Daily Archives: December 17, 2014

Buy Bitcoin with Paypal. This way!
https://bitly.com/1A5MDkf.

By: usernamedeltdd

See the rest here:
Buy Bitcoin with Paypal. This way! - Video

Boom Bust tackles Bitcoin
Erin Ade and Edward Harrison hot a special Boom Bust, looking at the world #39;s newest and most complex currency. Watch Wednesday, December 17 at 4:30 PM EST on RT America. Check us out on...

By: Boom Bust

See the rest here:
Boom Bust tackles Bitcoin - Video

Bitcoin Meetup Amsterdam 16 December 2014

By: NXT Foundation

The rest is here:
Bitcoin Meetup Amsterdam 16 December 2014 - Video

Bitcoin game Moneypot
Game bitcoin moneypot.

By: farel siregar

Read more from the original source:
Bitcoin game Moneypot - Video

Tim Lee at Vox argues that Bitcoin is destined to succeed not as a currency but as a financial network.

Its a mistake to think about Bitcoin as a new kind of currency. What makes Bitcoin potentially revolutionary is that its the worlds first completely open financial network. Think about the internet. It didnt seem like a very practical technology in the 1980s. But it was an open platform that anyone could build on, and in the long run it proved to be really useful. The internet succeeded because Silicon Valley have created applications that harness the internets power while shielding users from its complexity. Bitcoin applications can work the same way.

The Bitcoin network serves the same purpose as mainstream payment networks such as Visa or Western Union. you want to build a business based on one of those networks, you have to get permission from the owner. And thats not always easy. To use the Visa network, for example, you have to comply with hundreds of pages of regulations. The Visa network also has high fees, and there are some things Visa wont let you do on its network at all. Bitcoin is different. Because no one owns or controls the network, there are no limits on how people can use it. One obvious application is international money transfers. Bitcoin is a payment network that happens to have its own currency, not the other way around.

This looks, initially, like a plausible and attractive argument. But from a political science perspective, it misses something very, very important. There is a reason why you have to comply with hundreds of pages of regulations to use the Visa network that goes beyond Visas selfish corporate interests. That reason is government. Governments regulate payment networks very heavily, for a wide variety of reasons, which include making sure that people dont use these networks to support activities that governments dont like. They use financial intermediaries as points of controlthat allow them to control who does business with whom. The Obama administrations undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, David Cohen, delivered a speech four days ago that copiously illustrates this point.

Over the past decade or so, one important way that the United States has protected our nations core interests, projected power, and exercised leadership on the world stage is through the increasing use of financial measures. Far from just focusing on terrorist financing and money laundering, my office in the Treasury Department is now regularly called upon to help advance a variety of U.S. national security and foreign policy goals. financial measures have become far more powerful tools of statecraft, and their effects are multiplied in a world defined by economic interdependence.

Compare, for example, Jeffersons failure to our ongoing efforts to use sanctions to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Together with partners around the world, we have imposed what many believe is the most effective set of financial and economic sanctions in history. Carefully designed and customized to maximize pressure, they have impeded Irans ability to acquire material for its nuclear program, isolated it from the international financial system, drastically slashed its oil exports, and deprived it of access to a sizeable portion of its oil revenues and foreign reserves. Not surprisingly, the impact on Irans economy has been dramatic: its budget deficit and inflation have spiked, the value of its currency has sharply declined, foreign investment has all but dried up, and overall economic activity has stagnated.

The reason that the U.S. can do this is because it has a lot of effective control over financial networks. It can put pressure on banks (including foreign banks, which have been fined billions of dollars for not complying with the U.S. sanctions regime) to isolate Iran from the international system. In Cohens words:

Put simply, financial institutions everywhere need dollars to serve their customers, and thus require access to U.S. banks through correspondent accounts to settle their customers transactions. That means that foreign banks are especially attuned to our sanctions.

Because so many international transactions are (a) settled in dollars and (b) settled across payment systems run by banks and other financial intermediaries that are vulnerable to U.S. pressure, the U.S. can use these systems to exert political control. Now, imagine the likely response of the U.S. (and the E.U., and, for that matter, China) to a payment network which is designed from the ground up to be decentralized, so that it is impossible for any specific intermediaries to really control payment flows from one actor to another. Such a network would be impossible for states to control. The U.S.wouldnt be able to use it, for example, to squeeze Iran out of the world financial system. If such a network ever showed signs of really becoming established (rather than being a relatively small-scale thought experiment, and money suck for libertarians with more ideology than good sense), the U.S.would ruthlessly act to isolate it from the international financial system.

And that is the story of Bitcoin. Up to this point, regulators have largely tolerated Bitcoin as a curiosity and experiment. While Bitcoin allows consumers to buy illegal drugs on Tor Hidden Services sites like Agora and Evolution, they dont do so on a sufficiently large scale to really cause enormous alarm. Regulators still dont know quite what to do with Bitcoin. But if Bitcoin were ever to threaten to become a truly decentralized payments network, owned by no one, and with no one e.g. capable of implementing Know Your Customer rules, regulators would know very well what to do with it. Theyd introduce regulatory guidances and pass laws to freeze it off from the regular financial system. Very possibly, Bitcoin could still survive at the margins (as the Hawala system has survived). However, it would be isolated, and in no position to threaten Visa or Mastercard, let alone the underlying payment and messaging services that really underpin the world financial system.

Continued here:
Bitcoins financial network is doomed - The Washington Post

Tim Lee at Vox argues that Bitcoin is destined to succeed not as a currency but as a financial network.

Its a mistake to think about Bitcoin as a new kind of currency. What makes Bitcoin potentially revolutionary is that its the worlds first completely open financial network. Think about the internet. It didnt seem like a very practical technology in the 1980s. But it was an open platform that anyone could build on, and in the long run it proved to be really useful. The internet succeeded because Silicon Valley have created applications that harness the internets power while shielding users from its complexity. Bitcoin applications can work the same way.

The Bitcoin network serves the same purpose as mainstream payment networks such as Visa or Western Union. you want to build a business based on one of those networks, you have to get permission from the owner. And thats not always easy. To use the Visa network, for example, you have to comply with hundreds of pages of regulations. The Visa network also has high fees, and there are some things Visa wont let you do on its network at all. Bitcoin is different. Because no one owns or controls the network, there are no limits on how people can use it. One obvious application is international money transfers. Bitcoin is a payment network that happens to have its own currency, not the other way around.

This looks, initially, like a plausible and attractive argument. But from a political science perspective, it misses something very, very important. There is a reason why you have to comply with hundreds of pages of regulations to use the Visa network that goes beyond Visas selfish corporate interests. That reason is government. Governments regulate payment networks very heavily, for a wide variety of reasons, which include making sure that people dont use these networks to support activities that governments dont like. They use financial intermediaries as points of controlthat allow them to control who does business with whom. The Obama administrations undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, David Cohen, delivered a speech four days ago that copiously illustrates this point.

Over the past decade or so, one important way that the United States has protected our nations core interests, projected power, and exercised leadership on the world stage is through the increasing use of financial measures. Far from just focusing on terrorist financing and money laundering, my office in the Treasury Department is now regularly called upon to help advance a variety of U.S. national security and foreign policy goals. financial measures have become far more powerful tools of statecraft, and their effects are multiplied in a world defined by economic interdependence.

Compare, for example, Jeffersons failure to our ongoing efforts to use sanctions to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Together with partners around the world, we have imposed what many believe is the most effective set of financial and economic sanctions in history. Carefully designed and customized to maximize pressure, they have impeded Irans ability to acquire material for its nuclear program, isolated it from the international financial system, drastically slashed its oil exports, and deprived it of access to a sizeable portion of its oil revenues and foreign reserves. Not surprisingly, the impact on Irans economy has been dramatic: its budget deficit and inflation have spiked, the value of its currency has sharply declined, foreign investment has all but dried up, and overall economic activity has stagnated.

The reason that the U.S. can do this is because it has a lot of effective control over financial networks. It can put pressure on banks (including foreign banks, which have been fined billions of dollars for not complying with the U.S. sanctions regime) to isolate Iran from the international system. In Cohens words:

Put simply, financial institutions everywhere need dollars to serve their customers, and thus require access to U.S. banks through correspondent accounts to settle their customers transactions. That means that foreign banks are especially attuned to our sanctions.

Because so many international transactions are (a) settled in dollars and (b) settled across payment systems run by banks and other financial intermediaries that are vulnerable to U.S. pressure, the U.S. can use these systems to exert political control. Now, imagine the likely response of the U.S. (and the E.U., and, for that matter, China) to a payment network which is designed from the ground up to be decentralized, so that it is impossible for any specific intermediaries to really control payment flows from one actor to another. Such a network would be impossible for states to control. The U.S.wouldnt be able to use it, for example, to squeeze Iran out of the world financial system. If such a network ever showed signs of really becoming established (rather than being a relatively small-scale thought experiment, and money suck for libertarians with more ideology than good sense), the U.S.would ruthlessly act to isolate it from the international financial system.

And that is the story of Bitcoin. Up to this point, regulators have largely tolerated Bitcoin as a curiosity and experiment. While Bitcoin allows consumers to buy illegal drugs on Tor Hidden Services sites like Agora and Evolution, they dont do so on a sufficiently large scale to really cause enormous alarm. Regulators still dont know quite what to do with Bitcoin. But if Bitcoin were ever to threaten to become a truly decentralized payments network, owned by no one, and with no one e.g. capable of implementing Know Your Customer rules, regulators would know very well what to do with it. Theyd introduce regulatory guidances and pass laws to freeze it off from the regular financial system. Very possibly, Bitcoin could still survive at the margins (as the Hawala system has survived). However, it would be isolated, and in no position to threaten Visa or Mastercard, let alone the underlying payment and messaging services that really underpin the world financial system.

Read the rest here:
Monkey Cage: Bitcoins financial network is doomed

David, thanks for joining us.

Good morning.

A lot of people, including the producers of the show are constantly making one of me because i was and am such a bi tcoin believer.

It has come down from $1100 to $350. does that bum you out?

If you look at december of 2012, bitcoin was $13. if you have been a long-term holder of this asset, that's a pretty good return.

And more important than the short-term price movements, you've seen these incredible announcements in the last few days.

Take microsoft -- you know, it does not get much larger than microsoft as far as companies that could be accepting bitcoin.

And more importantly, we see a huge user growth in people creating bitcoin wallets.

If you are having these great announcements and support, why is a trading like you know what?

I think it is a long-term valuation creation.

Read more:
Was Bitcoin the Worst Investment of 2014?

Transaction volumes between the ruble and digital currency bitcoin enjoyed their biggest day of the year on Tuesday as the Russian central bank failed to halt the ruble's tumble.

The ruble plunged more than 11 percent against the greenback Tuesday its steepest intraday fall since 1998 as traders dumped a currency that has crumbled on the back of weaker oil prices and sanctions against Russia by the West.

Volatile trading continued on Wednesday, with the currency gaining over 10 percent against the dollar, although it remains down 13 percent on the week.

Other than the dollar, the beneficiaries of this flight from Russia appeared to be the euro, the yen, sterling -- and bitcoin. Data from bitcoincharts.com, which tracks financial and technical statistics for bitcoin, shows that transaction volumes with the ruble spiked on Tuesday spiked to 819 from an average of 230 trades for the last 30-day period. This was close to a 250 percent increase in transactions and was the highest volume seen since December 2013, according to the website.

"The news coming out of Russia is indeed unparalleled," Bobby Lee, the co-founder and CEO of prominent Chinese bitcoin exchange BTC China, told CNBC via email.

Read MoreRussia starts selling its foreign currency stock

"The high trading volumes with the ruble is to be expected, given the flight away from this struggling currency. Bitcoin is therefore a natural destination, as well as other strong central bank currencies."

The rest is here:
Russians move into bitcoin as ruble tanks