct 2012 thru feb 2013), then the mainstream will not give a crap about btc.
silk road and winklevii make bitcoin a juicier story not a smaller one
6.
Post 2920880 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.13h):
Scrutiny by regulatory bodies is bullish because either (1) legit operators emerge with government approval or (2) it becomes clear that the government is unable to control bitcoin.
It is still a prob with we are left with 1 or 2 legit operators but it turns out only ~5% of traders are legit (not involved in illegal stuff).
1 or 2 legit operators is all it will take to open the flood gates to the mainstream
if it is revealed that only a small minority are 'legit' traders and the winklevii are solely responsible for bid-walling (start sept-oct 2012 thru feb 2013), then the mainstream will not give a crap about btc.
silk road and winklevii make bitcoin a juicier story not a smaller one
sure mainstream media, but mainstream-potential-investor will not be interested.
who wouldn't love some tax free money to buy drugs, while also having a chance to hop on "the next big thing"?
7.
Post 3584671 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.23h):
This is a good sign.
Bitcoin is taken seriously and they are already thinking about possible regulation!
Just to make sure that when this industry takes off the US will be part of it and not lagging behind!
+ 1
Like it or not, regulation is what's going to take bitcoin mainstream, and is therefore, very bullish.
8.
Post 3584814 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.23h):
Given all the shadiness and risk involved with much of the current crop of bitcoin businesses, I'm sure a little consumer protection can't hurt. There's a large distance between regulation and prohibition.
9.
Post 3593259 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.23h):
holy shit here comes the crash:

How is people moving around bitcoins an indication for a crash?

10.
Post 3598226 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.23h):
11.
Post 3620509 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.24h):
random...but does anyone have that gif where its like "I don't know what it is, you don't know what it is. Cash. Lots of cash." gif
I thought i saw it in here last week

12.
Post 3627918 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.24h):
we're growing up boys: real-time price reactions to congressional testimony!
13.
Post 3628340 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.24h):
Raman just said current laws/statutes are flexible enough to meet their needs
+1
no new legislation needed!!
14.
Post 3628391 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.24h):
"cash is still the best medium for laundering money"
15.
Post 3628847 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.24h):
bitcoin has crossed the rubicon
16.
Post 3629201 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.25h):
Finally mainstream?
Comment about how BTC is tiny in regards to USD, western union, all the many other options criminals can and do use.
Virtual currency inherently NOT ILLEGAL. WE are not stopping INNOVATION
... digital currencies as long as they comply with regulations they are not ILLEGAL... they also provide cheap and efficient money transferring.....
current laws/statutes are flexible enough to meet their needs
"cash is still the best medium for laundering money"
BTC is ok so long as they play by the anti money laundering rules.
they want to tax .....
They dont want digital currencies to be come tax heaven.
DHS just commented and said that cyber criminals that they have been investigating haven't directly gravitated towards bitcoin and prefer a more centralized currency
Costs of prohibition versus benefits of economic boom

17.
Post 3641807 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.25h):
It seems traders are too focused on technicals at the moment, and not focused enough on the significance of bitcoin becoming legal. Time to refocus in 2 hours.
18.
Post 3641863 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.25h):
Ahhhh the wonderful smell of fear in the morning, how you bulls feel today? do you believe we are going to the moon or down back to reality?


19.
Post 3645296 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.26h):
20.
Post 3655553 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.26h):
Currency of the future. My payment of xx:18 still has 0 confirmations at xx:51. Sorry I could not dump you sooner, my coins
This is why bitcoin might die soon. Because there are to many people who don't understand, that the value of bitcoin is based on the promise of fast and cheap transactions. They dream of some kind of electric gold and this will make bitcoin drop to zero.
If you can't pay your 3$ coffee without an 3$ fee, bitcoin is worth shit.
every damn time. what happened to good old "lurk moar"? here's your answer: the (highly secure) blockchain is most likely not the ideal medium for micro transfers, and probably not even for small-ish transactions like paying for your coffee. That doesn't mean Bitcoin will fail, it only means there will be ways to perform smaller transaction off the chain.
The highly secure blockchain is the right medium for small transfers. You will have to have the possibility to buy every day stuff with your smartphone with bitcoin, or it will die. Period. Off-the-chain is the most stupid shit I heard the last weeks.
Everybody is talking about regulations, senate hearings, peeing their pants whether the Chinese will accept bitcoins or whatever. But the real thread are the users/speculators who think you have to have the whole blockchain in your pocket.
Bitcoin has the ultimate chance to replace visa etc..
7 Billion people with 1-5 transactions a day, that should be the goal of bitcoin. If this is not going to be implemented the next months I will sell out and watch one of the greatest projects in our time die.

21.
Post 3656009 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.26h):
Bitcoin doesn't need to be a currency to be successful. It will in fact be wildly successful even if only functioning as a store of value, the tax havens amounts to trillions. The first phase is speculation and this is where we are now... people believe in bitcoins future potential and that is what drives the price up and the large market cap will make it viable for large fortunes to be stored in bitcoin, eventually it will stabilize at much higher prices. At that point it will work well as a way to settle debt even if we're not able to do as many transactions as other networks I don't think it matters. Micro-transactions can happen off-chain, big money stored safely away from government and bankers.
How can big money be stored away safely if bitcoin is still tied to fiat currency? If fiat currency collapses, bitcoin no longer has anything to compare itself to, so how would we express value then? Using valuation in bitcoin itself? How would that work since there's a limited amount...
I suppose comparing to gold or oil would be the answer.
maybe water?
Bitcoin is a protocol and a technology; it's just a layer, not necessarily the layer that directly touches the end-user. It's the many bitcoin businesses that emerge that will leverage the bitcoin technology directly and provide a consumer friendly service to deliver a wide variety of financial products and services, and compete with each other to solve all problems relating to transaction time, security, etc.
22.
Post 3656075 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.26h):
Bitcoin doesn't need to be a currency to be successful. It will in fact be wildly successful even if only functioning as a store of value, the tax havens amounts to trillions. The first phase is speculation and this is where we are now... people believe in bitcoins future potential and that is what drives the price up and the large market cap will make it viable for large fortunes to be stored in bitcoin, eventually it will stabilize at much higher prices. At that point it will work well as a way to settle debt even if we're not able to do as many transactions as other networks I don't think it matters. Micro-transactions can happen off-chain, big money stored safely away from government and bankers.
How can big money be stored away safely if bitcoin is still tied to fiat currency? If fiat currency collapses, bitcoin no longer has anything to compare itself to, so how would we express value then? Using valuation in bitcoin itself? How would that work since there's a limited amount...
I suppose comparing to gold or oil would be the answer.
maybe water?
Bitcoin is a protocol and a technology; it's just a layer, not necessarily the layer that directly touches the end-user. It's the many bitcoin businesses that emerge that will leverage the bitcoin technology directly and provide a consumer friendly service to deliver a wide variety of financial products and services, and compete with each other to solve all problems relating to transaction time, security, etc.
I'm sorry but this is complete bullshit.
The first goal of bitcoin should be to be able to handle the same amount of transactions as visa.
And it is 1700 visa transactions vs 7 possible bitcoin transactions.
I don't understand why so many don't want to see that problem. Still high from the last ath?
Bitcoin is not gold.
No need to apologize, you refuted yourself by not providing any reasoning.
23.
Post 3656558 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.27h):
Bitcoins advantages are technical and if you take that from bitcoin there is nothing left.
Not true. One of bitcoins main advantages is that inflation is predictable. Maybe you understand the technical aspects of bitcoins but you do not seem to understand the problems with the current monetary situation or the political implications of Bitcoin.
This is wrong. Bitcoin lives from being a worldwide currency. As soon as you are not able to pay anything with it, it will lose its value. Just because something is "rare" doesn't mean it hast value. I can print 10.000 sheets with "this is xymoney" on it and say they have a value because I just made 10k. But the don't.
And the same goes for bitcoin. Bitcoins value only stems from it's (promises of) advantages over other payment systems. Since the beginning.
Yes but is your "xymoney" accounted for on a distributed public ledger with an insane amount of processing power (huge amounts of invested capital) behind it?
24.
Post 3657822 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.27h):

take care....

25.
Post 3667686 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.27h):
26.
Post 3676799 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.27h):
I wonder what the fees and length of time would be to move $200M fiat. Oh noes only 7 transactions per sec!
27.
Post 3677040 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.27h):
Bitcoin is still in beta and brilliant eggheads are working on it and there's now a shitload of people with a vested ($$$) interest in making it happen. The scaling issues will certainly be solved.
28.
Post 3677209 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.27h):
Logarithmic growth can't be the long term fit. Sqrt(x) seems like it would never have the rate-of-increase-is-increasing quality, which we are currently seeing.
Isn't the sigmoid curve an exponential at the start that falls behind with growth? Nowhere is an increase in the rate of increase to be seen in a sigmoid curve. The so called "vertical" phase is exponential-turned-linear on its way to saturation, but I might be wrong.
ditto +1 well put.
EDIT: So the question becomes where are we on the innovator => laggard scale? I would think still in the innovator coming up to early adopter pdq.
This is exactly the sort of conversation and counterpoints I was hoping to see. This isn't my expertise.
I think any attempt to compare Bitcoin to electricity, TV, etc must take the position that we are still very, very early in the adoption cycle.
What's interesting is the notion that there are at least two competing curves at work at once. I saw someone put an overlay of a sigmoid curve with another graph shape yesterday, but didn't see post-analysis or discussion of what that would be, or why it would be that way. Maybe I just missed it.
The sigmoid curve is the cumulative frequency distribution and the normal distribution is the same diffusion but not measured cumulatively. This post might be helpful:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=341681.msg3675891#msg3675891
29.
Post 3690022 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.28h):
30.
Post 3714424 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.29h):
lol at all the head-scratching, bitcoin never fails to entertain.
31.
Post 3742514 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.30h):
Yep. 4-6 confirmations are what exchanges wait for when transferring millions of dollars. Who gives a shit when it's a $1 coffee?
Yup, when its the one dollar coffee, the merchant just needs to make sure a miners fee was sent. Otherwise the payment may be sent back to the originating address.
Confirmations don't really matter if there is a miners fee sent, speaking on behalf of small transactions.
Bitpay or another payment processor should offer merchants a credit account and/or insurance to provide instant transaction times, and make whatever adjustments might be necessary once the transaction is confirmed.
32.
Post 3774717 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.30h):
Fully understanding the dynamics between the cryptocurrencies will likely require the development of a new form of economics.
33.
Post 3839398 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.32h):
I think there is a very real possibility that all the big players (that would be willing to get in at all) we're hoping to get in and jack up the price got in at the $150-$250 range, and now all the good news is designed to set up some bag holders when they inevitably sell out.

34.
Post 3894672 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.35h):
The price manipulators and launderers need to find a new exchange.
nah, more like - new blockchain.
too many eyes are on bitcoin.

35.
Post 4781455 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_11.59h):
CCMF!
36.
Post 4803725 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.00h):
37.
Post 4805457 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.00h):
can somebody explain to me what the woman on the right of mr. Lee is talking about? Gold back uped system? Is this a alternativ system beside bitcoin that she is talking about?
It seemed like she had no idea what she was talking about, and almost everything about the system sounded flawed.
38.
Post 4805632 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.00h):
Does anyone have a fucking clue wtf these women are talking about?
where is the cute asian girl from the foundation, I need something to watch.
I kind of like what Annie Wilkes suggested. She said the government should just have the public sign-off that they are aware of the nature and risks of crypto-currencies and leave it at that.
The problem though with women, is that when you involve them in anything they take that as validation that they know what they are talking about and start spouting-off all sorts of firm but nonsensical positions and ideas.
That's because for women, feelings determine reality and not the other way around.
Judging from that statement, I wouldn't be too quick to assume you understand what "reality" is.
39.
Post 4806138 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.00h):
40.
Post 4822431 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.00h):
love the brain power going on in this segment, nice contrast from yesterday
41.
Post 4826256 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.01h):
wall street money incoming confirmed: 2014 the year bitcoin connects to the banks thanks to NY regulatory framework! hopefully we'll get legit US exchange and full derivatives trading this year as well.
42.
Post 6208711 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.37h):
CCMF!
43.
Post 6208863 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.37h):
This breakout is weaksauce.

44.
Post 6223771 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.37h):
You are twisted, and I will let my post stand for itself.
Consider yourself lucky, that you will probably never find out, on how twisted I could actually be with disrespectful little brats like you.
You are NOT making any insightful statement or facts or possibilities that have NOT already been sufficiently and adequately accounted for in my earlier discussion to whatever extent I chose to engage with your lamed brained ideas that tend to be attempt to talk about exceptions rather than rules..
I was debating aminorex's argument where he said that BTC would benefit from the devaluation of the dollar.
And there you came, having absolutely no clue on what is exactly going on, and then attempting to throw personal insults at me.
Each of your points here is filled with faulty logic, incorrect facts or incorrect inferences regarding fact.
I see no real value into getting drug into such tangential stream of consciousness type scenarios, so accordingly, and as far as I'm concerned, the substance of various referenced historical posts can speak for themselves.
Ok, bring forward the points that I have made, that are filled with faulty logic, incorrect facts or incorrect inferences regarding fact.
If you fail to do that then I'm seriously starting to reconsider on finding a way to show you how twisted I can really be.
Now try really hard, a lot could be at stake here.
I'm NOT going to play your annoying little game, you perverted and twisted fuck.
Your posts speak for themselves, unless you edited or deleted them, and i have NO current plan to spend any of my time in such an endeavor.. especially with someone who by almost every post can be determined to be disingenuous in regards to dealing in realities and/or meaningful and adult discussions.
Remember this moment. There will be a day, not soon, but it won't take very long either, when you'll ask yourself "why is this happening to me?", then remember that you brought this on yourself. You had a choice and you took the choice.
But don't worry, I'm just a random snot-nosed geek trying to troll you. Not like I have the capabilities and means to do something that you would strongly care about.
You take care now. I think I'll rest for today.

45.
Post 7018427 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.48h):
Fortunately for you, if these things bother you and you'd rather have a malleable money supply managed by unelected officials who can seize funds and reverse transactions at will: you are well served with the current monetary paradigm - be it Keynesian, monetarist or neocon - the differences are of cosmetic character, really.
Those of us with the (obviously wrong!) view that a monetary system should be predictable and not prone to manipulation by individuals have been longing for the chance to try out something like that. It will quite obviously fail, because centralized systems run by
experts are naturally superior to decentralized systems run by no one but some people just need to convince themselves on their own, deferring to the wise opinions of experts is not enough for them. And who knows - if by some freak accident such a monetary system turns out to be better than what we have now, you will benefit as well

My preferences are not important. The point is that a system that does not allow the forcible return of stolen property will not be acceptable to society, except for thieves and other criminals. In the end, it will be rejected even by the libertarians who now think that irreversibility is a good thing.
Cash is just as irreversible as bitcoin. Transactions that require reversibility are implemented where the parties are willing to pay the additional cost of escrow, insurance, or whatever specific reversibility mechanism is desired, and those mechanism are cheaper to implement in crypto-currencies as compared to cash.
46.
Post 7042710 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.48h):
Just another artificial pump. All of you just need to pray that those few who are actually controlling the whole BTC market will not dump it all in the next few weeks.
When the dollar finally has its crashing part, these times will look like cheap times.
Argentina just got an exchange. A shit storm is a brewin...
Most of btc's early adopters are truth and liberty seeking folks.
Give them more credit...
Lol, do you really believe in this freedom and liberty shit?
Bitcoins were created by some very smart people, who most probably are controlling it right now. Who is using bitcoins in real life? Nobody. It is just an artificial medium for cash laundry, for selling some useless hardware (miners) for very high price.
Many drug and paedophile dealers are really pleased to have something like bitcoin, so they can do their stuff totally undercover.
That is it. Any mentally healthy person wouldnt build his business on BTC, any smart person will invest money in BTC because it is controlled by few people, and you never know what will happen tomorrow: will they pump it? Or maybe sell everything and wave you bye bye?

47.
Post 8061841 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.01h):
feeling the fear, time to get greedy
48.
Post 8187251 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.02h):
http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/im-hoarding-bitcoins-and-no-you-cant-have-any/ One of the most annoying things about Bitcoin is that it’s so convenient to make payments with it that sometimes it is extremely tempting to spend it and avoid the hassle of using dollars. One of the ways to help deal with the temptation to spend is to demand a Bitcoin discount at any store that accepts Bitcoin. This is perfectly reasonable because not only is the store lowering its own costs by using Bitcoin, but it is asking me to give up an inherently superior commodity.
Hoarders are more important than merchants. If a restaurant downtown starts accepting bitcoins, this does not necessarily create an incentive for anybody to buy more bitcoins. Why would anyone bother if they can still just use a credit card? If you can convince a merchant to accept bitcoins and stop accepting dollars, then I’ll be impressed.
Unless a merchant is offering something that cannot be bought for dollars, or at least offering a discount, he is only benefiting Bitcoin to the extent that he encourages more hoarding. If he immediately converts the bitcoins he receives as payment into dollars, and if his customers only buy bitcoins so as to spend them at his shop shortly thereafter, then neither has much direct effect on Bitcoin’s demand. The real hero is the hoarder behind the scenes who buys from the merchant and enables him to convert his payments into dollars.
Not to change the topic of the post.
But I think the main problem with bitcoin mass adoption is there are no guarantees against the owner in cases of theft and mis use.
The reason why credit costs more for merchants is because the interbanks get paid most of the interchange fees (interest and transaction fees) and the credit procesors Visa, amex, mc get paid the association fees. But the banks cover most of the costs in case of fraud and stolen cards and accounts and most customers are not liable if the transactions are abided by the rules of the credit card companies. They know this happens alot and to keep commerce moving with more sales this is a built in "expense".
With btc if consumers have their wallets hacked or stolen easily the btc is pretty much gone and it will detract from mass adoption because there is no recourse for refunds. And this will mean less people use it, and less incentive for merchants to adopt it, even though it is good saving for them versus credit card transaction costs.
This isn't an inherent problem with btc itself, it's more a function of a new market without sophisticated financial institutions that will protect the consumer against fraud and theft. The New York regulations make it all the more likely that those institutions will be created.
49.
Post 8188241 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.02h):
http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/im-hoarding-bitcoins-and-no-you-cant-have-any/ One of the most annoying things about Bitcoin is that it’s so convenient to make payments with it that sometimes it is extremely tempting to spend it and avoid the hassle of using dollars. One of the ways to help deal with the temptation to spend is to demand a Bitcoin discount at any store that accepts Bitcoin. This is perfectly reasonable because not only is the store lowering its own costs by using Bitcoin, but it is asking me to give up an inherently superior commodity.
Hoarders are more important than merchants. If a restaurant downtown starts accepting bitcoins, this does not necessarily create an incentive for anybody to buy more bitcoins. Why would anyone bother if they can still just use a credit card? If you can convince a merchant to accept bitcoins and stop accepting dollars, then I’ll be impressed.
Unless a merchant is offering something that cannot be bought for dollars, or at least offering a discount, he is only benefiting Bitcoin to the extent that he encourages more hoarding. If he immediately converts the bitcoins he receives as payment into dollars, and if his customers only buy bitcoins so as to spend them at his shop shortly thereafter, then neither has much direct effect on Bitcoin’s demand. The real hero is the hoarder behind the scenes who buys from the merchant and enables him to convert his payments into dollars.
Not to change the topic of the post.
But I think the main problem with bitcoin mass adoption is there are no guarantees against the owner in cases of theft and mis use.
The reason why credit costs more for merchants is because the interbanks get paid most of the interchange fees (interest and transaction fees) and the credit procesors Visa, amex, mc get paid the association fees. But the banks cover most of the costs in case of fraud and stolen cards and accounts and most customers are not liable if the transactions are abided by the rules of the credit card companies. They know this happens alot and to keep commerce moving with more sales this is a built in "expense".
With btc if consumers have their wallets hacked or stolen easily the btc is pretty much gone and it will detract from mass adoption because there is no recourse for refunds. And this will mean less people use it, and less incentive for merchants to adopt it, even though it is good saving for them versus credit card transaction costs.
This isn't an inherent problem with btc itself, it's more a function of a new market without sophisticated financial institutions that will protect the consumer against fraud and theft. The New York regulations make it all the more likely that those institutions will be created.
The NY rules only want more info on the buyers and sellers of the btc, in case they have to trace back to illegal activities.
They dont address wallet security. Imagine people having codes on their cellphones and losing them. This is much easier than losing large amounts of cash or credit.
The regulations address capital reserves and other consumer protections, and obtaining a license from the state reduces the risk for banks and insurance companies to transact in bitcoin.
50.
Post 9190669 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.23h):
Gotta say, that article seems incredibly misguided to me.
I think BTC might have issues with confirmation time right now that prevent a ton of in-store user adoption, but the long-term important advantage that BTC has, in my view, is transaction cost. Apple isn't going to reduce transaction cost one iota for anybody in the chain, from what I can tell, but somebody pleae correct me if I am wrong.
For ordering online for next-day ship, fo airline tickets, for anything that doesn't require immediate change-of-possession, there is a 4%+ advantage to using BTC.
I just wish somebody would integrate a BTC wallet with gasoline pumps and come up with a way for me to put gas in my car while saving that 4%+, then split that savings with the merchant.
Apple just provides a slicker interface for using the same system of usury.
Apple Pay will always only work on Apple devices, thus limiting its ability to take the whole mobile payments market. Meanwhile it will build out NFC payment infrastructure and get the consumer used to mobile payments, paving the way for BTC.
51.
Post 11525387 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
52.
Post 11525501 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
So what Is so Great about this bitlisence?
banks everyone will feel better about dealing with BTC businesses that have a bitlicense.
Indeed, it adds legitimacy in the eyes of
certain players.
It is another straw.
Way to sell out to the banksters.
/ignored.

Thanks for selling us out to The Man for thirty pieces of silver, Judas. You're pathetic.
Idiot.
No, klovenhuff is right. All the ideology and freedoms fall by the wayside 'soon as there's a chance to turn a quick buck.
Not Judas-caliber, but a sellout for sure

There's a difference between libertarianism and anarchism.
53.
Post 11861379 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.20h):
Hi. New member here.

Read a few pages of topic, but didn't get my answer. Can someone please explain what happened in the recent days? We've had an increase of about $70 for every BTC price in just a few days. As a proud owner of 1.5 BTCs I wanna know what causes that, and do you think the trend will continue or not?
Thanks.


54.
Post 11862715 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.20h):
Now what would you suggest? I have sold few bitcoin at 305 dollars and now I am holding $$.

55.
Post 12012322 (copy this link) (by dasein) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.22h):
bfxdata.com
Haha. Pull the other one.
there is a whole list... just to mention some.
slow confirmations
blocksize
energy consumption
outdated blockchain tech
banks dont give a damn
bad reputation
usage is down
regulatory issues on exchanges
scams everywhere
blockchain is the future, but
Bitcoin itself has no intrinsic value and its price is purely based on speculation.
350 million gigahashes per second beg to differ.