To add on to my statement above, if someone excepts what you say then EVERY market is a Ponzi scheme. The $480 is not coming from another investor in the same scheme as was with Madoff, it comes from a price that a bitcoin market set. Plus the "investor" is doing business with the 3rd party. Madoff took money from other parties and gave them to original investors without them knowing where the money came from.
If I buy a rare comic book for $10 and sell it for $50 to a 3rd party later have I engaged in a Ponzi scheme? The only difference between what is happening is we are talking about BTC and not comic books.
In both cases the original person to issue the item doesn't matter. In Madoff's case it's central to the matter.
Wikipedia: "A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation."
This is what Madoff did exactly. He got new investors, skimmed money, and paid off other investors to make it look like money was being earned.
Bitcoin (or any national currency) doesn't fit the definition in any way. If you want to argue that Bitcoin is a scam then do it with facts, but arguing that it's a "ponzi" scheme is an attempt to scare with loaded words and it's a fallacy.
Working with BTC in mining I haven't become convinced that BTC itself is going to be the long next "next thing" in currency, but it has convinced me that something like it will come along. Maybe a cryptocurrency that has origins that mimic more the creation of the internet itself.
However, something like this is on the way. I think decoupling governments from the ability to print currency as they want would be incredibly positive. Even though that's how we as humans have set up monitory currency in the past there is no reason why we need to keep it. It's the people as a whole that give currency its worth, not the government. If the people of the world as a whole decided tomorrow that the USD was worth nothing it would be gone. It's people giving bitcoin its value no governments and I think that's the lesson to learn here.
The beginnings of the Q series and Monty Python were about the same time. After watching each other Spike apparently wanted to do what Monty Python was doing and vice versa. There was some direct cross-pollination during that period of time.
Actually I don't think you're right here. I don't think anyone in Python would agree with you, either. By their own admission they built on and expanded the type of humor that "The Goon Show" brought to prominence. They aren't a copy of the Goon Show, but go listen to it and you'll hear the legacy.
On top of that I would add something largely forgotten: they are acting the public's trust and in the name of the government that is (at least still in name) are acting on the behalf of the public. Every person that pays into that trust with taxes should have the right to know what is going on and hold officials accountable.
Police departments attract people that like to use authority over others and many officers forget they are operating in the public trust. There should no expectation of privacy at all, and I think the Federal courts constant cutting down of rules and laws meant to keep police actions private backs that idea up.
Slashdot Mirror
They were only $90 about six weeks ago.
I'm a bitcoin miner and I do agree they are overpriced at the moment. It should be $200-300 IMHO.
Not mine. Mine's with Aetna.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPJ2ZjYlY38
Sorry to feed a troll, but that's not what the topic here was.
To add on to my statement above, if someone excepts what you say then EVERY market is a Ponzi scheme. The $480 is not coming from another investor in the same scheme as was with Madoff, it comes from a price that a bitcoin market set. Plus the "investor" is doing business with the 3rd party. Madoff took money from other parties and gave them to original investors without them knowing where the money came from.
If I buy a rare comic book for $10 and sell it for $50 to a 3rd party later have I engaged in a Ponzi scheme? The only difference between what is happening is we are talking about BTC and not comic books.
In both cases the original person to issue the item doesn't matter. In Madoff's case it's central to the matter.
Neither a "profit earned" or "subsequent investors" even exists. You're twisting words in a *big* way.
If "stability" is an aspect of your definition of currency then Turkey and many countries in the former Soviet bloc don't have currencies either.
It's not a currency if "government" is essential to your definition, true, but maybe that definition is changing.
Neither is a ponzi scheme:
Wikipedia: "A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation."
This is what Madoff did exactly. He got new investors, skimmed money, and paid off other investors to make it look like money was being earned.
Bitcoin (or any national currency) doesn't fit the definition in any way. If you want to argue that Bitcoin is a scam then do it with facts, but arguing that it's a "ponzi" scheme is an attempt to scare with loaded words and it's a fallacy.
Working with BTC in mining I haven't become convinced that BTC itself is going to be the long next "next thing" in currency, but it has convinced me that something like it will come along. Maybe a cryptocurrency that has origins that mimic more the creation of the internet itself.
However, something like this is on the way. I think decoupling governments from the ability to print currency as they want would be incredibly positive. Even though that's how we as humans have set up monitory currency in the past there is no reason why we need to keep it. It's the people as a whole that give currency its worth, not the government. If the people of the world as a whole decided tomorrow that the USD was worth nothing it would be gone. It's people giving bitcoin its value no governments and I think that's the lesson to learn here.
You know what is ironic about this comment?
It's made by people who think the only thing worth knowing is stuff that makes you money RIGHT NOW. MBAs are in the same boat.
If money is equal to speech then guess who as more speech than you.
Complying with contracts is only for the little people!
Funny person! CFAA is only for companies with 50 lawyers or more on staff!
howard johnson is right!
Go look up the list of things that made David Banner go green over the course of the series. You'll laugh your ass off.
"We are all individuals"
now my cat is confused.
The beginnings of the Q series and Monty Python were about the same time. After watching each other Spike apparently wanted to do what Monty Python was doing and vice versa. There was some direct cross-pollination during that period of time.
Actually I don't think you're right here. I don't think anyone in Python would agree with you, either. By their own admission they built on and expanded the type of humor that "The Goon Show" brought to prominence. They aren't a copy of the Goon Show, but go listen to it and you'll hear the legacy.
That's still better than nickleback.
That's not an argument. You're just being contradictory.
With another special appearance by Dr. Chapman's Urn.
On top of that I would add something largely forgotten: they are acting the public's trust and in the name of the government that is (at least still in name) are acting on the behalf of the public. Every person that pays into that trust with taxes should have the right to know what is going on and hold officials accountable.
Police departments attract people that like to use authority over others and many officers forget they are operating in the public trust. There should no expectation of privacy at all, and I think the Federal courts constant cutting down of rules and laws meant to keep police actions private backs that idea up.