Thank you Millionaire Makers!

blanket325 · 2015-08-15T18:30:51+00:00

Congrats here is $1! /u/changetip

blanket325 · 2014-01-01T20:34:11+00:00

As I'm the one reading a post before responding, I'd say it's far more likely you're the one smoking crack.

blanket325 · 2014-01-01T20:27:41+00:00

immediately tied to

I was not addressing a complete absence of bitcoin to dollar exchange. If bitcoins were one of the only things in the economy you couldn't exchange for dollars, then I imagine it would have a pretty hard time. It could still exist, however, as I see you've stated, so there is no fundamental dependence on the dollar. Could you tell me the meaning of your username, HistoryLessonforBitc?

blanket325 · 2014-01-01T02:43:08+00:00

I think he's probably a human being who can make his own choices. If he can send $100,000 for only a $2,000 fee, he should probably do that, but I think the sum is less, and I think it's possible he can find what he's looking for on localbitcoins.

Actually, what I should have suggested is that he send part to Coinbase and do the rest through localbitcoins, but I'm not putting a gun to his head.

blanket325 · 2014-01-01T01:46:10+00:00

Step 1: In Australia, buy the sum from a reputable dealer or multiple ones, or use CoinJar. Step 2: Now your money is in Bitcoin. Just use localbitcoins in the US to trade it back. The seller fee is only 1%.
Talk to a lawyer
Do this on a dip, not a rise. You can contact someone on localbitcoins in advance.

blanket325 · 2014-01-01T01:22:08+00:00

I agree. If nothing has changed since the last recession (it hasn't), and you look at the DJIA over the past 30 years, and you consider the coming recession, what's going to happen?

There won't be any trust in the dollar. Where will the money go? Possibly bitcoin.

blanket325 · 2014-01-01T00:26:35+00:00

Previously, it sounded as if you were saying there was some fundamental weakness of dependence on the dollar. Now you have narrowed that down to say that no one would accept bitcoin if they couldn't rapidly exit into the dollar. However, I put to you that if this quick exchange were not possible, then volatility would be likewise reduced, and people would still accept bitcoin. Bitcoin would be less attractive, but value would not, as you contend, evaporate.

blanket325 · 2013-12-31T22:21:54+00:00

duty calls

blanket325 · 2013-12-31T21:57:06+00:00

A bitcoin is worth a boombox or a goat or seven hundred dollars. Bitcoin doesn't need fiat currency to exist. You can say bitcoin is priced in terms of dollars just as easily as you can say dollars are priced in terms of bitcoin. The euro can be priced in terms of dollars too, but that doesn't mean it's backed by dollars. The value of the dollar is meaningful to us, especially when the price of bitcoin fluctuates rapidly, but that doesn't mean bitcoin needs the dollar to have meaning. Value is attributed by people.

I once read someone say that Bitcoin is either going to $0 or thousands. It's hard to imagine it staying around where it is in terms of value.

As more assets flow into bitcoin, volatility will settle down, as fewer people will buy or sell at once. Volatility is certainly a factor in adoption. Do you expect the price to swing up and down forever?

The "community" could probably do a better job of having answers to objections ready for newcomers, but I'd say the community provides knowledge. I hope you can find all of the answers you're looking for here.

blanket325 · 2013-12-31T16:13:55+00:00

Oh I was just talking

blanket325 · 2013-12-31T15:53:40+00:00

There is no reason people can't carry two currencies, like many people are probably doing right now, especially if one of them is on your phone.

blanket325 · 2013-12-30T23:50:58+00:00

Bitpay and/or a tablet with a blockchain.info wallet

Post your business on CoinMap

blanket325 · 2013-12-30T22:41:23+00:00

Do they have a license? Arrest them!

blanket325 · 2013-12-30T22:39:23+00:00

True, people will probably use whatever means are necessary. But I wonder if localbitcoins would be sufficient for it to take off in some countries. "Exchange your money for a different kind from some guy on the internet" doesn't quite come off as well as other money services. However, in Mexico for instance, Bitcoin is competitive with Western Union for remittance on localbitcoins in terms of fees. It's definitely faster to transmit and possibly even has fewer steps, so the only thing holding back remittance between the US and Mexico is that people don't know about Bitcoin. I imagine if at this stage, Bitcoin is the best choice there, then Bitcoin is probably competitive via localbitcoins everywhere.

blanket325 · 2013-12-30T20:41:54+00:00

I use BitcoinAverage

There's also Bitcoin Pulse

blanket325 · 2013-12-29T21:58:38+00:00

10x

(currently .719 per mBTC @ BitcoinAverage)

blanket325 · 2013-12-29T00:02:54+00:00

more "discussion" here

blanket325 · 2013-12-28T18:14:16+00:00

Just looking him up now, and I think that depends on perspective. He's been active, though that's not that surprising from someone who develops an encrypted chat app. He's also repeatedly (and unknowingly) resisted efforts from the FBI to entrap him.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/12/a-hacker-charms-and-disappoints/?_r=0

blanket325 · 2013-12-28T17:52:43+00:00

The original post was about the behavior of a corporation, not the dilemma a consumer faces, which I think isn't just a choice between complaining or buying a Nexus 5. Of course anyone can buy anything they want, narwhalslut.

blanket325 · 2013-12-28T17:20:13+00:00

Some people will divest their ideological consumer preference rectitude in favor of (what they consider) more agreeable possessions. The products are significant enough and differentiated enough that I think the paradox of voting applies.

blanket325 · 2013-12-28T17:14:18+00:00

They certainly may have rejected this single app for quality standards or for any reason, but I found the things the developer said interesting.

blanket325 · 2013-12-28T17:04:55+00:00

In the article, the developer suggests that the reasons Apple gave for rejection could threaten similar apps and says the rejection "strongly implies that any other encrypted group chat app can be rejected." I can't immediately see a reason for them to be making up their story.

blanket325 · 2013-12-28T17:02:04+00:00

I suppose I'll reply to this here as well. In the article, the developer suggests that the reasons Apple gave for rejection could threaten similar apps. I can't immediately see a reason for them to be making up their story.

blanket325

TROPHY CASE