Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

i believe this underlying realization is what will prevent gvts from willy nilly seizing coins out of pure maliciousness:

Our reasoning above applies to the cryptoasset viewed as a conglomeration of public data, private key and system rules. It does not apply to the private key viewed in isolation. That is no more than an item of pure information and, like a password or a telephone number, it cannot in itself be treated as property, although the legal rules concerning confidentiality might provide remedies to prevent wrongful disclosure or misuse.

for if they attempt such blatant abuse upon said system, if they even can, it would cause the price to tank with legal ramifications.

 

[Zarathustra]

https://bitinfocharts.com/de/comparison/transactions-btc-ltc-bch-bsv.html#6m

While the reborn Bitcoin (BSV) overtakes the stagnant decay (BTC), BCH is still in competition with LTC. Sad to see how Peter and our Andrews are wasting time and money on the frenchman's road map (highway to hell). How long can such a sadomasochistic symbiosis last?

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Some take the view that the design of cryptoassets means that there is no need for traditional legal rules or processes. Law is irrelevant, it is sometimes said, because dealings are effected by non-legally-binding consensus between users, because cryptographic authentication and validation using strong encryption methods makes dealings irreversible, and because decentralisation and disintermediation means that there is no responsible party who can be compelled to act at the direction of a court. We do not agree. The design of cryptoassets may create some practical obstacles to legal intervention but that does not mean that cryptoassets are outside the law.

That wording is quite close to CSW's phrasing. Someone's been whispering in ears...

 

[cypherdoc]

lol

[doublepost=1574168037][/doublepost]

https://bitinfocharts.com/de/comparison/transactions-btc-ltc-bch-bsv.html#6m

it doesn't matter ....

 

[cypherdoc]

is Matthew talking about BTC and BCH?

 

[79b79aa8]

congratulations unwriter and your seed investors @kyuupichan, @digitsu et alia. may planaria corp flourish and fulfill its potential!

 

[cypherdoc]

It is the fact that everything is public that allows Bitcoin to not be controlled by tyrannical governments.

https://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/transparency-and-government/

 

[AdrianX]

That wording is quite close to CSW's phrasing. Someone's been whispering in ears...

Bitcoin just means you don't have to engage with the legal system when it's not necessary, not that the legal system is unnecessary.

Adam Back frustrated me to now end, with his trust-free contract ideas. As a business I literally need to trust the reputation of my suppliers, no smart contract can substitute for good faith and subjective value, and when there is abused Bitcoin cant help.

Bitcoin allows a business to prosper, without having to engage teh legal system, but it's there if you need it, it's not a substitute for it.

 

[cypherdoc]

nice to hear others think @imaginary_username is incredibly toxic. why are the anon BCH devs so much alike?:

 

[cypherdoc]

gaud, the stupidity never ends. even from normally intelligent minds like Steve Patterson:

 

[Norway]

Great technical interview with @Otaci.

 

[Zarathustra]

nice to hear others think @imaginary_username is incredibly toxic. why are the anon BCH devs so much alike?:

Those two toxic anonymous dev accounts who wrote BUIPS against one real person could be the accounts of one toxic member with two votes.

 

[cypherdoc]

that obviously occurred to me
[doublepost=1574197763][/doublepost]pulling away:

 

[79b79aa8]

you need to be looking at that chart with log scale.
here you go.

 

[freetrader]

Those two toxic anonymous dev accounts who wrote BUIPS against one real person could be the accounts of one toxic member with two votes.

Toxic anon comes up with toxic theory.

Nope, I'm not imaginary_username, and he's not me. I don't think anyone with a clue would think so either.

 

[AdrianX]

@freetrader you're both anonymous so how could we even pretend to know? Craig claiming he is the Satoshi pseudonym and not prove it is more of a genuine claim than you not proving you are @imaginary_username. Craig at least has his reputation at stake.

 

[Zarathustra]

Toxic anon comes up with toxic theory.

Nope, I'm not imaginary_username, and he's not me. I don't think anyone with a clue would think so either.

I said 'could be'. Nobody knows.
But it is a perversion of democracy when anonymous accounts can bully a real person out of a project. Sad that BU makes it possible and that leading members played along in this disgusting game.

@AdrianX
That's exactly the problem. Anonymous accounts have nothing to lose, but are eligible to vote.

 

[Norway]

gaud, the stupidity never ends. even from normally intelligent minds like Steve Patterson:

One way confiscation could happen is like this:
"You'll get ten years in prison, and your coins are frozen as long as we want. If you cooperate and give us your keys, you'll get a reduced sentence."

No protocol change needed.

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

Craig at least has his reputation at stake.

lol
[doublepost=1574243010][/doublepost]@Norway
Well a protocol change for the rule of law would be needed in most half-way sane countries.

 

[kyuupichan]

@Norway congratulations on the release!

@kostialevin re "On January 3 2009 the first block of the chain is mined, the so called Genesis Block, and with it the first 50 bitcoins are released to the world." This isn't actually correct - the Genesis Block contains no spendable coins. They're fake, but it's unknown if deliberate or not (I suspect it was deliberate).