Ben Bernanke: Bitcoin Has 'Serious Problems'

Complete Guide to All r/neoliberal Flair Personalities [J-L]

Please see the first post [A-I] for more info about this post. Unfortunately, post character limit is 40k, so I will have to break this into multiple posts linked here:





James Heckman
1944 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Professor in Economics at the University of Chicago. Professor at the Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies. Director of the Center for the Economics of Human Development (CEHD). Co-Director of Human Capital and Economic Opportunity (HCEO) Global Working Group. Heckman is also a Professor of Law at ‘the Law School’, a senior research fellow at the American Bar Foundation, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
· In 2000, Heckman shared the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences with Daniel McFadden, for his pioneering work in econometrics and microeconomics.
· As of February 2019 (according to RePEc), he is the next most influential economist in the world behind Daniel McFadden.
· Heckman has received numerous awards for his work, including the John Bates Clark Medal of the American Economic Association in 1983, the 2005 and 2007 Dennis Aigner Award for Applied Econometrics from the Journal of Econometrics, the 2005 Jacob Mincer Award for Lifetime Achievement in Labor Economics, the 2005 Ulysses Medal from the University College Dublin, the 2007 Theodore W. Schultz Award from the American Agricultural Economics Association, the Gold Medal of the President of the Italian Republic awarded by the International Scientific Committee of the Pio Manzú Centre in 2008, the Distinguished Contributions to Public Policy for Children Award from the Society for Research in Child Development in 2009, the 2014 Frisch Medal from the Econometric Society, the 2014 Spirit of Erikson Award from the Erikson Institute, and the 2016 Dan David Prize for Combating Poverty from Tel Aviv University.
“The best way to improve the American workforce in the 21st century is to invest in early childhood education, to ensure that even the most disadvantaged children have the opportunity to succeed alongside their more advantaged peers”

Janet Yellen
1945 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Successor to Ben Bernanke, serving as the Chair of the Federal Reserve from 2014 to 2018, and as Vice Chair from 2010 to 2014, following her position as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Yellen was also Chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton.
· Yellen is a Keynesian economist and advocates the use of monetary policy in stabilizing economic activity over the business cycle. She believes in the modern version of the Phillips curve, which originally was an observation about an inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation. In her 2010 nomination hearing for Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Yellen said, “The modern version of the Phillips curve model—relating movements in inflation to the degree of slack in the economy—has solid theoretical and empirical support.”
· Yellen is married to George Akerlof, another notable economist, Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences laureate, professor at Georgetown University and the University of California, Berkeley..
· In 2014, Yellen was named by Forbes as the second most powerful woman in the world. She was the highest ranking American on the list. In October 2015, Bloomberg Markets ranked her first in their annual list of the 50 most influential economists and policymakers. In October 2015, Sovereign Wealth Fund Institute ranked Yellen #1 in the Public Investor 100 list. In October 2010, she received the Adam Smith Award from the National Association for Business Economics (NABE).
“In the long run, outsourcing is another form of trade that benefits the U.S. economy by giving us cheaper ways to do things.”
“I'm just opposed to a pure inflation-only mandate in which the only thing a central bank cares about is inflation and not unemployment.”

Jared Polis
1975 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· 43rd governor of Colorado since January 2019. Polis served on the Colorado State Board of Education from 2001 to 2007 and was the United States Representative for Colorado's 2nd congressional district from 2009 to 2019.
· Polis is the first openly gay person and second openly LGBT person (after Kate Brown of Oregon) to be elected governor in the United States.
· In 2000 Polis founded the Jared Polis Foundation, whose mission is to “create opportunities for success by supporting educators, increasing access to technology, and strengthening our community.” Polis has also founded two charter schools.
· Polis was named Outstanding Philanthropist for the 2006 National Philanthropy Day in Colorado. He has received many awards, including the Boulder Daily Camera's 2007 Pacesetter Award in Education; the Kauffman Foundation Community Award; the Denver consul general of Mexico “Ohtli”; the Martin Luther King Jr. Colorado Humanitarian Award; and the Anti-Defamation League's inaugural Boulder Community Builder Award.
“Having alternative currencies is great, right, because, historically, government's had a monopoly on currency. At the end of the day, why should only politicians—either directly or indirectly—control the currency? We can reduce transaction cost, provide an alternative, and—look, I don't know whether it'll be Bitcoin or not—but I think the concept of digital currencies is here to stay, and the fact that a politician would write to try to ban them in their infancy is just the wrong way to go about it. Let the market determine whether there's any value there or not.”

Jeff Bezos
1964 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Best known as the founder, CEO, and president of Amazon, Bezos is an American internet and aerospace entrepreneur, media proprietor, and investor. The first centi-billionaire on the Forbes wealth index, Bezos was named the “richest man in modern history” after his net worth increased to $150 billion in July 2018. In September 2018, Forbes described him as “far richer than anyone else on the planet” as he added $1.8 billion to his net worth when Amazon became the second company in history to reach a market cap of $1 trillion.
· Bezos supported the electoral campaigns of U.S. senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, two Democratic U.S. senators from Washington. He has also supported U.S. representative John Conyers, as well as Patrick Leahy and Spencer Abraham, U.S. senators serving on committees dealing with Internet-related issues.
· Bezos has supported the legalization of same-sex marriage, and in 2012 contributed $2.5 million to a group supporting a yes vote on Washington Referendum 74, which affirmed same-sex marriage.
· After the 2016 presidential election, Bezos was invited to join Donald Trump's Defense Innovation Advisory Board, an advisory council to improve the technology used by the Defense Department. Bezos declined the offer without further comment.
· In September 2018, Business Insider reported that Bezos was the only one of the top five billionaires in the world who had not signed the Giving Pledge, an initiative created by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett that encourage wealthy people to give away their wealth.
“Percentage margins don't matter. What matters always is dollar margins: the actual dollar amount. Companies are valued not on their percentage margins, but on how many dollars they actually make, and a multiple of that.”
“We have the resources to build room for a trillion humans in this solar system, and when we have a trillion humans, we'll have a thousand Einsteins and a thousand Mozarts. It will be a way more interesting place to live.”

Jens Weidmann
1968 – Present Born: Germany Resides: Germany
· German economist and president of the Deutsche Bundesbank. Chairman of the Board of the Bank for International Settlements. From 1997 to 1999, Weidmann worked at the International Monetary Fund. In 2006, he began serving as Head of Division IV (Economic and Financial Policy) in the Federal Chancellery. He was the chief negotiator of the Federal Republic of Germany for both the summits of the G8 and the G20. He was given the 2016 Medal for Extraordinary Merits for Bavaria in a United Europe.
· Weidmann was involved in a series of major decisions in response to the financial crisis in Germany and Europe: preventing the meltdown of the bank Hypo Real Estate, guaranteeing German deposits and implementing a rescue programme for the banking system, piecing together two fiscal-stimulus programmes, and setting up the Greek bail-out package and the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF).
· In a 2011 speech, Weidmann criticized the errors and “many years of wrong developments” of the European Monetary Union (EMU) peripheral states, particularly the wasted opportunity represented by their “disproportionate investment in private home-building, high government spending or private consumption”. In May, 2012, Weidmann's stance was characterized by US economist and columnist Paul Krugman as amounting to wanting to destroy the Euro. In 2016, Weidmann dismissed deflation in light of the European Central Bank's current stimulus program, pointing out the healthy condition of the German economy and that the euro area is not that bad off.
“I share the concerns regarding monetary policy that is too loose for too long. … As you know I have concerns about granting emergency liquidity on account of the fact that the banks are not doing everything to improve their liquidity situation.”

Jerome Powell
1953 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Current Chair of the Federal Reserve, nominated by Trump. Powell has faced substantial and repeated criticism from Trump after his confirmation. The Senate Banking Committee approved Powell's nomination in a 22–1 vote, with Senator Elizabeth Warren casting the lone dissenting vote.
· Powell briefly served as Under Secretary of the Treasury for Domestic Finance under George H. W. Bush in 1992. He has served as a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors since 2012. He is the first Chair of the Federal Reserve since 1987 not to hold a Ph.D. degree in Economics.
· Powell has described the Fed's role as nonpartisan and apolitical. Trump has criticized Powell for not massively lowering federal interest rates and instituting quantitative easing.
· The Bloomberg Intelligence Fed Spectrometer rated Powell as neutral (not dove nor hawk). Powell has been a skeptic of round 3 of quantitative easing, initiated in 2012, although he did vote in favor of implementation.
· Powell stated that higher capital and liquidity requirements and stress tests have made the financial system safer and must be preserved. However, he also stated that the Volcker Rule should be re-written to exclude smaller banks. Powell supports ample amounts of private capital to support housing finance activities.
“The Fed's organization reflects a long-standing desire in American history to ensure that power over our nation's monetary policy and financial system is not concentrated in a few hands, whether in Washington or in high finance or in any single group or constituency.”

John Cochrane
1957 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and economist, specializing in financial economics and macroeconomics.
· The central idea of Cochrane's research is that macroeconomics and finance should be linked, and a comprehensive theory needs to explain both 1.) how, given the observed prices and financial returns, households and firms decide on consumption, investment, and financing; and 2.) how, in equilibrium, prices and financial returns are determined by households and firms decisions.
· Cochrane is the author of ‘Asset Pricing,’ a widely used textbook in graduate courses on asset pricing. According to his own words, the organizing principle of the book is that everything can be traced back to specializations of a single equation: the basic pricing equation. Cochrane received the TIAA-CREF Institute Paul A. Samuelson Award for this book.
“Regulators and politicians aren’t nitwits. The libertarian argument that regulation is so dumb — which it surely is — misses the point that it is enacted by really smart people. The fact that the regulatory state is an ideal tool for the entrenchment of political power was surely not missed by its architects.”

John Keynes (John Maynard Keynes, 1st Baron Keynes)
1883 – 1946 Born: England Died: England
· British economist, whose ideas fundamentally changed the theory and practice of macroeconomics and the economic policies of governments. Originally trained in mathematics, he built on and greatly refined earlier work on the causes of business cycles, and was one of the most influential economists of the 20th century. Widely considered the founder of modern macroeconomics, his ideas are the basis for the school of thought known as Keynesian economics, and its various offshoots. Keynes was a lifelong member of the Liberal Party, which until the 1920s had been one of the two main political parties in the United Kingdom.
· During the 1930s Great Depression, Keynes challenged the ideas of neoclassical economics that held that free markets would, in the short to medium term, automatically provide full employment, as long as workers were flexible in their wage demands. He argued that aggregate demand (total spending in the economy) determined the overall level of economic activity, and that inadequate aggregate demand could lead to prolonged periods of high unemployment. Keynes advocated the use of fiscal and monetary policies to mitigate the adverse effects of economic recessions and depressions.
· Keynes's influence started to wane in the 1970s, his ideas challenged by those who disputed the ability of government to favorably regulate the business cycle with fiscal policy. However, the advent of the global financial crisis of 2007–2008 sparked a resurgence in Keynesian thought. Keynesian economics provided the theoretical underpinning for economic policies undertaken in response to the crisis by President Barack Obama of the United States, Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the United Kingdom, and other heads of governments.
· Keynes was vice-chairman of the Marie Stopes Society which provided birth control education and campaigned against job discrimination against women and unequal pay. He was an outspoken critic of laws against homosexuality. Keynes thought that the pursuit of money for its own sake was a pathological condition, and that the proper aim of work is to provide leisure. He wanted shorter working hours and longer holidays for all. Keynes was ultimately a successful investor, building up a private fortune.
“How can I accept the Communist doctrine, which sets up as its bible, above and beyond criticism, an obsolete textbook which I know not only to be scientifically erroneous but without interest or application to the modern world? How can I adopt a creed which, preferring the mud to the fish, exalts the boorish proletariat above the bourgeoisie and the intelligentsia, who with all their faults, are the quality of life and surely carry the seeds of all human achievement? Even if we need a religion, how can we find it in the turbid rubbish of the red bookshop? It is hard for an educated, decent, intelligent son of Western Europe to find his ideals here, unless he has first suffered some strange and horrid process of conversion which has changed all his values.”

John Locke
1632 – 1704 Born: England Died: England
· Known as the “Father of Liberalism,” Locke was an English philosopher and physician, widely regarded as one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers. His work greatly affected the development of epistemology and political philosophy. His writings influenced Voltaire and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, many Scottish Enlightenment thinkers, as well as the American revolutionaries. His contributions to classical republicanism and liberal theory are reflected in the United States Declaration of Independence.
· Locke's political theory was founded on social contract theory. Social contract arguments typically posit that individuals have consented, either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their freedoms and submit to the authority (of the ruler, or to the decision of a majority) in exchange for protection of their remaining rights or maintenance of the social order.
· Locke advocated for governmental separation of powers and believed that revolution is not only a right but an obligation in some circumstances. Locke was vehemently opposed to slavery, calling it “vile and miserable … directly opposite to the generous Temper and Courage of our Nation.”
· Locke uses the word “property” in both broad and narrow senses. In a broad sense, it covers a wide range of human interests and aspirations; more narrowly, it refers to material goods. He argues that property is a natural right and it is derived from labour aand that the individual ownership of goods and property is justified by the labour exerted to produce those goods
· According to Locke, unused property is wasteful and an offence against nature, but, with the introduction of “durable” goods, men could exchange their excessive perishable goods for goods that would last longer and thus not offend the natural law. In his view, the introduction of money marks the culmination of this process, making possible the unlimited accumulation of property without causing waste through spoilage.
“The power of the legislative, being derived from the people by a positive voluntary grant and institution, can be no other than what that positive grant conveyed, which being only to make laws, and not to make legislators, the legislative can have no power to transfer their authority of making laws, and place it in other hands.”
“No man in civil society can be exempted from the laws of it: for if any man may do what he thinks fit, and there be no appeal on earth, for redress or security against any harm he shall do; I ask, whether he be not perfectly still in the state of nature, and so can be no part or member of that civil society; unless any one will say, the state of nature and civil society are one and the same thing, which I have never yet found any one so great a patron of anarchy as to affirm.”

John Mill (John Stuart Mill a.k.a. J. S. Mill)
1806 – 1873 Born: England Died: France
· John Stuart Mill was arguably the most influential English speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century. He was a naturalist, a utilitarian, and a liberal, whose work explores the consequences of a thoroughgoing empiricist outlook. In doing so, he sought to combine the best of eighteenth-century Enlightenment thinking with newly emerging currents of nineteenth-century Romantic and historical philosophy. His most important works include System of Logic (1843), On Liberty (1859), Utilitarianism (1861) and An Examination of Sir William Hamilton’s Philosophy (1865).
· Mill's conception of liberty justified the freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state and social control. A member of the Liberal Party and author of the early feminist work The Subjection of Women (in which he also condemned slavery), he was also the second Member of Parliament to call for women's suffrage after Henry Hunt in 1832.
· Mill, an employee for the British East India Company from 1823 to 1858, argued in support of what he called a “benevolent despotism” with regard to the colonies. Mill argued that “To suppose that the same international customs, and the same rules of international morality, can obtain between one civilized nation and another, and between civilized nations and barbarians, is a grave error. ... To characterize any conduct whatever towards a barbarous people as a violation of the law of nations, only shows that he who so speaks has never considered the subject.”
· John Stuart Mill believed in the philosophy of Utilitarianism, which he described as the principle that holds “that actions are right in the proportion as they tend to promote happiness [intended pleasure, and the absence of pain], wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness [pain, and the privation of pleasure].” Mill asserts that even when we value virtues for selfish reasons we are in fact cherishing them as a part of our happiness.
· Mill's early economic philosophy was one of free markets. However, he accepted interventions in the economy, such as a tax on alcohol, if there were sufficient utilitarian grounds. Mill originally believed that “equality of taxation” meant “equality of sacrifice” and that progressive taxation penalized those who worked harder and saved more. Given an equal tax rate regardless of income, Mill agreed that inheritance should be taxed.
· His main objection of socialism was on that of what he saw its destruction of competition. According to Mill, a socialist society would only be attainable through the provision of basic education for all, promoting economic democracy instead of capitalism, in the manner of substituting capitalist businesses with worker cooperatives.
· Mill's major work on political democracy defends two fundamental principles at slight odds with each other: extensive participation by citizens and enlightened competence of rulers. He believed that the incompetence of the masses could eventually be overcome if they were given a chance to take part in politics, especially at the local level.
· Mill is one of the few political philosophers ever to serve in government as an elected official. In his three years in Parliament, he was more willing to compromise than the “radical” principles expressed in his writing would lead one to expect.
“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion... Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them...he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
“The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.”

John Rawls
1921 – 2002 Born: United States Died: United States
· Liberal American moral and political philosopher who received both the Schock Prize for Logic and Philosophy and the National Humanities Medal in 1999, the latter presented by President Bill Clinton, who acclaimed Rawls for having “helped a whole generation of learned Americans revive their faith in democracy itself.” He is frequently cited by the courts of law in the United States and Canada.
· Rawls's most discussed work is his theory of a just liberal society, called justice as fairness. Rawls first wrote about this theory in his book A Theory of Justice. Rawls spoke much about the desire for a well-ordered society; a society of free and equal persons cooperating on fair terms of social cooperation.
· Rawls’s most important principle (the Liberty Principal) states that every individual has an equal right to basic liberties. Rawls believes that “personal property” constitutes a basic liberty, but an absolute right to unlimited private property is not.
· Rawls's argument for his principles of social justice uses a thought experiment called the “original position”, in which people select what kind of society they would choose to live under if they did not know which social position they would personally occupy.
“Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought. A theory however elegant and economical must be rejected or revised if it is untrue; likewise laws and institutions no matter how efficient and well-arranged must be reformed or abolished if they are unjust. Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others. It does not allow that the sacrifices imposed on a few are outweighed by the larger sum of advantages enjoyed by many. Therefore in a just society the liberties of equal citizenship are taken as settled; the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests.”

Joseph Nye
1937 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· American political scientist and co-founder of the international relations theory of neoliberalism (a theory concerned first and foremost with absolute gains rather than relative gains to other states), developed in the 1977 book Power and Interdependence. He is noted for his notion of “smart power” (“the ability to combine hard and soft power into a successful strategy”), which became a popular phrase with the Clinton and Obama Administrations.
· Secretary of State John Kerry appointed Nye to the Foreign Affairs Policy Board in 2014. In 2014, Nye was awarded the Order of the Rising Sun, Gold and Silver Star in recognition of his “contribution to the development of studies on Japan-U.S. security and to the promotion of the mutual understanding between Japan and the United States.”
· From 1977 to 1979, Nye was Deputy to the Undersecretary of State for Security Assistance, Science, and Technology and chaired the National Security Council Group on Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In recognition of his service, he was awarded the State Department's Distinguished Honor Award in 1979. In 1993 and 1994, he was Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, which coordinates intelligence estimates for the President, and was awarded the Intelligence Community's Distinguished Service Medal. In the Clinton Administration from 1994 to 1995, Nye served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, and was awarded the Department's Distinguished Service Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster. Nye was considered by many to be the preferred choice for National Security Advisor in the 2004 presidential campaign of John Kerry.
· Nye has been a member of the Harvard faculty since 1964. He is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences and a foreign fellow of The British Academy. Nye is also a member of the American Academy of Diplomacy. The 2011 TRIP survey of over 1700 international relations scholars ranks Joe Nye as the sixth most influential scholar in the field of international relations in the past twenty years. He was also ranked as most influential in American foreign policy. In 2011, Foreign Policy magazine named him to its list of top global thinkers. In September 2014, Foreign Policy reported that the international relations scholars and policymakers both ranked Nye as one of the most influential scholars.
“When you can get others to admire your ideals and to want what you want, you do not have to spend as much on sticks and carrots to move them in your direction. Seduction is always more effective than coercion, and many values like democracy, human rights, and individual opportunities are deeply seductive.”

Karl Popper
1902 – 1994 Born: Austria-Hungary Died: England
· Karl Popper is generally regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century. He was a self-professed critical-rationalist, a dedicated opponent of all forms of scepticism, conventionalism, and relativism in science and in human affairs generally and a committed advocate and staunch defender of the ‘Open Society’.
· In ‘The Open Society and Its Enemies’ and ‘The Poverty of Historicism’, Popper developed a critique of historicism and a defense of the “Open Society”. Popper considered historicism to be the theory that history develops inexorably and necessarily according to knowable general laws towards a determinate end. He argued that this view is the principal theoretical presupposition underpinning most forms of authoritarianism and totalitarianism. He argued that historicism is founded upon mistaken assumptions regarding the nature of scientific law and prediction. Since the growth of human knowledge is a causal factor in the evolution of human history, and since “no society can predict, scientifically, its own future states of knowledge”, it follows, he argued, that there can be no predictive science of human history. For Popper, metaphysical and historical indeterminism go hand in hand.
· Popper is known for his vigorous defense of liberal democracy and the principles of social criticism that he believed made a flourishing open society possible. His political philosophy embraced ideas from major democratic political ideologies, including socialism/social democracy, libertarianism/classical liberalism and conservatism, and attempted to reconcile them.
“Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.”

Lawrence Summers
1954 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· American economist, former Vice President of Development Economics and Chief Economist of the World Bank, senior U.S. Treasury Department official throughout President Clinton's administration, Treasury Secretary 1999–2001, and former director of the National Economic Council for President Obama (2009–2010). Summers served as the 27th President of Harvard University from 2001 to 2006. Current professor and director of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.
· As a researcher, Summers has made important contributions in many areas of economics, primarily public finance, labor economics, financial economics, and macroeconomics. Summers has also worked in international economics, economic demography, economic history and development economics.[ He received the John Bates Clark Medal in 1993 from the American Economic Association. In 1987, he was the first social scientist to win the Alan T. Waterman Award from the National Science Foundation. Summers is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences.
· In 1983, at age 28, Summers became one of the youngest tenured professors in Harvard's history. In 2006, Summers resigned as Harvard's president in the wake of a no-confidence vote by Harvard faculty. Summers viewed his beliefs on why science and engineering had an under-representation of women to be a large part in the vote, saying, “There is a great deal of absurd political correctness. Now, I'm somebody who believes very strongly in diversity, who resists racism in all of its many incarnations, who thinks that there is a great deal that's unjust in American society that needs to be combated, but it seems to be that there is a kind of creeping totalitarianism in terms of what kind of ideas are acceptable and are debatable on college campuses.”
· As the World Bank's Vice President of Development Economics and Chief Economist, Summers played a role in designing strategies to aid developing countries, worked on the bank's loan committee, guided the bank's research and statistics operations, and guided external training programs. The World Bank's official site reports that Summer's research included an “influential” report that demonstrated a very high return from investments in educating girls in developing nations. According to The Economist, Summers was “often at the centre of heated debates” about economic policy, to an extent exceptional for the history of the World Bank in recent decades.
· In 1999 Summers endorsed the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act which removed the separation between investment and commercial banks. In February 2009, Summers quoted John Maynard Keynes, saying “When circumstances change, I change my opinion”, reflecting both on the failures of Wall Street deregulation and his new leadership role in the government bailout.
submitted by learnactreform to neoliberal [link] [comments]

A Crypto Fix for a Broken International Monetary System

The international monetary system is broken. Helping to fix it poses a huge opportunity for the cryptographers behind cryptocurrency and blockchain technology.
Now they have one of the stewards of that system in their corner: Mark Carney, the outgoing Bank of England Governor.
A week ago in Jackson Hole, Mont., Carney told the Federal Reserve’s annual gabfest that central bankers could develop a network of national digital currencies to create a new, basket-managed “synthetic hegemonic currency.”
Carney’s proposal was mostly a thought exercise to inspire conversation around solutions to the dangerous imbalances fostered by the current system’s dependence on the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. The specifics were necessarily thin – any solution will be both technically and politically complicated, and even though he’ll depart the BOE in January, Carney’s status as a public official demands caution.
But I don’t share those constraints. So, let me lay out my own modest proposal for a cryptocurrency-based fix to a broken global financial system. Hint: it is not “buy bitcoin.”
I’m neither a trained economist nor a cryptographer, so I know this act of hubris will attract naysayers. I welcome criticisms and suggestions. I’m also quite certain I’m not the first to think of this, so I’m eager to hear of others working on similar projects.
The thing is I’ve been obsessed with both the structural failings of the global financial system and cryptocurrency for many years now. Three of my five books have covered those topics. It’s hard to bite my tongue.

Fixing the global currency system

I think that instead of creating a whole new global currency, central bankers should work to develop digital currency interoperability. We need a system of decentralized exchange through which businesses in different countries can use smart contracts to create automated escrow agreements and protect themselves against exchange rate volatility. With algorithms that achieve atomic swaps now available and with other advances in cross-chain interoperability, I believe we’ll soon have the technology to remove foreign exchange risk from international trade without relying on an intermediating currency such as the dollar.
Here’s how it might work: A hypothetical importer in Russia could strike a deal with an exporter from China and agree to a future payment, denominated in Chinese renminbi, based on the latter’s prevailing exchange rate with the Russian ruble. Relying on an interoperability protocol that’s commonly integrated into each party’s preferred digital national currency – either in privately run stablecoins or central bank-issued digital currencies – the two firms could then establish a smart contract that “trustlessly” locks up the required renminbi payment in decentralized escrow. If delivery and contract fulfillment are confirmed, the payment is released to the Chinese exporter. If not, the funds revert to the Russian importer at the same, initial conversion rate.
In this scenario, both parties are protected against adverse exchange rate movements. Yet, despite the trust gap between them, there is no need to intermediate the payment through dollars, and no need for either party to take out a forward contract, FX option or some other expensive exchange rate hedge.
Of course, the importer would suffer the opportunity cost of locking up otherwise valuable working capital for a few months. But private banks could mitigate that with collateralized short-term loans on terms that would be a lot cheaper than the current cost of currency hedging. Alternatively, if the smart contract is executed on a proof-of-stake blockchain, the locked-up funds could be employed to earn cryptocurrency staking rewards.
What would central banks’ roles be?
Well, for one, they could backstop the entire credit and/or staking model. Providing liquidity or guarantees to banks’ trade finance businesses would be a more constructive use of domestic money supply than applying it to rainy-day funds of U.S. Treasuries and other dollar assets.
Secondly, they’d be charged with assuring the trustworthiness of the interoperability protocol. Whether central banks would endorse and regulate privately developed protocols such as Tendermint’s Cosmos, Parity Technologies’ Polkadot or Ripple’s Interledger, or whether they would commission a multilateral body to build and manage a single official system, there’s no getting around an oversight role for public sector policymakers.
(Don’t worry, crypto libertarians, no one’s taking away your bitcoin in this scenario. In fact, since central bankers will retain their own monetary sovereignty, with exchange rates continuing to fluctuate, bitcoin’s appeal as a “digital gold” alternative to domestic currencies could well be enhanced.)

A broken system

Let’s be clear: if foreign trade no longer requires dollar intermediation, the U.S.-centric global economy will suffer a massive impact, perhaps bigger even than the 1971 “Nixon Shock,” when the dollar was unpegged from gold.
The entire reserve currency system, in which foreign central banks own U.S. government bonds as a backstop and multinational companies hold large parts of their balance sheets in dollars, is based on the need to protect against exchange rate losses. If that risk is removed, the edifice would, in theory, come down.
Yet, as Carney rightly points out, continuing with dollar hegemony is not tenable, either. The system is broken. Whenever global investors get the jitters they rushen masse into “safe haven” dollar assets – even when, as with President Trump’s trade war with China, U.S. policy is the cause of their malaise.
This process, which has become progressively more acute with each financial crisis, causes huge distortions, economic dysfunction and political turmoil. And with economies slowing and the worldwide value of bonds carrying negative yields now at $17 trillion, we now face worrying signs of another crisis. This time, traditional central bank policy could be powerless.
When another crisis comes, the dollar-based system will generate a predictable vicious cycle. The dollar will rapidly rise. This will hurt U.S. exporters, which further stir the mercantile instincts of anti-free traders such as Trump and fuel risks of a destructive tit-for-tat currency war.
Meanwhile, emerging markets will suffer capital flight as a rising dollar raises the risk of debt defaults in those countries. Their central banks will respond by jacking up interest rates to prop up their domestic currencies, but this will choke their economies at a time when they require easier, not tighter, monetary policy. Unemployment will surge and governments will topple.
The current system breeds what former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke dubbed the “global savings glut” as developing countries squirrel money into dollar reserves that could otherwise be used for domestic development.
In the U.S., it creates the countervailing effect of massive deficits – in other words, sky-high debt. Far from being the “exorbitant privilege” once described by French Finance Minister Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, the dollar’s reserve status is an American curse. It creates artificially low U.S. interest rates, which misprices credit risks and fuels bubbles – see: the 2008 housing crisis.
Worst of all, the dollar system undermines democracy and diminishes economic sovereignty. The performance of every economy hinges on U.S. Federal Reserve policies. Yet the Fed’s low inflation/maximum employment mandate is defined only by the U.S. economic outlook. This policy mismatch makes it much harder for governments to pursue effective measures to create opportunities for all.
When things really go sour, the Fed belatedly and reluctantly becomes the world’s lender of last resort, pumping dollars into the world’s banks via their New York subsidiaries. That’s how we ended up with the “quantitative easing” surfeit after the last crisis, money that went into financial assets, London real estate and fine art, but did little to boost the earning power of the middle class.
These policy failures have bred a populist backlash against globalization, manifest in the U.K.’s Brexit crisis and President Trump’s adversarial trade policies. Yet the reality is that capital flows are more globalized than ever and increasingly beating to the drum of the U.S. dollar.
So, yes, we need change. The question is how and in what time frame?

Violent or managed change?

The solution I described could be adopted abruptly and disruptively or it could be cooperatively managed for a smoother transition.
Under the first scenario, let’s consider Russia and China, the two countries I deliberately chose for my explanatory example, since they are believed to be further ahead than most in developing fiat digital currencies. Both would love to do away with dollar dependence. Could they go it alone and jointly devise a bilateral, cross-chain smart contract between a digital renminbi and a digital ruble? Sure. Would other countries follow suit? Maybe. Such an uncontrolled retreat from dollars could do huge harm to the U.S. and the overall global economy.
That’s why I think central banks should heed Carney’s call and work together on a solution. They could coordinate the gradual introduction of digital currencies, selectively managing access and applying differential interest rates to discourage an exodus from shaky banks. They could also charge the IMF with seeking a global standard for cross-chain interoperability.
Regardless, the disruptive technologies behind digital currencies, stablecoins and decentralized exchanges will advance. It’s a ticking time bomb.
Some central bankers, led by Carney – and now, Philadelphia Fed President Patrick Harker, who said in a Wharton Business School podcast that stablecoins are “inevitable” – get it. Others need to learn fast.
Mark Carney image via Twocoms /
submitted by lordofhippos to CryptoCurrencyLive [link] [comments]

Why I'm dumping hundreds of thousands of EUR into BTC instead of stocks, gold, bank deposits or cash

I've been reading up on bitcoin heavily since the wake-up call that was the cyprus banking crises in march 2013. Up to that point I had most of my financial assets in bank deposits, 5% in physical gold, and less than 5% in cash in eur, although we have our own brand of toilet paper: lev (bgn) tied to a fixed exchange rate to eur since 1997 (1 eur = ~ 2BGN). during 1997 bulgaria was going through a huge currency crises with 1 USD reaching 3000 BGN, state pensions going down to $5-10 monthly, salaries of teachers and doctors $20-30 and general mayhem for the 8mil. population at that time as the State was stealing whatever foreign paper currency (usd, deuthche marks mostly) through manipulation of the currency exchange. Since then there has been a currency board established, erasing three zeros from the exchange rate and a newly designed paper money we are still using. The hyperinflation was like a jubilee for all debt holders and a menace for everyone that had savings in local money and not quick enough to convert into other assets. People could by real estate back then for less than $2000-3000 that now easily cost $50-60k!
17 years later, almost a generation later, into 2014 and another crises is looming ahead as we just had 3th (first investment bank) and 4th largest (bulgarian corporate bank) banks going through bank runs, with the 4th totally frozen since june 20th and the 3rd receiving billions in liquidity to contain the run on deposits. Both banks are among the few left among the 30 operating banks with bulgarian owners which are perceived as highly corrupt. Corporate bank had 6.5bil (3.25bil eur) in assets and has been closed for all its clients as more than 4.5bil are supposedly "missing" through suspicious credits to an inner circle of businesses associated with local party mafia rulers and the bank owners themselves - outright criminal ponzi that was backed by the State, as it had deposited money from large energy companies in Corporate bank to keep its capital requirements within the legal threshold. Now the party rulers are pondering the "idea" of covering all deposits through issuing bonds for all citizens to pay through taxes, even those above 100k eur supposedly protected by law, as to "save" it turns out a lot of deputies in the parliament, prosecutors, judges, famous artists, and the general ruling "elite" who have been collecting 8-9% annual interest for the last 10 years through deposits with maturity every 4 months! From here on I expect things are going to deteriorate badly and with an accelerating force as the local rulers seem to be bent over on raping the country financially for saving their own ass, which is to be expected worldwide as centralization always breeds corruption.
After the cyprus bank crises, I started dumping bigger chunks of bank money for larger amounts of gold bullion at once, as a hedge against all the political stupidity that seems inevitable when shtf, guaranteed to happen in the current financial system worldwide. Then the news started gaining steam about the rise of BTC during april and it was the first time I started putting hours a day in reading on the subject of what this fuss about BTC was all about. Few days later I was hooked to BTC like on the hardest drugs available on the market! Still, did not buy any, but started spreading the gospel that is the decentralized nature of crypto to all my friends and through heavy spam on facebook. It took me 2 months before I pumped up my partners to accept BTC in the online businesses that I am a cofounder of, with 3 in the Top 100 by daily traffic and 1 in Top 10 in online commerce by revenue. We were the first major sites in BG (june 2013) to accept BTC and doing some excessive marketing on behalf of BTC through huge onsite ads, special rates for btc payments, special badges ala foursquare for btc users, special and highly attractive subscription packages only available for btc, allowing users with site credits to convert them into btc, putting out blog posts on the subject, giving away bonuses to our employees only in btc and so on. Since accepting BTC we have never converted them back into paper money and keep 100% which turned out to be highly profitable, as we have made 5x the amount just by speculating on the rising price of BTC in contrast to any paper money. We are now going to promote BTC further by giving away BTC to our users for certain tasks and promotions. All of my partners are now invested in btc, buying in btc, building an atm, and very acceptive of whatever initiative that we could put out to further spread btc among our 2.5mil. registered combined user base in a country of 4.5mil. total internet users :-)
Yet, it took me another 4 months in octover 2013 to start buying BTC with my own saved-up money, as I felt highly confident of where I believe BTC is headed, especially after the run on the price thanks to the unlikely culprit ben bernanke's speech in the congress hearing. Ever since then I've been accumulating BTC first by slowly to feel confident of all the security needed to be exercised towards btc long term holdings, then almost daily and now dumping ever larger amounts of fiat paper into btc until I reach a threshold of no more than 25-30% of my assets to be converted into BTC. I've been buying through all the price ups and downs since 10.2013 and am resolved to hold hard for the future no matter the monthly fluctuations. I see BTC as even a greater hedge during turmoil than gold, as BTC can not be stopped by any capital controls, which indians are learning the hard way since their rulers imposed heavy duties on import/export on gold since march 2013.
I'm confident that bitcoin can weather the storms coming its way being upgradable, needing truly global democratic consensus, being deflationary in an ever more inflationary brands of toilet papers, easy to protect from state actors that look up for miniscule reasons to confiscate or put levy on personal wealth, easy to transport and live by on its own as daily more exchanges and businesses are opening up worldwide, gaining more confidence as a store of value and alternative to bank deposits which are easy pray to bank criminality or the unpredictable market forces that can obliterate depositors relying on 3rd party wealth preservation, the best form of payment for the huge knowledge-based economy and workers worldwide that can finally become totally mobile thanks to internet and decentralized money, accelerating remittance opportunities, great store of value in times of ever increasing state authoritarianism under the weight of sovereign debt explosion and rising social promises that need to be backed by real assets and especially people who are ever more mobile and hard to tax to death as internet+bitcoin turns the planet in a highly competitive marketplace for tax-purposes as to what the different offerings of state rulers are. Looking what is heating in the middle east, west vs russia, currency debasement of the world reserve currency worse than during times of world wars, it's not hard to predict than btc has not way to go but up, even if the nsa tries their best to subvert it, the People will find a way to fix it!
submitted by srebrin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Greg Maxwell has now publicly confessed that he is engaging in deliberate market manipulation to artificially suppress Bitcoin adoption and price. He could be doing this so that he and his associates can continue to accumulate while the price is still low (1 BTC = $570, ie 1 USD can buy 1750 "bits")
Greg Maxwell: If you imagine that everyone in the world would wake up tomorrow and know in their heart of hearts that bitcoin would be the true reserve currency of the world, then this would not be good news. The result would be war. People would fight over the supply of bitcoin.
The above statement is a surprisingly revealing admission by Gregory Maxwell (self-appointed dictator of Bitcoin monetary policy CTO of Blockstream, and architect of the Core stalling scaling road-map signed by 57 devs and wannabe devs).
It is quoted from the transcript of the invite-only, semi-transparent (manually transcribed, not recorded) Fed meeting private meeting between Core/Blockstream devs and Chinese miners, held in Silicon Valley on July 30-31, 2016.
There is only one way that a trader (or a regulator!) would interpret the above statement by Gregory Maxwell nullc, where he (perhaps inadvertently but) openly admits that he is trying to prevent a free market where "people would fight over the supply of bitcoin".
Greg's statement constitutes a clear and damning admission of attempted market manipulation, as typically used for activities such as insider trading, and front-running - which are illegal in regulated markets.
Greg Maxwell has now publicly admitted that he is attempting to artificially suppress Bitcoin adoption and price, in the short term.
Maybe he is doing this so that he and his associates can continue to accumulate while the price is still low (1 BTC = $570, ie 1 USD can buy 1750 "bits" - where 1 BTC = 1'000'000 "bits").
Or maybe Greg - and his buddy Adam Back, President of Blockstream - could simply be doing this for any number of reasons related to their ignorance of how economics and politics actually work with open-source currencies.
Either way, this kind of centralized market manipulation is outrageous.
It should not be tolerated in any market in a publicly traded asset - whether regulated or unregulated.
By the way, as we all know, the total supply of Bitcoin is 21 million BTC, or 21 trillion "bits" - which is similar to total money supply for many other measures of currency or wealth (ie, in the tens of trillions of units).
And as we also know, many measures of total world currency or wealth are also in this same range: around 10s of trillions of units (ie: dollars, etc.).
This suggests that (for people who, in Greg's words, already "know in their heart of hearts that bitcoin would be the true reserve currency of the world"), the current price of 1 USD = 1750 "bits" (market-manipulated by Greg Maxwell) is ridiculously low - ie, it's a "steal".
So, people who are currently "short" on bitcoin (ie, they want to buy more), might be thankful for Greg Maxwell's market manipulation - where he is exploiting his position as self-appointed dictator of Bitcoin Blockstream CTO, to engage in central planning in order to manipulate the market, by artificially suppressing Bitcoin adoption and price a while longer (by forcing his "tiny-blocks" approach on everyone: the notorious 1 MB "max blocksize") - simply because he can and he wants to.
Meanwhile, in a regulated market, this sort of blatant centralized "insider influence" on a publicly traded asset class or currency would be illegal.
The only reason Blockstream is able to get away with this kind of crime bullshit is because Bitcoin is unregulated - and the only people who can stop them at this point is us: the Bitcoin community.
For the record, I believe the following:
  • Government interference with Bitcoin would be wrong.
  • Market manipulation of Bitcoin, by artificially suppressing adoption and price, as practiced by Greg Maxwell, is also wrong.
  • The Bitcoin community can and should regulate itself - by letting the free market determine things like what code to run, what "max blocksize" (if any) to adopt - which will in turn naturally determine Bitcoin adoption and price.
So, this public admission of market manipulation by Greg Maxwell constitutes yet another reason why the community should reject his attempt to become some kind of self-appointed dictator for Bitcoin.
Specifically, we can and should use other code (not developed by Greg Maxwell and his minions at Core/Blockstream) which does not impose an artificial 1 MB "max blocksize" - which repeated studies have shown is far below the blocksize supported by our current technology (which would be up to up to 4 MB according to the Cornell study - or even 20 MB, using u/Peter__R's proposed "Xthin" approach).
For additional background, below are 3 previous posts from last week, regarding Core/Blockstream's centralized, behind-the-scenes manipulation of Bitcoin adoption and price:
The Fed/FOMC holds meetings to decide on money supply. Core/Blockstream & Chinese miners now hold meetings to decide on money velocity. Both are centralized decision-making. Both are the wrong approach.
Having a "max blocksize" effectively imposes a "maximum money velocity" for Bitcoin - needless central economic planning at its worst.
We should not be waiting for insider information from Ben Bernanke or Janet Yellen or some creepy scammer named u/btcdrak or some economically clueless kid like u/maaku7 in order to determine how our financial system operates.
So, on the expiration date of the HK stalling / non-scaling non-agreement, Viacoin scammer u/btcdrak calls a meeting with no customer-facing businesses invited (just Chinese miners & Core/Blockstream), and no solutions/agreements allowed, and no transparency (just a transcript from u/kanzure). WTF!?
Bitcoin's so-called "governance" is being hijacked by some anonymous scammer named u/btcdrak who created a shitcoin called Viacoin and who's a subcontractor for Blockstream - calling yet another last-minute stalling / non-scaling meeting on the expiration date of Core/Blockstream's previous last-minute stalling / non-scaling non-agreement - and this non-scaling meeting is invite-only for Chinese miners and Core/Blockstream (with no actual Bitcoin businesses invited) - and economic idiot u/maaku7 who also brought us yet another shitcoin called Freicoin is now telling us that no actual solutions will be provided because no actual agreements will be allowed - and this invite-only no-industry no-solutions / no-agreements non-event will be manually transcribed by some guy named u/kanzure who hates u/Peter__R (note: u/Peter__R gave us actual solutions like Bitcoin Unlimited and massive on-chain scaling via XThin) - and as usual this invite-only non-scaling no-solutions / no-agreements no-industry invite-only non-event is being paid for by some fantasy fiat finance firm AXA whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group which will go bankrupt if Bitcoin succeeds. What the fuck?!?
Remember when Bitcoin was to be ruled by "math not men"? Whether you support bigger or smaller blocks, and whether you're "short" Bitcoin (you want the price to go down, so you can buy), or "long" (you want the price to go up, so you can sell) - you should still support decentralized governance.
The potential for manipulation
In the past, I've communicated with several experienced old-time traders and consultants from Wall Street regarding Bitcoin.
And many of them say they won't touch Bitcoin with a ten-foot pole because it's quite obvious to them that (in the absence of regulation), a new asset class like Bitcoin is horribly vulnerable to all sorts of behind-the-scenes manipulation.
They've seen it all before. They know all the ins and outs of how people with "insider information" can rig the market - and they can already see plenty of warning signs and alarm bells showing how easy it would be to pull off this kind of market manipulation in Bitcoin.
A handful of insiders can easily manipulate this "max blocksize" number - deciding whether and when and how it will get changed, and how much, and how often - so they could potentially manipulate the price - depending on their own personal preferences.
Is there a solution?
As you can see from all of the above, the main problem facing Bitcoin right now is centralized governance.
Of course, code inevitably does have to be (centrally) written by someone.
But there are things we can do right now to minimize the amount of centralized intervention in Bitcoin's code and governance.
Whenever possible, we can and should favor code which requires a minimum of centralized interference.
Core/Blockstream have basically spent the past year or two tying themselves up in knots, and disrupting the community and the market - and maybe even suppressing the price - due to their stubborn, selfish, destructive refusal to provide parameterized code where the market can set certain values on its own - most notably, the "maximum blocksize".
Meanwhile, code such as Bitcoin Unlimited (and also Bitcoin Classic, once it adopts BitPay's Adaptive Blocksize Limit) puts the "governance" for things like "max blocksize" back where it belongs - in the hands of the users, in the marketplace.
Using more-parameterized code is an obvious technique known by anyone who has taken a "Programming 101" course.
Everyone knows that parameterized code is the easiest way to let the market set some parameters - avoiding the dangers of having these parameters set behind closed doors by a centralized cartel of powerful people.
We can and should all work together to make this a reality again - by adopting more-parameterized code such as Bitcoin Unlimited or Bitcoin Classic.
This will allow us to realize the original promise of Bitcoin - where "The Users and the Market Decide - Not Central Planners."
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

An Open Letter to the Neo team, Da Hongfei and City of Zion

Hi everyone! Before we begin, this is a long post and I will like to thank everyone who is gracious enough to spend their time and effort in reading. I am writing an open letter to the Neo team, Neo CEO Da Hongfei and the Neo Community team City of Zion in the hopes that they can consider a burning idea that came up in my mind.
Firstly, to introduce myself, I am a huge fan of Neo (hence the nickname). I came to know about Antshares earlier this June and has been following the coin ever since. I believe that Neo has huge potential in bettering people’s lives. However, I also think that the technology is currently some distance away from being able to do that. In the cryptocurrency world where days and weeks feel like months and years, I believe that speed is of the essence and that coins with a first mover advantage in their respective fields will have a distinct advantage over the rest of their competition.
As such, I believe that at status quo, Ethereum, instead of Neo, is poised to become a world leader in terms of smart contracts. Already, they are coming up with the Metropolis and Byzantium updates to their system, and it is not difficult to see that they will continue to upgrade themselves as time goes. With the backing of the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance(EEA), the trajectory of their growth looks to outpace that of Neo. The debate on whether both Ethereum and Neo can co-exist in this space is one that we will save for another day. Instead, what I am about to propose is, in my opinion, a possible strategic collaboration that will quicken the pace of Neo, expand its resources and put them on equal footing with Ethereum.
As we all know, Neo is working towards the vision of a Smart Economy, where Digital Assets meet Digital Identities and Smart Contracts. Taken from the Neo website:
“In this new Smart Economy, a paradigm shift from the “Internet of Information” to an “Internet of Value” is taking place. This will allow for seamless integration of the traditional economy and digital economy, facilitating the free flow of all assets. Exchange of value and economic activities are provided in a trustless mode. The rules, policies, and organizations of traditional society will be rightfully transparent and fair. This is an “Internet of Order” and the ultimate goal of Neo Smart Economy.”
It’s a compelling vision. However, the downside that I foresee is that the goal, being a very tall order, will take a long time to achieve, in which case by then Neo may be displaced by new ideas or technologies. Progress as a lone wolf is tough and lonely. However, progress as a group will bring about much more efficiency through delegation, specialization and leverage. This brings about my next point: Partnerships.
As far as I know, Neo already has several partnerships ongoing / underway: Bancor, Coindash, Agrello, Elastos and Red Pulse, which only just very recently concluded a hugely successful ICO (also having the honour of being the first ICO hosted on the Neo blockchain). However, I believe many will agree with me that these partnerships do not even come close to the level of the EEA of Ethereum. This is where I want to introduce a very interesting blockchain project that I have come across recently: ChainLink.
The ChainLink Network is a fully decentralised blockchain middleware that provides Smart Contracts with data, bank payments and access to APIs (Application Programming Interface). I am unable to explain their tech very well, so for the more gifted, tech savvy redditors, please feel free to add or correct anything that I have to say. As far as I understand, ChainLink is trying to solve the problem where Smart Contracts are unable to connect with key external resources like off-chain data and APIs. These external resources are information and data that we currently receive in our everyday lives, for example, weather forecasts, traffic conditions or even football match results.
So let’s say there is a Smart Contract deployed on the Neo blockchain to, for example, retract your clothes hangers when it rains. In order to execute correctly, it will require external data in the form of the weather forecast in the local area. Instead of coming up with ways to do it all on their own on the Neo blockchain, developers can instead choose to employ ChainLink to access this external data, saving time and effort, as well as using much more reliable information than they will be able to source on their own. Currently, from their website, people are able to create ChainLinks on Ethereum, Town Crier and Bitcoin.
So, why will ChainLink want to work with Neo if they are already working with the Ethereum blockchain? Unfortunately, I am not affiliated to ChainLink in any way, and this will not be a question that I will be able to answer. All I am proposing is for Neo / Da Hongfei to look into a possible partnership, in which I have no concrete answers for. However, I do know of possible reasons in which the different organisations might want to come and work together with each other.
Firstly, take a look at this:
This was Vitalik dissing ChainLink openly on twitter. Now, if my company runs Oracle networks and someone high profile comes out to purposefully non-endorse my product and say that my company is not even worth $32m (implied meaning), I will be pretty pissed off. I don’t know about you, but last I checked CEOs are humans.
Secondly, ChainLink is a fairly new ICO and it will do well to form strong partnerships with other relevant parties, and Neo’s position as a frontrunner in China as well as its reputation (for good or for bad) as China’s Ethereum will definitely shore up its credibility to prospective partners and investors.
Thirdly, from the ChainLink website, you can see that they are proud to be working with SWIFT on their own SWIFT Smart Oracle. Why is this important? SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) has long held a monopoly for interbank payments, but its position is starting to get threatened by newcomer Ripple (XRP). In fact, SWIFT is holding its annual SIBOS conference on the 16-19th of October later this month, and Ripple has decided to gatecrash the party by holding its own conference called SWELL, on the 16-18th of October. It is common knowledge that Ripple seems to have superior technology versus SWIFT, and if SWIFT wants to maintain its power and position, it will definitely need to start getting into the blockchain arena. Take a look for yourself, the SIBOS program list consists of an item in which (ChainLink) will be presenting a live demo of a Proof of Concept.
Now, whats in it for Neo? If Neo manages to get into close collaboration with ChainLink, it will have access to technology that speeds up its game exponentially. By outsourcing the channel that receives external, off-chain, real time data, they will be able to focus their time, energy and money on other strategic areas. SWIFT works with over 11,000 banks, and in the event that ChainLink becomes a partner of SWIFT, Neo becoming a partner with ChainLink will indirectly make them partners of SWIFT as well. Now, let me remind you what Neo is up against.
In summary, a Neo – ChainLink – SWIFT partnership will be a win / win / win situation for all parties involved. It tilts the balance of Neo vs ETH, as well as SWIFT vs Ripple. In case you are wondering why SWIFT will want to partner up with blockchain companies that are a fraction of its own size, look up Ripple’s SWELL conference and you will see that former US Federal Reserve System chairman Ben Bernanke, as well as the freaking inventor of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners are both going to be there as keynote speakers. They need blockchain just as much as blockchain needs partnerships and resources. I like to think of Neo’s Smart Contracts as cars while ChainLink serves as the road for the cars. Imagine driving cars without roads, will we still want to travel around in cars? You get the point.
Please upvote this thread, comment and share this post as much as you can. All I want is for Neo / Da Hongfei / City of Zion to just consider the possibilities of collaboration with ChainLink. I am very excited for the world moving forward, and I just hope to make a small contribution to the world by casting this little seed of possibility in the great minds of the leading thinkers of blockchain.
TLDR – Upvote this thread and spread the love and get Da Hongfei to notice this post <3
submitted by Ants2Dragons to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Just called Fidelity Investments re: my 401K - mentioned bitcoin, got very nervous laughter

Was discussing a 401k adjustment with one of the guys at Fidelity, and he asks me "So, in order to gauge how you want to invest your money, tell me how you feel about the stock market..."
I reply with "Well, banks and the market kinda suck, but they're a necessary evil, until something like bitcoin comes along and blows them all away."
Fidelity guy laughed very loudly at first, then I said "Have you seen the growth in the value of bitcoin?" And then he got quiet, and said "Yeah... I have. It's a joke... it'll never go anywhere." I mentioned that Ben Bernanke talked to Congress about it last week, and that it's got attention at that level from the Senate. He laughed again, but it was the laugh of someone in denial - not self-assured at all this time.
One thing's for sure, it's going to be very interesting in the next year or so....
submitted by wildbill1941 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A list of people who haven't completely dismissed Bitcoin

This is not an attempt to convince anyone why Bitcoin will succeed, but merely to show that there exist reasonably intelligent people who believe there's a chance.
Paul Graham Co-founder of Y Combinator
I am very intrigued by Bitcoin. It has all the signs. Paradigm shift, hackers love it, yet it's derided as a toy. Just like microcomputers.
Peter Thiel Co-founder of PayPal His VC Founder's Fund led a $2m invesetment in BitPay
It is worth thinking about money as the bubble that never ends. There is this sort of potential that bitcoin could become this new phenomenon
Exclusive: Peter Thiel on Bitcoin
Eric Schmidt Google Chairman and former CEO
Bitcoin is a remarkable cryptographic achievement and the ability to create something which is not duplicable in the digital world has enormous value. It’s very hard to do and it’s incredibly useful for many many computer applications. … The Bitcoin architecture, literally the ability to having these ledgers that can’t be replicated is an amazing advancement. A lot of businesses will be built on top of that... Eric Schmidt: The technology behind bitcoin has enormous value
Sir Richard Branson Founder of Virgin Group
I have invested in some bitcoins myself, and find it fascinating how a whole new global currency has been created. For people who can afford to invest a little in bitcoins, it’s worth looking into.
Bitcoins in space
Kevin Rose Founder of Digg
Those of us that understand that Bitcoin has the potential to change money forever. If you believe that a decentralized digital currency, free from government corruption and controlled by the masses is the future – then you’re in this camp. This is no easy road, there are going to be sell-offs, attempted regulation, and major unforeseen disasters. It’s not for the faint of heart. We could and probably will lose everything, but IF we pull this off, the results will be unlike anything we’ve ever seen.
Bitcoin is falling, again, here is why it really doesn't matter.
Ben Bernanke Former chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve
In letter to Senate committee “to explore potential promises and risks related to virtual currency for the federal government and society at large”:
..while these types of innovations may pose risks related to law enforcement and supervisory matters, there are also areas in which they may hold long-term promise, particularly if the innovations promote a faster, more secure and more efficient payment system
full letter to the Senate committee
Paul Buchheit Creator and lead developer of GMail
Bitcoin may be the TCP/IP of money.
Alexis Ohanian Co-founder of reddit, investor in Coinbase and Buttercoin
I am cautiously optimistic about it — but I am intrigued
Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian: ‘I’m cautiously optimistic about Bitcoin’


Union Square Ventures Select portfolio: Twitter, Twillio, Kickstarter, Meetups Investor in Coinbase
We believe that Bitcoin represents something fundamental and powerful, an open and distributed Internet peer to peer protocol for transferring purchasing power. It reminds us of SMTP, HTTP, RSS, and BitTorrent in its architecture and openness
Y Combinator Investor in Coinbase and Buttercoin Select portfolio: Airbnb, Dropbox, reddit
Google Ventures Investor in Buttercoin Select portfolio: Nest, Uber, 23andMe
edit: do what you want with the list, copyrights of quotes and trademarks belong to respective owners, anything else is cc0
Kind of wish people could just edit it like a wiki as well
submitted by enkideridu to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Quotes about Bitcoin from Famous people

"[Bitcoin] is a techno tour de force." - Bill Gates, Founder of Microsoft
"You can't stop things like Bitcoin. It will be everywhere and the world will have to readjust. World governments will have to readjust" - John McAfee, Founder of McAfee
“It's money 2.0, a huge huge huge deal.” - Chamath Palihapitiya, Previous head of AOL instant messenger
“We have elected to put our money and faith in a mathematical framework that is free of politics and human error.” - Tyler Winklevoss, Co-creator of Facebook
“Entire classes of bugs are missing.” - Dan Kaminsky, Security Penetration Expert for Cisco and Avaya
“There are 3 eras of currency: Commodity based, politically based, and now, math based.” - Chris Dixon, Co-founder of Hunch now owned by Ebay, Co-founder of SiteAdvisor now owned by McAfee
“Right now Bitcoin feels like the Internet before the browser.” - Wences Casares, Founder of Banco Lemon, aquired by Banco do Brazil, Won Xbox game of the year for his game Assault Heroes
"Bitcoin will do to banks what email did to the postal industry" - Rick Falkvinge, Founder of the Swedish pirate party
"Bitcoin may be the TCP/IP of money." - Paul Buchheit, Creator of Gmail
“ I think the fact that within the bitcoin universe an algorithm replaces the functions of [the government] … is actually pretty cool. I am a big fan of Bitcoin” - Al Gore, 45th Vice President of the United States
"I am very intrigued by Bitcoin. It has all the signs. Paradigm shift, hackers love it, yet it's derided as a toy. Just like microcomputers." - Paul Graham, Creator of Yahoo Store
“I do think Bitcoin is the first [encrypted money] that has the potential to do something like change the world." - Peter Thiel, Co-Founder of Paypal
"I really like Bitcoin. I own Bitcoins. It's a store of value, a distributed ledger. It's a great place to put assets, especially in places like Argentina with 40 percent inflation, where $1 today is worth 60 cents in a year, and a government's currency does not hold value. It's also a good investment vehicle if you have an appetite for risk. But it won't be a currency until volatility slows down." - David Marcus, CEO of Paypal
“"[Virtual Currencies] may hold long-term promise, particularly if the innovations promote a faster, more secure and more efficient payment system.” " - Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve
"Virgin Galactic is a bold entrepreneurial technology. It's driving a revolution and Bitcoin is doing just the same when it comes to inventing a new currency." - Sir Richard Branson, Founder of Virgin Records, Virgin Galactic, and 400+ other businesses
"So bitcoin is cyber snob currency..." - William Shatner, Actor known for lead role in Star Trek TOS
"Bitcoin actually has the balance and incentives right, and that is why it is starting to take off" - Julian Assange, Founder of Wikileaks
"[Bitcoin] is a very exciting development, it might lead to a world currency. I think over the next decade it will grow to become one of the most important ways to pay for things and transfer assets." - Kim Dotcom, CEO of MegaUpload
"Bitcoin is a remarkable cryptographic achievement and the ability to create something that is not duplicable in the digital world has enormous value" - Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google
Any more you know? Put them in the comments! For each of these I found someone who's name or role in a company is generally known by the public who had something to say about Bitcoin.
submitted by imkharn to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Help moving random quotes css from sidebar to above posts.

Im currently trying to add random quotes to bitcoin_unserious/ but having a bit of trouble.
So far Ive gotten the random quotes to show up, but not exactly where I would like them.
No matter what I have tried they end up on the sidebar instead of in an announcement like bar above the posts.
Is there anyone that can show me what Im doing wrong?
Here is the code its currently using
/*RANDOM QUOTES*/ /* Random quote container */ .titlebox .usertext-body, input[name=uh] ~ a:before { list-style: none; position: absolute; top: 163px; /*Change this in relation to your header's height*/ left: 8px; margin:0; background-color: #f6f7f8; color: #555; border-radius: 2px; border: 1px solid #dbdbdb; padding: 7px 10px; white-space: nowrap; overflow: hidden; } input[name=uh][value^="0"] ~ a:before { content: "''I think bitcoin's a technical tour de force.'' - Bill Gates"} input[name=uh][value^="1"] ~ a:before { content: "''It will be everywhere and the world will have to readjust. World Governments will have to readjust.'' - John Mcafee"} input[name=uh][value^="2"] ~ a:before { content: "''Bitcoin actually has the balance and incentives right, and that is why it is starting to take off.'' - Julian Assange"} input[name=uh][value^="3"] ~ a:before { content: "''Bitcoin is the beginning of something great: a currency without a government, something necessary and imperative.'' - Nassim Taleb"} input[name=uh][value^="4"] ~ a:before { content: "''We have elected to put our money and faith in a mathematical framework that is free of politics and human error.'' - Tyler Winklevoss"} input[name=uh][value^="5"] ~ a:before { content: "''I'm a big fan of Bitcoin... Regulation of money supply need to be depoliticised'' - Al Gore"} input[name=uh][value^="6"] ~ a:before { content: "''Virtual currencies may hold long-term promise, particularly if the innovations promote a faster, more secure and more efficient payment system.'' - Ben Bernanke"} input[name=uh][value^="7"] ~ a:before { content: "''It's money 2.0, a huge huge huge deal.'' - Chamath Palihapitiya"} input[name=uh][value^="8"] ~ a:before { content: "''Bitcoin is a remarkable cryptographic achievement and the ability to create something that is not duplicable in the digital world has enormous value'' - Eric Schmidt"} input[name=uh][value^="9"] ~ a:before { content: "''Gold is a great way to preserve wealth, but it is hard to move around. You do need some kind of alternative and Bitcoin fits the bill. I'm not surprised to see that happening.'' - Jim Rickards"} input[name=uh][value^="a"] ~ a:before { content: "''Bitcoin may be the TCP/IP of money.'' - Paul Bucheit"} input[name=uh][value^="b"] ~ a:before { content: "''Bitcoin will do to banks what email did to the postal industry.'' - Rick Falkvinge"} input[name=uh][value^="c"] ~ a:before { content: "''Right now Bitcoin feels like the internet before the browser.'' - Wences Casares"} input[name=uh][value^="d"] ~ a:before { content: "''I see Bitcoin as one of the biggest things of potentially reducing the power of state and uplifting the power of the individual to happen for... forever maybe.'' - Zander Marz"} input[name=uh][value^="e"] ~ a:before { content: "''Bitcoin, and the ideas behind it, will be a disrupter to the traditional notions of currency. In the end, currency will be better for it.'' - Edmund Moy"} input[name=uh][value^="f"] ~ a:before { content: "''Let's go, Chuck Taylor, you're the best wrestler in the world, you're in way better shape than Tyler Black!'' - Chuck Taylor"} input[name=uh][value^="g"] ~ a:before { content: "''I am the one behind twenty one and one!'' - Paul Heyman"} input[name=uh][value^="h"] ~ a:before { content: "''Yep'' - Jumping Jeff Farmer"} input[name=uh][value^="i"] ~ a:before { content: "''"} input[name=uh][value^="j"] ~ a:before { content: "''I am the savior of your divas division. I AM the divas division.'' - AJ Lee"} input[name=uh][value^="k"] ~ a:before { content: "''It's violet, nimrod'' - HHH"} input[name=uh][value^="l"] ~ a:before { content: "''It's gonna be ugly, people.'' - Brock Lesnar"} input[name=uh][value^="m"] ~ a:before { content: "''CM PUNK! CM PUNK! CM PUNK!'' - The People"} input[name=uh][value^="n"] ~ a:before { content: "''SHUT. UP!'' - Lana"} input[name=uh][value^="o"] ~ a:before { content: "''She smells like Cinnamon...Toast Crunch.'' - Fandango"} input[name=uh][value^="p"] ~ a:before { content: "''Perfect. Better than Perfect!'' - RybAxel"} input[name=uh][value^="q"] ~ a:before { content: "''I hate you too!'' - Batista"} input[name=uh][value^="r"] ~ a:before { content: "''Minnesota's electricians are almost as bad as its NFL team.'' - Bad News Barrett"} input[name=uh][value^="s"] ~ a:before { content: "''Maybe next week, YOU won't be around!'' - Jerry Lawler"} input[name=uh][value^="t"] ~ a:before { content: "''I'm dumb as fuck.'' - Phil Brooks"} input[name=uh][value^="u"] ~ a:before { content: "''Speaking of feet, Tony Atlas is an asshole.'' - Roddy Piper"} input[name=uh][value^="v"] ~ a:before { content: "''I agree.'' - Sting"} input[name=uh][value^="w"] ~ a:before { content: "''I got all the numbers!'' - Dean Ambrose"} input[name=uh][value^="x"] ~ a:before { content: "''These people want you to quit, just like CM Punk did.'' - Stephanie McMahon"} input[name=uh][value^="y"] ~ a:before { content: "''Coming to you live from the studio.... apartment.'' - Colt Cabana"} input[name=uh][value^="z"] ~ a:before { content: "''Playtime is over, and so am I!'' - Ryback"} .titlebox .usertext-body, input[name=uh] ~ a:before { display: inline; } body > .content { margin-top: 45px; /*Increase this number if you want to create more lines/links*/ } 
submitted by SouperNerd to csshelp [link] [comments]

Bitcoin does not need a fees market.

I am tired of reading a whole lot of theoretical nonsense about a fee market for Bitcoin. It is economic gobbldegook. Some people are saying that capitalism and price discovery only work in a market situation. This is rubbish. Imagine the following conversation -
At the bank. Question, how much to send $100 to Australia. Answer, well it depends on how busy the network is. If we are busy it will cost you more if we are not busy then it will cost you less. You name an amount and we will see if it works.
At the hairdresser. Question, how much for a haircut. Answer, well $20 is usually enough but just a minute while I see if someone wants to pay more, if they do you will have to pay more too or wait.
At Western Union. Question, how much do you charge to send $50 to my impoverished friend in The Philippines. Answer, well if lots of people want to send $50 to the Philippines it will cost you a bit more. You have to guess and if it doesn't work, just pay a bit more and eventually it will work.
At the lawyers office. Question, how much do you charge to notarize this statement. Answer sometimes $10 and sometime $15. If you want to be sure then pay me $20 or if you want to save money pay me $5 but if you pay $5 I might not do it till next week or maybe I just won't do it at all.
At the Credit Card office. What are your fees on each transaction. Answer. That's up to you but if you don't pay enough we won't accept your transaction. Question, well how much is enough. Answer, I don't know it depends on how busy we are.
Clearly in all the cases above a fees market is not practical. What happens is the business sets a fee that enables them to make a profit, yet remain competitive and declares it up front. Any other approach would not be accepted by the vast majority of people.
I agree eventually Bitcoin fees will have to rise to keep the network secure. Trying to establish a fees market, particularly while the mining rewards are so high seems like a waste of time and energy. As mining rewards reduce, fees should rise by voluntary consensus of the providers (miners) to a level that is sufficient to keep the market secure.
When I first used Bitcoin the consensus was that the fee should be 0.001. Later this changed to 0.0001. There was no market to decide this consensus, just common sense as the value of bitcoin increased. Now my wallet tells me that 0.0001 fee will be included or if I want a higher priority then I can choose 0.0002. Great simple to understand and easy to execute.
If miners decide they need 0.05 to make it worth their while then they should say so. I can then decide to use bitcoin or swift or credit cards or whatever.
There is already a very efficient bitcoin market and that is the one that decides what the price of a bitcoin is. In the same way as the stock market decides what the price of a stock is. However my stockbroker charges a published fee to do the transaction. He is not stupid enough to try and establish a secondary market for his own fees. If he did, I would find a new stockbroker.
I am a firm believer that Economics is at best a soft science and at worst a load of cow faeces. I tend to the cow faeces end of the spectrum. The world economy has been totally screwed up by Economists with models that are never accurate and do not reflect reality. Chief screw ups being Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen.
Let's not let people like that screw up bitcoin.
submitted by PattayaPete to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Elliott Wave analyst's thoughts on Bitcoin

(NB: typos mine; crappy OCR software. If anyone wants to see the Eliott Wave he's discussing and I'll make it available.)
Bitcoin Bubble or Bitcoin Breakthrough? How about both?
by Elliott Prechter
December 20, 2013 in the Elliott Wave Theorist
EWT discussed Bitcoin for the first time in August 2010, when the currency traded at six cents. As far as we know, EWI was the first financial publisher to discuss it. Bitcoin was unknown to the general public and off private investors’ radar. Even the earliest adopters did not take it as seriously as they should have. The most notable example of this is the man who paid 10,000 BTC for a pizza. This pizza purchase is now famous (, and many continue to track its price in USD terms via the “Bitcoin Pizza Index," which recently hit an all-time high of over S12 million.
Fast forward to today, and the currency is regularly featured in financial news and social media. Bitcoin Magazine has become popular, Congress is holding hearings on the currency, Germany has defined its role in finance, China is ruling on its legality, and the business world is adopting it. The most prominent business to embrace Bitcoin is Virgin Galactic, one of the many creations of billionaire Richard Branson (
EWT readers were prepared for all this. When Bitcoin was still in the shadows, the August 2012 issue said,
Presuming bitcoin succeeds as the world’s best currency-and I believe it will-it should rise many more multiples in value over the years. -EWT, August 2012
The big question on the minds of investors is not what Bitcoin has achieved, but should they buy Bitcoins now? It’s amusing that so many people ignored Bitcoin upon hearing about it in 20 1 0, but now that its price has gone up 20,000 times, they want to invest. Notwithstanding the currency’s potential, this shift in attitude is a signal saying now is not the time to buy. Let’s look at four areas of evidence:
1) Optimism is off the charts. Past issues of The Elliott Wave Financial Forecast discussed people selling their homes and borrowing money to invest in Bitcoins. That was near the peak of wave Now the desire to buy has grown even more extreme. Bloggers are calling for Bitcoin to reach S1 million. . .soon. One young investor borrowed a million dollars from his father and without his knowledge invested it in Bitcoin ( The other day I walked into a convenience store wearing a Bitcoin T-shirt, and the owner asked me if he should invest now. I felt like I was living in 1929.
2) Investors have recently been rushing to buy a rash of 95 (at last count; see https://bitcointalk. org/index.php?topic=l34179.0) new clones of Bitcoin that have recently emerged: Litecoin, Namecoin, Zerocoin, BBQCoin, PPcoin, PrimeCoin, NovaCoin, FeatherCoin, TerraCoin, Devcoin, Megacoin, Mincoin, DigitalCoin, Anoncoin, Worldcoin, Freicoin, IxCoin... and more. (That they are clones is obvious from the lack of imagination in naming.) This rush of clones is reminiscent of the South Sea bubble of 1720 and the dot-com mania of 1999, when shares of zero-profit, copycat companies (and even fake ones) sold like hotcakes. Virtually every week now, the Bitcoin code is forked into a new coin that investors bid up. lt’s as if buyers feel the world will run out of cryptocurrency, which in fact is infinitely and freely duplicable.
3) The Elliott wave pattern from Bitcoin’s inception shows five waves up. The December ll Short Term Update noted that a major top was potentially in place: The peak [in Bitcoin] came 10 days after U.S. officials, ranging from an assistant attorney general with the Department of Justice to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, “spoke approvingly of the potential of virtual currencies." So, here again, the government is getting on board at the very tail end ofa long rise. Since we posted that comment, Bitcoin has fallen an additional 40%, bringing it down nearly 60% from its all-time high.
Will this prove to be just another brief, sharp correction or something larger? Take a look at the completed impulse pattern shown in Figure 3. The structure begins very near the inception of the currency three-plus years ago, when it was selling for a penny. Notice that wave @ is a triangle (see text, p.49), which typically comes in the fourth-wave position. Wave a thrust, carried to the all-time high of S 1242 on November 29. The reversal from that point should mark the start of the largest bear market to date in the currency. This forecast is in tune with the anticipated bear market in the broader stock averages, which have strongly correlated with Bitcoin’s pattern.
The chart is in log scale to show the returns one would have achieved in each impulse leg of the pattern. Wave Q) achieved a stunning 3 19ox gain. Wave ® achieved 59.3% (a Fibonacci 3/5) of the gain of wave Q). Wave ® (measured from the low of wave @) achieved 39.3% (a Fibonacci 2/5) of the gain of wave (D and 66.3% (a Fibonacci 2/3) of the gain of wave Therefore, while each upward move has been large, each successive wave has been decelerating in log terms relative to past waves, in each case by a Fibonacci multiple. Also notice that Bitcoin trades more like a commodity than a stock, with its blow-off tops and extended fifih waves. Most of the gain since early 20 12 has been within (5) of ® and the final wave all of which is probable retracement territory.
4) Most people involved in this mania seem oblivious to Bitcoin’s fundamentals. In my experience, raising these issues publicly earns scorn for spreading “FUD.” But there is a good reason-now widely ignored-that Bitcoin is beta software. Our August 2010 piece explained how Bitcoin operates, but it’s worth revisiting some details to understand just how out-of-touch investor expectations are with the reality of Bitcoin technology. Specifically, let's examine the limitations of Bitcoin’s blockchain.
The blockchain is the heart of Bitcoin. In its simplest form, the blockchain is a public ledger of all transactions that happen in the Bitcoin network. Each block is composed of individual records that track the ownership of each coin. The transactions “fit” together cryptographically. A block is created about once every 10 minutes by the network. Each block is then cryptographically linked to the previous blocks in the chain, forming a history of all transactions that-to Bitcoin’s credit-cannot be forged. To the extent that Bitcoin currency is real, it could be said that the blockchain is the Bitcoin currency.
Yet the core problem with the blockchain is that it grows over time and must be shared by every fiill Bitcoin node. Today it is nearing 13 GB in size. Now, 13 GB doesn't sound too large, but at the current rates of exponential growth the blockchain is projected to become over a terabyte in size in just three years. What's more, the amount of accompanying data required to handle just a fraction of Visa-level traffic would overwhelm even the fastest Internet connections. This technical hurdle makes the “Bitcoin is going to a million” commentary seem premature.
The hope for Bitcoin’s future lies in its open-source nature, allowing it to be improved, and Moore’s Law. Moore’s Law is colloquially used to signify the exponential increases in computer-hardware efficiency over time, including network capacity. But Moore’s law-which calls for a doubling of computer speed every two years-has hit a snag in recent years: the rate of improvement in performance has dramatically slowed, causing many experts to call for the end of the operation of Moore’s law. (For the record, Moore’s Law was never intended to refer to computer hardware performance, but the media have confused the term to the point where it is now generally used in this context. Originally, it was intended to refer to the increase in the number of transistors that are packed into microchips.)
The past four years have been an exciting ride for Bitcoin. But the evidence says the Bitcoin bull market is done for now. It would be best to put Bitcoin out of your mind for the duration of the deflationary wave that is curling toward the financial world. Due to the psychology surrounding Bitcoin, as well as its correlation with the stock indices, it is too risky to buy now. Due to its open-source nature, however, Bitcoin’s infrastructure should continue to improve over the years.
For the long run, I agree with Roger Ver, the CEO of memory dealers and one of Bitcoin’s earliest adopters, who recently said, “It is just getting started." But one could have said that about the U.S. stock market in 1966. It would have been visionary only if you were patient and willing to hold through a very deep valley. Our position is that Bitcoin will never again sell for 6 cents, as it did when EWT first wrote it up. But there will be another time to buy it for relative peanuts alongside stocks, real-estate, gold and silver. When the time comes, no one will be interested.
Elliott Prechter's primary task at EWI is working on EWA VES, our in-house artificial intelligence softwarefor analyzing Elliott waves.
submitted by Indy_Pendant to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why bitcoin is showing downward price-pressure?

My theory:
It should be perfectly reasonable to expect that bitcoin, as a supply-controlled crypto-currency, should begin to respond to the same price pressures that other hard-assets face.
For instance, the price of gold has absolutely tumbled lately some 43% with the announcement and expectation that the Fed will begin easing quantitative easing (QE) soon (as Ben Bernanke gets ready to retire his position). The dollar will face inflation expectations whenever the Fed is printing money to buy bonds or w/e.
Why does that put price-pressure on gold or bitcoin? Because gold and bitcoin are both hedging assets expected to hold their value in an environment where the dollar is inflating. Thus, when people expect inflation, demand for inflation-hedges goes up. And when inflation expectations go down, so does demand for inflation-hedge assets, like gold, like bitcoin.
The announcement that the Fed will soon stop or slow printing money reduces inflationary expectations and therefore reduces the value of inflationary hedges like gold or bitcoin because while supply of both gold and bitcoin are essentially static, price changes when demand changes.
Now unlike gold, which has really only that one ability--value store--bitcoin has a compelling value proposition: lower transaction costs, something gold cannot match.
Bitcoin is simply cheaper and more convenient for distance and online transactions than any currency in the world, gold included.
So while the article linked above cites expectations of gold to continue at $1,000 / ounce till 2017, personally I'm still bullish on bitcoin, and 2017 will be a big year for bitcoin as the block-reward halving takes place.
submitted by Anenome5 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Some perspective on the Bitcoin "bubble" valuation.

Total Bitcoin market cap right now is just over 10bn and people say it's a bubble. Meanwhile I read that, quote:
"The Fed is in the midst of tapering its stimulative quantitative easing policy. On December 18, the Fed decided to taper its quantitative easing policy by $10 billion per month, to $75 billion. Chairman Ben Bernanke expects the program to wind down steadily through 2014 and conclude by year-end, assuming the economy remains healthy. On January 29, the Fed announced that it would taper quantitative easing by another $10 billion per month to $65 billion."
So Fed has been pumping 85 billion a month of money created out of thin air for the last 5 years and these banks say Bitcoin isn't a good store of value. Are you ##ing kidding me?!!
submitted by Aylorian to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Quotes - We are not the only ones who love BTC. Please add to the list if you have good ones

submitted by bitvote to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin achievements

All achievements listed below are permanent upon accomplishment and stack. Achievements earned years ago are still valid today.
Mining achievements
Solo miner
Mined a valid block all by yourself.
CPU miner
Earned at least 1 BTC using just your CPU to mine.
Creative miner
Built your own custom mining rig composed of graphics cards.
Lazy miner
Earned at least 1 BTC in dividend from investment in mining stocks.
Virtuous miner
Earned at least 1 BTC by mining in a pool that processes transactions with below standard transaction fees, thus helping out people whose transactions would otherwise get stuck.
Price stabilizer achievements
Silk road stabilizer
Bought when the price dropped during the Silk road crash.
Fork fighter
Bought during the 11/12 march 2013 blockchain fork.
Ponzi plunge protector
Bought during the August 2012 pirateat40 Ponzi scheme collapse associated price crash.
Helped preserve the value of Bitcoin by not selling any Bitcoin in the six month period following the 266 dollar peak. Only valid for people who actually had any Bitcoin before the peak.
Helped preserve the value of Bitcoin by not selling any Bitcoin in the six month period following the 2011 peak. Only valid for people who actually had any Bitcoin before the peak.
Popularizer achievements
Mother Theresa
Gave away at least 1 BTC in donations and tips, expecting nothing in return.
Spend at least 1 BTC on items not directly Bitcoin related.
Sold at least 1 BTC worth of items not directly Bitcoin related using Bitcoin.
Spreading the seed
Sold at least 1 BTC through local Bitcoins.
Bitcoin hoarder achievements
Bitcoin hoarder achievements are permanent upon achievement, even if you later let go of your Bitcoin.
Club Bitcoin
Own at least 1 BTC.
Fabulous Five
Own at least 5 BTC.
Interested investor
Own at least 100 dollar worth of Bitcoin.
Serious speculator
Own at least 1000 dollar worth of Bitcoin.
I did it for the children
Invest at least 10.000 dollar in Bitcoin, on behalf of other people.
Number of achievements unlocked
0 - You are literally Ben Bernanke.
1 - You may be new.
2 - You have a serious interest in Bitcoin.
3 - You have a serious interest in Bitcoin, and probably a serious stake in its success as well.
4 - You have a serious interest and stake in Bitcoin, and are likely partly responsible for its success.
5 - You have helped make Bitcoin the success it is today.
6-9 - You are likely a developer, early adapter or institutional investor.
10+ - You are literally Satoshi Nakamoto.
submitted by rational to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Letter to the portfolio manager of a relation of mine

This is a letter I have sent to a relation of mine's portfolio manager. This is an obvious throwaway and I really am not interested in giving specifics. I'm just reproducing it here so that if others are thinking of approaching their managers, they have something as a basis for their conversation.
I am [a relation to your client]. I think that we may have spoken once in the past regarding aspects of the portfolio for [your client].
[They have] asked me to write you about some of the developments with respect to Bitcoin as a diversification option for this portfolio. I understand that [they have] put in a call to you and would like to discuss this further, and [they] wanted me to give you some materials on recent events and analysis with respect to Bitcoin.
There was recently a Wall Street Journal article covering this topic
The article tells of a paper by Marie Brire, an associate professor at Universit Paris Dauphine in France, co-authored by Kim Oosterlinck and Ariane Szafarz of the Universit Libre de Bruxelles in Belgium, that concluded that a small allocation to bitcoin, perhaps 3% of a well-diversified portfoliocould improve one's risk-return trade-off. It also has several statements by Raoul Pal, a former hedge-fund manager and founder of the Global Macro Investor, and concludes these by saying he, more conservatively, put a small slice of his portfolio—between 1% and 2%—into the coins.
There have recently been senate hearings on bitcoins and other virtual currencies, and these have been notably positive. Even Ben Bernake wrote a letter to the senate committee stating that bitcoins are not directly under any regulatory regime and that they "may hold long-term promise, particularly if the innovations promote a faster, more secure and more efficient payment system.”
We had discussed investing a small amount of [your client's] portfolio with you in the summer of 2012. At that point in time, if a 1% allocation (about [some amount]) had been done, then the value of those coins today would be about [100 times that amount]. While a lot of the upside of Bitcoins have been realized in this time, we feel that Mr. Pal is right in his assessment that there is still value in investing now.
Sincerely, [My name]
submitted by btcthrowaway3 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Ben Bernanke on Bitcoin
It’s interesting from a technological point of view. We’re in a world where the payments system is evolving quickly and new approaches to managing payments are proliferating, and some of the ideas around bitcoin will no doubt be useful in doing that.
But I think bitcoin itself has some serious problems. The first is that it hasn’t shown to be a stable source of value. Its price has been highly volatile and it hasn’t yet established itself as a widely accepted transactions medium.
But the real serious problem that it has is it’s anonymity, which is a feature, and is also a bug, in that it has become in some cases a vehicle for illicit transactions, drug selling or terrorist financing or whatever. And you know, governments are not happy to let that activity happen, so I suspect that there will be oversight of transactions done in bitcoin or similar currencies and that will reduce the appeal.
submitted by cafucafucafu to btc [link] [comments]

What would trigger another significant valuation increase?

The most recent value increase (multiple times over) in November was mostly due to the Ben Bernanke stating there is potential in the Bitcoin platform, and a tremendous amount of media coverage.
What specific future event do you think could occur which would trigger the value of Bitcoin to increase in value multiple times over?
submitted by johnstarks13 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Economia (March 2014) realistic opinion article

Hey guys, I read this article just this morning in Economia.
Here's a link to the 'e-magazine':
'Bitcoin is the secret to a safer, more efficient financial system' Garrick Hileman
The internet currency Bitcoin is surrounded by uncertainty. Is it a speculative bubble? Is it as anonymous as is claimed? Can it be used to purchase the legendary White Widow marijuana or hire a hit man? But these questions divert attention from far more important discussions about Bitcoin's potential to drive financial innovation.
Bitcoin has transcended partisan ideologies. Nobel laureate economist Paul Krugman and US Tea Party icon Ron Paul are diametrically opposed on virtually every issue but Bitcoin (both dislike it). Yet Bitcoin's opponenets should ask how the groundbreaking ideas that underlie it could be applied to reforming the global financial system. Although the 2008 financial crisis exposed profound institutional shortcomings, subsequent regulatory safeguards, like the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act in the US and the Basel III, have failed to bring about transformation. Likewise, protest movements such as Occupy Wall Street, aimed ultimately at reforming the culture of finance, have delivered mixed results.
The fact is no one, except a small coterie of financial insiders who have benefited from taxpayer-financed bailouts, should be satisfied with the current system, not least because another crisis, accompanied by more bailouts, can be expected in the near future.
While the exact timing of the next meltdown is unknown, one thing is certain: consideration of what kind of financial system we need would be incomplete without Bitcoin. The technology behind it could not only help to reduce risk by creating safeguards shielding the payments system from unpredictable financial activities; it could also bolster growth.
Financial institutions act as matchmakers, linking investors, borrowers and savers, and recording what people own and owe. In exchange for these services they are generously compensated. So, to ask whether bankers' pay is fair is really to ask how much value is created by financial matchmaking - and there is no simple answer. By allowing a greater proportion of an economy's wealth to be channeled toward investment and other productive economic activities, a more efficient financial services industry boosts growth. Given the high costs of financial systems that are antiquated, costly and inefficient, the smaller the financial system, the better off everyone else will be.
Profit seeking is also a factor in the inefficiency of the world's financial system. While British authorities recently announced the transfer of physical cheques would be abolished, a two-day cheque-clearing delay will remain. As scanned images of cheques could be processed electronically almost instantaneously, the delay can be explained only by "float" - the interest earned by holding onto money for as long as possible.
Float is one of the ways the financial services industry extracts resources from the economy. The 3-5% charge levied by credit card companies adds up to several hundred billion dollars in profits. Fees for wire transfers and currency exchange can climb to 10% per transaction. The innovations pioneered by Bitcoin eliminate the fees, delays and inefficiencies lining the pockets of the financial services industry. Ahead of US Senate hearings last November, former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke wrote to senators saying Bitcoin may "hold long-term promise, particularly if the innovations promote a faster, more secure, and more efficient payment system".
Bitcoin, with its capacity for anonymity, could make the global financial system more secure. At the same time it offers an alternative tore of value, and its use as a medium of exchange is steadily growing. But perhaps the most exciting innovation offered by Bitcoin is the "Blockchain" - peer-to-peer software that keeps a record of all transactions and a tally of who owns what. The Blockchain serves the "ledger" function of banks, but at a fraction of the cost.
Bitcoin marks a return to a community-based approach to money and banking, with financial services more closely connected to the people. Large, monolitic third-party managers, like "too big to fail" banks", would be cut out. With software like the Blockchain powering a new financial architecture, "the people" would effectively become the bank.
Bitcoin and its ecosystem are maturing, and only time will tell if its current price is a speculative bubble. But the innovations pioneered by Bitcoin could play a transformative role in building a safer, less expensive and more effective financial system.
I think it's well written and takes a realistic view on the potential of both Bitcoin and the technology that it uses. While it does only talk about Bitcoin for a short amount of time, it highlights the issues with the current financial system and what Bitcoin could do to remedy some of its vices.
submitted by comfortman to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why bitcoin is showing downward price-pressure

My theory:
It should be perfectly reasonable to expect that bitcoin, as a supply-controlled crypto-currency, should begin to respond to the same price pressures that other hard-assets face.
For instance, the price of gold has absolutely tumbled lately some 43% with the announcement and expectation that the Fed will begin easing quantitative easing (QE) soon (as Ben Bernanke gets ready to retire his position). The dollar will face inflation expectations whenever the Fed is printing money to buy bonds or w/e.
Why does that put price-pressure on gold or bitcoin? Because gold and bitcoin are both hedging assets expected to hold their value in an environment where the dollar is inflating. Thus, when people expect inflation, demand for inflation-hedges goes up. And when inflation expectations go down, so does demand for inflation-hedge assets, like gold, like bitcoin.
The announcement that the Fed will soon stop or slow printing money reduces inflationary expectations and therefore reduces the value of inflationary hedges like gold or bitcoin because while supply of both gold and bitcoin are essentially static, price changes when demand changes.
Now unlike gold, which has really only that one ability--value store--bitcoin has a compelling value proposition: lower transaction costs, something gold cannot match.
Bitcoin is simply cheaper and more convenient for distance and online transactions than any currency in the world, gold included.
So while the article linked above cites expectations of gold to continue at $1,000 / ounce till 2017, personally I'm still bullish on bitcoin, and 2017 will be a big year for bitcoin as the block-reward halving takes place.
submitted by Anenome5 to TheoryofBitcoin [link] [comments]

Ron Paul and Ben Bernanke on MONEY, CURRENCY and VALUE #217 Bombensicherer Bitcoin Bunker, Luxusvilla in London für 5050 BTC & Ben Bernanke Bitcoin BITCOIN vs RIPPLE ~ BEN BERNANKE & CENTRAL BANKS (SWELL CONFERENCE)( price bitcoin,crypto) Bitcoin And Blockchain Conference Has Ben Bernanke Headlining! Banks Capitalize From Blockchain Bill Still on Bernanke's Bitcoin Surprise

Speaking to Quartz, former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said that Bitcoin "has some serious problems." Bitcoin's value peaked at $1,147.25 on December 4 and crashed to a low of $177.28 just a few ... Ben Bernanke: Bitcoin Has 'Serious Problems' November 19, 2015 245 Views. Former Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke offered both muted praise and criticism when discussing bitcoin in a new interview, suggesting that government oversight of blockchain transactions could counter perceived risks. Speaking to Quartz, Bernanke said that bitcoin is “interesting from a technological point of ... An intervention by Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, enabled Bitcoin’s enthusiasts to put the spotlight where they believe its potential value lies: as a cheaper alternative to the ... use the following search parameters to narrow your results: subreddit:subreddit find submissions in "subreddit" author:username find submissions by "username" find submissions from "" Ben Bernanke on bubbles, bitcoin, and why he’s not a Republican anymore. Reuters/Kevin Lamarque . A heart-to-heart with Ben. By Matt Phillips. November 19, 2015 This article is more than 2 years ...

[index] [32995] [5858] [35352] [13147] [25690] [28825] [1803] [19707] [10404] [5333]

Ron Paul and Ben Bernanke on MONEY, CURRENCY and VALUE

Enabling a dialogue about Bitcoin The VoB is a dialogue event that brings together skeptics, advocates, entrepreneurs and inquisitive decision makers. It is ... Heute geht's um folgende Themen: Bombensicherer Bitcoin-Bunker: So schützen Millionäre ihre Krypto-Kohle, Notting Hill Luxusvilla für 5050 BTC, Ben Bernanke glaubt Bitcoin wird nicht ... Filmmaker and activist Bill Still joins Gary Franchi to weigh in on Ben Bernanke's recent statements on Bitcoin and also shares his thoughts on cryptocurrencies. Ron Paul Hits Ben Bernanke at Hearing, Says Fed Has Destroyed 'Value of Real Money' - Duration: 4 ... Bitcoin Explained Simply for Dummies - Duration: 12:49. 99Bitcoins 490,151 views. 12:49. Steve ... BITCOIN vs RIPPLE ~ BEN BERNANKE & CENTRAL BANKS (SWELL CONFERENCE)( price bitcoin,crypto). ( price bitcoin,crypto) Thanks For Watching! Please subcribre Channel Top News.