Bitcoin
 

Craig Wright revealed as Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto

Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto. Is he?

No wonder so many women are looking for Mr Wright.

He has 'left' us with coins we cannot spend in stores. Imagine leaving a tip with a bit coin (unfortunately you must virtuallly imagine). That coin is worth about $440. Would a waitress say thank you to the person who left that tip? Probably to Mr Wright? (But could she use it to buy her wedding dress?)

Well, he has just outted himself placing him with Julian Assange and Edward Snowden. What some people will do for their 5 minutes of fame.

I'll never trust Bitcoin.

It does not matter what you feel. Only relevant is why.

Because he feels it untrustworthy, that's why.

Obviously that is not why. That would be an emotion that only children entertain. If bitcoin is untrustworthy, then a logic reason for why exists. Silly emotions do not say why.

Trust is both an emotional and logical act. You can't take the emotion out of it.

If something is known to be secure, then you don't need to evaluate the situation, and don't need to decide if it is trustworthy. It's simply secure. Period.

If there is inconclusive evidence that something is secure, then you have to take the given evidence and use your emotions to make a judgement call on its trustworthiness.

In all seriousness, I actually feel smarter after reading that. But I will think about it for a while before simply adopting it.

Exactly. Unregulated. Linked to criminal activity. Way to expensive to buy.

'Feels untrustworthy' is only a silly emotion. Unregulated and linked to criminal activity are logical reasons. First is how adults who are still children make judgments. Latter is what an adult does before preceding to any conclusion.

No, you are silly. You're ongoing spiel about only children having emotions enter into judgments and decisions is silly. Nobody is buying it, so keep your hand on your wallet, because any human who buys into your fairytale, has an ulterior motive.

Do you have a logical reason for being unnecessarily nitpicky right now?

Also, I think the fact that I feel Bitcoin is untrustworthy is perfectly valid, and not silly. Other people can trust it not to screw them over if they want. I'm not going down that road.

Saddam's WMDs were a perfect example of why nitpicky is actually the difference between an adult and child. Apparently you do not see the chasm that separates emotional feelings from logical facts. Many adults do not.

Stating that "I never trust Bitcoin" is only an emotion. Basically wasted bandwidth. It says nothing useful. Is even how Rush Limbaugh so easily manipulates many to agree with him.

Stating that "Unregulated. Linked to criminal activity." is a major difference. It states a conclusion based in actual facts. We were all taught this concept in junior high science.

I have little respect for people's need to post their emotions. It provides me with nothing useful, helpful, or informative. Those same people also love Trump, Cruz, or Sanders. In each case, those politicians preach emotional fubar. Even their few underlying facts can be outright lies. But that does not matter to the emotional. The emotional want their emotions fed. Those politicians are not preaching to people who need to see actual facts so as to avoid brainwashing.

So many who "knew" Saddam was a threat were easily brainwashed by propaganda techniques that were delineated here back then.

Another good example. Do you plug your computer into a surge protector? Then you are easily scammed by emotion. Show me a fact that says surge protector is surge protection? Most of us are so emotional as to believe that alone is proof.

Difference between emotion and fact is difficult for many who never learned that distinction. Children cannot see that difference. Some adults also do not. It even explains why so many love Trump. It is not nitpicking. It defines a difference between being easily manipulated verses grasping reality.

One could be emotional also about what is posted here. Or one could appreciate an underlying science that says why. That is why all were taught in junior high science how to separate knowledge from emotional beliefs such as spontaneous reproduction.

Trust based in emotion is why so many even gamble in casinos or buy lottery tickets to get rich. Others who think logically do not see entertainment in throwing money away. This example also demonstrates how many are emotional; not logical.

For someone who has little respect for other people's need to express their emotions, you sure do spend a fuckload of time ranting about it. Talk about your wasted bandwidth.

You're a hypocrite.

I guess that explains why you felt the need to explain the difference between emotion and logic where no such explanation was warranted.

Also, the fact that logic tells my emotions to never trust Bitcoin is valid. I'll stick to PayPal.

Why is it not warranted? Do you have a similar conclusion? That is ambiguous because you did not say why.

Paypal is an amazing innovation.

I never understood why eBay sold Paypal. Apparently something is afoot in that transaction media. But to say what requires facts that are unknown.

Principles that are Bitcoin's foundation are innovative. But unproven. Underlying principles and Bitcoin's future explain a schism among Bitcoin insiders. Another fact that creates less trust in that transaction medium.

It does not help that a Bitcoin is about $440; not good currency for typical transactions that are necessary to build trust. And that a Bitcoin dropped in value from almost $1000 making it more like a derivative - less like a transaction medium.

Anything that can be kept scarce can be trusted as a backing for a currency. Suggested backings include gold, increasingly difficult cryptographic keys, and the insolvency of the US Government. Out of those three, which is most likely to remain limited?

Trust in the currency itself is equal to the trust in its backing. The reason that dollars actually work is based on an entirely, 100% emotional faith, a misplaced belief that they will continue to be accepted as payment of tax revenues by future US Governments.

Keep in mind that most dollars, like most bitcoins, do not exist in ANY physical form. They're both just numbers on computerized ledgers. When the US Treasury pays dividends on its bills to the banks, they do not back trucks up with $100s. They press keys, and bits are exchanged over networks, and "money" goes into the banks.

It's 100% emotional. Logic and reason do not apply to the future. 1 does not equal 1 if 1 does not exist.

Good luck to us all

Taxes do not define integrity of a currency. Dollar is controlled / defined by a Federal Reserve. World's most stable currencies all have equivalent to a Federal Reserve.

None of what backs a dollar is emotional. Dollar is stable due to facts - what the economy does, actions by the Central Bank, well defined numbers, AND due to previous and statistical history that so many all over the world have experienced and learned from. Emotion only exists if one trusts the dollar only because someone is told (like a child) to trust a dollar.

Some foolishly (emotionally) assume a currency must be backed by gold. We know from history and underlying economic facts that currencies (and therefore economies) work best when the currency is not backed by some irrelevant reference such as gold. Otherwise gold coins minted by the Islamic state would have great demand and trust. In reality, the Islamic gold dinar is a poor transaction media due to an economy that defines it and people that created it.

In 1931, Britain disconnected gold from their pound. Integrity of that currency increased. Even an economic boom resulted. No emotions were involved. It works due to hard and well proven facts.

Integrity of a currency is defined by its Central Bank and by the economy that underpins it. Those facts are even measured quantitatively. Those facts define what happens in currency exchanges all over the world.

However many do not understand those facts. Many trust a dollar only because others have told them to do so. They are emotional. They have little understanding of what underpins a currency. Some have so little grasp of those facts as to even believe gold must underpin a currency - because their emotions tell them to believe that myth.

Integrity of international currencies are based in (and can be destroyed by) fundamental facts. Emotion exists among the naive AFTER fundamental concepts break down. Trust in currencies exists due to fundamental and logical facts - such as stability of an economy that underpins that currency and actions of a Central Bank that defines / maintains that currency. No emotion exists in facts, actions and numbers. Emotion only exists among those who fail to comprehend those facts, actions, and numbers.

Bitcoin has an underlying flaw. Its integrity is backed by a vague group that answers to no one. In its short life, it has worked quite well. But statistical proof necessary to establish it integrity, a 'Central Bank' concept that defines it, its ability to expand with economic growth, and what keeps its management honest does not yet exist. Trust is defined by facts; not emotion.

:lol2: A boom resulted from emotion, facts are results seen only in retrospect.

Rrright, obviously; their role is to maintain the scarcity; but scarce things don't always have value. The dollar *actually* has value because its biggest user, by far, accepts it as a form of payment. That's what actually defines the dollar. If it stopped doing that, the currency would not hold as much value. Other people would have to broadly accept it as a form of payment, and why would they? Only if there was a valid form of exchange, dollars for some other thing, would it hold value. The Fed may choose to issue quatloons but that does not give quatloons any value!

What we've seen so far is that government guaranteeing its value is a stronger form of backing than the government offering to exchange bills for actual gold or silver. But what's weird is, that can change, and we have seen currencies devalue from weak government backing. We just have faith that it'll never happen to us, and it's that faith that ACTUALLY maintains the dollar's value.

If the US Gov instead accepted potatoes instead of dollars as a form of payment, potatoes would have great value... except that the scarcity can't be controlled, so the value would drop. Without scarcity, there is inflation, and the value of each individual potato drops. The Fed determines the scarcity of dollars but merely issuing dollars does not give them value.

Those who are emotional do not see and may even refuse to recognize how they are so easily manipulated by the fewer who actually understand relevant facts and numbers.

Of course, the emotional must deny this. Without learning facts, the emotional only have their emotions to work with. Fortunately those are not the people who define currencies.

Well proven history that demonstrates why the dollar is so stable. TARP was a perfect example. American central bankers told big banks, "You have eight hours to save the economy." How many emotional types saw that coming? None. People who learn facts and numbers (we all now know) were correct. What they did is why the American dollar is so stable and respected. Backed by people and an economy that uses facts (not emotions) to make decisions.

That is also why a Central Bank must be independent of the emotionally naive such as George Jr.

This last recession (that was almost a great depression) was created by a scarcity of equity. A massive and dangerous problem was solved by pumping $700 billion into the economy. Scarcity (in this case) almost destroyed economic activity (as it did in 1929). Also critical was where $700 billion was injected. Done so responsibly that we undid massive economic damage that started mostly about 2000.

A great depression averted by those who are not emotional - who made decisions from facts, numbers, and logic. That is why the dollar is trusted.

Emotion may have created those problems when people foolishly 'felt' Social Security should be in a stock market, commercial banks get into investment banking, sub-prime loans to create SIVs and CDOs even without open markets, that derivatives can make everyone richer, stock brokers promoted as informed investors, golden parachutes and other massive payments to top executives, 'buy American', and spending almost $3 trillion on Mission Accomplished. Stupidity was created by the emotional who also believed an emotional myth called trickle down economics.

The emotional create problems. Stable currencies exist when the emotional are disempowered. Stability of the American dollar is found in so many companies that do not exist for profits - and therefore have profits. And by the educated and logical who control, protect, and define that transactional medium.

The emotional and naive created a gold Dinar. Using their emotions, that Dinar should be a world's most stable currency. It is not because facts and numbers, necessary to have a trusted Dinar, do not exist. These people are so emotional as to even claim that banks create evil. Emotion does not define a stable currency. Emotion can undermine a currency. Facts, numbers, logic, statistical history, and educated people make possible a stable currency.

You Sir, are the King, the Emperor, the God, of circular logic. :notworthy

#bazinga? :D

Rather than learn what was stated, you have jumped to an emotional denial, with ridicule, to waste bandwidth. Impossible for you to understand once emotions assume conclusions. Third grade insults (so much like Donald Trump) then cause other third graders to agree.

Would you reflect and then return to logical deliberation? Unfortunately that word and what must be done is difficult for a third grader.

An actual adult would have demonstrated why he was confused and asked for clarification. Today, acting like Trump or Cruz is fashionable.

Demeaning others makes one popular. Just ask Hitler - since I read elsewhere here that he may be reincarnated. Would he also love your cheapshots?

Topic is Bitcion. Unfortunately that is so too complicated that some only want to post their emotions.

Bit coins were doomed from the start: they don't have green backs.

Yes dear.

Agreed. I am starting to wonder if TW respects his/her own emotions.

Emotions can often be useful. They reside in us, all the time, helping us to navigate throughout our daily lives, informing us about how to experience safety, acceptance, connection, contribution—all very basic needs of human beings of any age. When we’re emotionally blocked, we’re more likely to feel distance from ourselves and others and disempowered. Giving our emotions quality attention supports us in experiencing choice of new action which lead to breakthroughs and fulfillment.

As Robert Henri (1865-1929) said "Cherish your own emotions and never undervalue them."

Now, back to the main topic since apparently TW can't handle thread drift either.

Emotions should never run our lives. Process of becoming an adult is to use and control emotions as a tool. A tool used by the adult (logical) mind. Not as something to justify actions or make decisions.

High atop a building, one can have fear. A child entertains that fear - may scream or panic. An adult knows that fear is the subconscious mind reminding him to take extra care. A tool. One never entertains that fear. One uses that emotion to make a definite, careful, and logical decision.

A perfect example of adults acting like children is in N Korea. A BBC producer, reporter, and cameraman were held for eight hours in extensive questioning. Then deported. Accused of insulting "Dear Leader". Another example of adults acting on their emotions - not thinking logically like adults. Adult who make decisions based upon emotions are why N Korea is so dangerous. Emotions must never be justification for actions.

Hitler was another perfect example. He was driven by an emotion called ego. His ego needed him to annex or conquer other nations (ie Czechoslovakia, Poland). All for the greater glory of his ego and other emotions. The purpose of life (as understood by an adult mind) was irrelevant to his life ambition. Another example of why adults who are still children can be problematic.

I agree, but certain emotions, even negative ones, can lead to good decisions.

Exactly. One must make decisions based only in logic. At the end, one then examines his conclusion. If he does not like it, then one goes back to redo the logical analysis.

Again, emotions are what children use to make decisions. For an adult, emotion is a tool; must never be justification for a conclusion. But like fear (cited previously) it can provide additional knowledge or caution.

Another example of "emotion to make a judgement": racism - judging someone only upon first impressions. Any first impression must be tempered and constrained by what controls an adult - logical thought. Eventually, even Archie Bunker learned to stop being so emotional (so the series got canceled).

One more try to steer this thread back on topic: Craig Wright

If I wanted money for a story, that is what I would write for a less credible publication. I guess Playboy did not offer to publish it. Make some empty accusations hoping the more easily brainwashed will believe. It is financially fruitful.

If Craig Wright is an evil tax dodger, then so is Willy Nelson. Both have problems with the tax man. That says nothing about credibility.

If I was Nakamoto, the I would probably also use my favorite publication as one publication. His is probably GQ. So what? Well the author is trying to create suspicion and controversy by even citing that completely irrelevant fact - that he used GQ magazine.

For every point - most all are subjective and speculative - it exists by ignoring a counter point. We don't have an honest writer. We have the prosecutor spinning his story to a jury. And never hear from the defense. OJ is clearly innocent.

BBC was convinced he was Nakamoto. The Economist is mostly certain but did have some unanswered speculations. GQ - well I did not read it and do not know if they have technical abilities necessary to make a judgement.

Wright stopped participating in Bitcoin - as I would expect any founder to eventually do. Especially when controversy and other factors would only increase pressure on him for no benefit. He did what most in his position would do - drop out and and seek privacy.

That article does make one interesting speculation. That Craig Wright was simply a close friend of the actual Bitcoin creator - David Kliemen. But I also tire of accusations that the CIA killed Kennedy. Subjective accusations combined with second hand facts can prove most everything.

So why did Wright out himself? "Your so vain. You probably think this song is about you". Carly Simon eventually admitted who that was. Eventually someone will just fess up - to end wild speculation that is no longer fun and mentally fatiguing.

Change but a few letters and Carly Simon is really Carol King. Let's also create that urban legend.

Newsweek admitted they got it wrong. BBC believes Wright is Nakamoto. Economist also does, but is not as sure. Those are facts.

Curious is why Wright would out himself. Maybe to come back like Steve Jobs to save his baby? Why did the article also not discuss that? Because the author had enough accusations to get paid for his piece. His suspicions are mostly speculation based in statements, second hand, from others. Same reasoning also proved that Saddam had WMDs.

Eventually some of the questions raised by The Economist will be answered - either by fact or by time. This remains an ongoing story alongside Deep Throat.

A second parallel controversy is Bitcoin's future. It must change to grow. How?

BTW, did you know Nixon sent a letter informing me that I finally got on his 'enemies list'. That has been a lifelong ambition. But that is just me being emotional. That letter brought a tear to my eye.

New marketing strategy: Naughty Bits Coins

Sex sells.

What a tremendous idea. So many nations waste metals with headshots and memorials. A one dollar bit coin could feature conventional sex. A $10 coin features 69 oral sex. $20 (in the tradition of Andrew Jackson) could feature S&M. The $100 coin would feature bit tits so that the blind could identify it.

Then Bitcoin would create a massive following of numismatists creating more trade throughout the world. After all, isn't sex an international currency (even in the Islamist state where it is also called rape)?

I thought you didn't respect emotions.

Data didn't think so ....

Why thank you. I can tell you're a man of sophistication and good taste.

I must inform you that naughty bits coins are virtual; so, your bit tits for the blind won't work. The value of one naughty bitscoin [currency symbol "69"] is fixed at the price that Bill Clinton paid for the Grand Reserve Gurkha Cigar that he inserted into Monica Lewinsky's vagina.

This ensures stable valuation unlike precious metal coins (e.g. Islamic gold dinar) which fluctuate with metals market values. After all, who wants coins that are constantly changing in value? They're doomed from the start.

Thus, the value of the basic unit will be small enough for common use like real currency while versatile enough for larger transactions in the form of naughtykilobitscoins (K69), naughtymegabitscoins (M69), naughtygigabitscoins (G69) ... etc.

Of course, they won't be kept in virtual wallets, they'll be kept in virtual condoms for safety.

You're a sick bastard. :rolleyes:

I'm sure there're others who think tw is sophisticated and has good taste.

And some also thought you were trying to be funny.

Goodness gracious no. The funnybitscoin will be replacing the Disney Dollar which is to be discontinued tomorrow, Saturday, May 14th, 2016 after being in use since 1987. The funnybitscoins are hush hush, super tippy-top secret; so, don't tell anyone else. Well, you can tell Mickey if you see him.

Now that's a bit harsh. TW just doesn't place much value on emotions. That doesn't make him a bad person.

That was directed at Sexobon.
And it's twoo, it's twoo. /Von Shtupp

Really? :eek:

Classicman has taught the emotion called cheapshot. What is this emotion called 'bad'.

"/Von Schtupp"

LOL

The twooth, the whole twooth, and nothing but the twooth.

I also hunt twabbits.

With twaps? Or do you pull a twigger?

he just twix them

but, but, twix are for kids!

Have some Cellar Gold® a value free coin of the Realm of Undertoad.

So that what is meant by an underground economy.

What info should I read before investment bitcoins? I found a very extensive website (link removed in case spam). Can someone help me? Does this article have all the necessary information?

Do you want to invest in bitcoin? Or buy bitcoins? A major difference that even changes how that question can be answered.

Seems like a spam account.

As to the question, it's a commodity. To invest, you buy some and hope the price continues to rise, and sell them when you either need the cash, or think the price is going to fall.

Or invest in a bunch of computer hardware to mine them, and hope you get them fast enough to pay for it.

If anyone is interested here's a good article on cryptocurrencies.