People dont realize the potential

I've been asked by a few people lately if they missed the Bitcoin bus.   My answer is a hard, stern no.    A couple reasons

1) user adoption in western countries is low.   I'm pretty sure when I walk into any building i'm the only one that uses bitcoin

2) China is just now getting on board, and all of china (1.2 billion people) has a few merchants accepting bitcoin

3)  We aren't even talking about India yet.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/tech-news/internet/Bangalore-to-host-Indias-first-Bitcoin-conference/articleshow/26410751.cms

Now we are!

Its so important to realize we are talking about changing the ENTIRE WORLD, and we currently have perhaps a couple million users.

When your grandma uses bitcoin for services, perhaps by then it has neared its maximum potential.  In a similar way
  -when did you grandma get a facebook account?
  -when did your grandma get a smartphone?
  -when did your grandma get email?

Enjoy!

A post of mine on reddit

Again, discussing the value of bitcoin.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1radon/bitcoin_value_for_noobs_experts/

Bitcoin Goes to Washington - A scary bitcoin future.

   Within the next few weeks, popular public members from the bitcoin community will be summoned to speak on capital hill to some senate committees to begin the public discussion on if/ and how they should regulate bitcoin.

This is both good and bad.

  The outcome of these hearings will likely address certain issues as that go as deep as the question of if bitcoin is even legal.   I feel that large companies in the space (google, microsoft, apple) have stayed out of bitcoin entirely because they can't risk their companies on something that may be illegal.
   In reality it doesn't even matter if they decide its illegal or not.  the US does not have jurisdiction over bitcoin, and bitcoin is a world wide currency.

   The good part is that the government could release an official stance on bitcoin, and the result of which would be more companies adopting it.

The best thing that could happen would be the the US government to say "its legal and we are not going to touch it in any way".  Of course this isn't going to happen.

   Here is the hard part for the US Government.   Bitcoin directly attacks banks and the federal reserve.    I fully expect the senate committees to ask for things, such as reversible transactions, be built into the bitcoin protocol.   This will never happen, but if they demand it.... it would be like asking algebra to change its rules.... it just can't happen, and doesn't make sense to even ask it.
________________-
  Here is something that could be the future of the US banking system, if the US was to be a bitcoin based economy.   The US essentially has to build their own rules ontop of the bitcoin protocal, this is how it would be done (this actual works BTW)

Step 1) The US Government would wait until Bitcoin 1.0 software is release with multi-signature transactions.  Currently, just 1 private key will move bitcoin around the world, but with multi-signature transactions, you need any 2 of 3 private keys.  This is important to understand so if your reading this, make sure you understand it.
Step 2) The US Government then works with banks to implement the multi-signature transactions into the current banking system.   To create a series of signatures, a bitcoin holder would go into a bank and request a new bitcoin account.    The bank would keep one private key, and would send one the a US Government office(perhaps the federal reserve).   The account opener gets the third key
Step 3) When the account holder wants to spend money, the system uses the banks private key and the account holders private key.    This is no different than how checks work today.
Step 4) Nobody that receives bitcoins would be allowed to receive them into account that wasn't registered with the banking system
Step 5) If an account holder lost their private key, they would have to contact the government for a replacement, or a new account
Step 5a)  If a bank was compromised or robbed, the account holder would work the the government to replace the third private key.
Step 5b) If the account holder didn't pay his taxes, the bank and the government can move your money
Step 6) If the system recognized an input that wasn't part of the system, they would either hold it or just plain reject it.   This would be done at the banking level.  Again, the banks/gov hold the power to send and receive the account holders money, because they have 1 of the 3 private keys.
Step 7) If a account holder needed to take a transaction from an account not registered with the system, they would need to prove what it was, where it came from, and even pay a tax on it (or something).
Step 8) When the government needs more money in this case, they contact banks and take your money via a bail in.
Step 9) When the government needs to fund a war, they just take whatever money it needs.
__________________
Again, anybody receiving bitcoins has to register 3 keys with your local bank
Anybody spending bitcoins has to register 3 keys with your local bank.
Using an account not registered with a bank would be illegal, but 100% possible.

Now we all know we can bypass the system.   I can generate my own keys, and spend money outside this system.   There is no way they can stop this, but they can make it illegal to do.   It would be similar to buying drugs.  Because the blockchain is public information, the IRS would know if you sent money from your registered account to an un-registered account.  They would also know if you received money from an unregistered account with your registered account.    Registered accounts could not use mixing services because they would be un-registered accounts.

The only want to stay out of the system would be unregistered accounts to unregistered accounts.  The only way to get money into an unregistered account would be to mine it, or have it exist before the registration.
________
Sender - " do you take outside transactions"
Receiver - "yes, yes I do" or "no thats illegal i'm calling the cops and getting a reward"
________
The above system works, it allows the Government and banks to maintain control, but they can no longer simply print money.  

I will say though for myself, If they do implement the above in 10 years, bitcoin would be HUGE and i'd move to a more bitcoin friendly country.
___________
To implement this would be similar to Obamacare.   The US would pass a banking law, opening a new government office.   Banks would have a deadline to implement their system with the Governments.    Bitcoin holders would have a 1 year grace period to integrate their bitcoin, perhaps a 1 year period where unregistered bitcoin was taxed 20%, and another one year period where unregistered bitcoin was taxed at 40%, etc etc..

Its truly a scary system, and if implemented on a world wide scale, would be crushing.   Bitcoin would still be better than the current system, but it would lose most of its benefits.

Risks

I have posted mostly on here about how positive bitcoin is, and how much potential is there.... I'm going to use this post to play devils advocate and try to destroy the network.   I'm 100% honest here..  What I will not do is make 'uneducated' arguments though.   There are certain arguments that are only arguments because the argue-er doesn't understand some basic fundamentals.   Those arguments are.....

-Bitcoin is not backed by anything (today, no currency is backed by anything)
-What if the internet goes down or the power goes out (the only thing with value here is food)
-I can't hold it in my hand, its not physical (of course you can)
-the government will regulate it (you can't hold a gun to algebra or the law of gravity)

Here are some valid arguments.
__________
In my opinion, software updates are the biggest threat to the Bitcoin economy.   A hard fork is an update that changes or removes some of the rules of the network.    A software update that dos not have75% of the consensus of the miners, or a software update that is execute poorly would absolutely destroy the network and everything it has built to date.

An update that splits the block chain into BTC1 and BTC2, leaves its users with 100% of their coins on each fork, at 50% of the value.

Luckily, anybody trying to push a software update to the network has their own best interest in mind.   Nobody with coins would try and push a malicious update.

However a botched software update could do serious damage.    Currently today, the bitcoin foundation would organize a hard fork.   Currently the network is small enough to easily organize, but in the future, nobody knows?

I'll just note here than ANYBODY can fork the bitcoin blockchain... but the value of your new blockchain will ONLY be based on the number of users that use it.    If the US Government wants to change the rules with their own blockchain, go for it.   Its actually encouraged..... but I doubt any miners, exchanges or users would use it.

I mentioned this in the previous post, but I'll say it again.  How would you run a software update to the law of gravity?
_______
51% and now 25% attacks are a small concern.   With each day, the growing mining difficulty makes it harder and more expensive to launch such attacks.    Again, nobody with money INVESTED in the system is going to work to destroy the system.... well perhaps a government might.    Each passing day makes the network more secure.
_______
A weakness in SHA256 or in Eliptic curve encryption could cause problems for the network, but not as bad as a botched update.

A weakness in the used encryption method would not happen overnight.... first, encryption methods are weakened.... so instead of taking 500 million years to break encryption, maybe it only takes 2 years.   The result is that the network has time to change the encryption method before its officially "broken"
________
A better currency
  This is another great argument.

 What if somebody or something creates a BETTER internet currency.

An educated bitcoin user ENCOURAGES this.    Bitcoin is a challenge to the world.  You've seen the power of internet currency, now do it better.

To date, nobody has.  There are some 100 'alt coins' and a couple centralized systems like ripple.   None of them to date have anything on bitcoin.

Its kind of like saying to somebody, go home and code a better internet, or code a better email system.... it seems like it just can't happen.  If you did somehow manage to code a better cryptocurrency, bitcoin would just take your ideas and integrate it into the bitcoin system.

If it does happen, it will not be an overnight sensation.  This better currency will slowly win over users, and an educated user of bitcoin will split their value 50/50 amongst competing currencies.

_________
Unknowns.

There are any number of unknown potential problems out there.    However because the bitcoin blockchain is an infinitely secure database, the worst thing that can happen is that the network continues from the last known good block.  

If something breaks, the network rewinds to the last good block... gets consensus and moves on our way... however the damage done by the potential problem could take years to recuperate in market price.

Worldwide software update

I had an interesting thought today in relation to software updates.

If the laws of physics, say friction or gravity, were to run off software, and we had to run an update to that software..... what would that look like?

Typically we get software updates from a manufacturer, and we select when we run the update, perhaps on our computer before we go home for the day.   We update our software when it is convenient to us.

Bitcoin is a little bit different.   Bitcoin is software, for money.   One thing about money and economic activity is that you can't just simply turn it off to run a software update.

First, lets me say that we dont ever need to update the software.   The software works fine just how it is, and would operate without any maintenance from here until the end of time.

Second, software updates in bitcoin are referred to as "forks".   There are 'hard' forks and 'soft' forks.

A soft fork is a software update that doesn't change the rules of the network.  A soft fork can add features, but it cannot remove or change existing features.  These updates can be done at the leisure of the miner, exchange, or payment processor.

A hard fork is much more serious.   A hard fork must be done simultaneously around the world until there is a consensus of the miners.   With proper coordination this poses little to no risk, but if implemented poorly, could destroy everything that bitcoin has built to date.
_______
With a 'best case' hard fork scenario, all miners and exchanges are notified of an up and coming software update.    Perhaps a specific time and specific date.
  When the time comes, most everybody needs to shut off the current running software, run the update, then continue again.   This affects a couple groups of people.
  -Bitcoin miners need to stop, so that transactions are not verified under the old software.  Note that 100% of miners dont need to stop, just enough to stop solving blocks in a reasonable amount of time.   If 75% of miners shut down(perhaps just 5 pools), then to get 6 transactions verified would take about 4 hours.  Plenty of time.
  -Bitcoin users:  At the designated time, users are not affected, because mining and transaction verification has stopped.    It would kind of be the same as all Visa cards being declined for a 10 minute period today.
  -Exchanges.   Since the blockchain has come to a stop, incoming transactions to exchanges stop as well.

In general, under a hard fork scenario in bitcoin, the entire world would undergo a software update.   People would just stand in the starbucks line.... waiting for the go ahead.
_______
  The worst case scenario for a hard fork would be complete disorganization.   Miners would still verify transactions under the old software, which are then invalid once the new software meets consensus.  This would be particularly disastrous for exchanges, as they trade bitcoins for dollars, then send the dollars away only to find their bitcoins dont exist.
  For the consumer this is slightly less important.   If you paid your cable bill, then would just come back to you and have you pay it again.  If you had bought a TV, best buy would contact you asking for payment again.   This is still a chaotic environment, but still manageable.
________
A soft fork doesn't really matter a whole lot..   A soft fork would add features to the network.   Miners that dont update their software done get to use those features...(i think)  Not really a big deal.   An up and coming soft fork could be in multi-signature transactions.    Transactions today require 1 private key, but the software is coming that will allow us to use any 2 of 3 private keys.    If a miner found a block without this software update, the users transaction would wait until a miner WITH the software update found the block.

 Note that multi-signature transactions are the future of bitcoin banking/security.    One private key to the owner of the bitcoins, one private key to a bank or hot wallet (coinbase) and one private key to a trusted third party, in the event that one of the three lose their keys.   Then coinbase can't run off with your coins, and neither can sombody that stole your private keys through a hack of some-sort.
____________
Lets have fun with this hard fork idea.   Lets say the US government invests 100 million dollars in bitcoin mining and gets 51% of the network.     Since they own 51% of the network, then update the software to increase the cap to 42 million coins, of which they automatically get 20 million of.   O NO!!

  Not really.    The only thing they did was fork the bitcoin blockchain.  Now we have BTC1 and BTC2.   Users, exchanges, miners and payment processors can then chose which version of the blockchain they want to continue with.

The Government could setup their own exchange of BTC2 if the wanted to, but nobody would use it.
______________
 An interesting note here.... is who coordinates updates of the sofware in the event of a hard fork?   The Bitcoin Foundation is the un-appointed lead development team for bitcoin, however what if they want to run a software update nobody wants?   It is a serious concern.  
  Where I see this going is decentralized development.   There will be many many bitcoin foundations throughout the world.   One for each country, that may have each countries own interests in mind.    Perhaps all the bit coin foundations of all the countries would lead, democratically, software updates.    If those foundations cannot come to an agreement, the software doesn't get updated.... which is just fine.    I say its fine, because 2nd tier services and do ANYTHING that a software update can do. (I.E. coinbase can make their own rules for coinbase).   The free market will decide....
 

Lets Print 1 Trillion a MONTH!

shocking...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/27/business/economy/in-fed-and-out-many-now-think-inflation-helps.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

You are here.

  Just by simply reading this post, it is my opinion you are at the beginning of a HUGE technological adoption curve.   This is an image of the rate of adoption of new technologies.



  I mentioned to one of my buddies last night, whom is part of my generation, that we've all asked these questions.

Do you have a computer?   in 1995 this was a valid question.  Today it is just assumed.

Do you have the internet?  in 1997 this was a valid question.  Today it is just assumed

Do you have an email address?  in 1998 this was a valid question.  Today it is just assumed.

Do you have a cell phone?   in 2003 this was a valid question.  Today it is just assumed.

Do you have a paypal account? in 2003 this was a valid question.  Today it is just assumed.

Do you have a facebook account  in 2008 this was a valid question.  Today it is just assumed.  We are still working on this one.

Do you have a smart phone? Today this is a still a valid question, but its going towards assumption.

I believe the next question is... Do you have a bitcoin wallet?

Or perhaps people out there believe that we have maximized our technological advances capable via the internet and we "done" being more sophisticated.....


Here is another image from this website, which is a good, short read.  link

The recent price increase.

Bitcoin has been on pretty much a tear in October.   We're up about 40% since October 1st.

 I believe this to be due to a number of reasons

1) Increased adoption by retailers, eGifters walmart gift card, point of sale integrations, etc

2) China's "Baidu" has begun to accept bitcoin as a payment method.
     -Alot of the current rally has been led by China, they have been breaking volume records on their exchange..

3) The shutdown of the silk road got a 'stain' off bitcoins track record, and paraded it through the media for two weeks.   I had no less than 10 people ask me about bitcoin because of this story.   Media attention is good for bitcoin price, leading to more media attention.

4) The US governments dysfunction.    If you think the government will continue to be dysfunctional, invest in bitcoin, because bitcoiners dont give a rats ass what the government does.   We've "opted out" of the system, and chosen not to participate.   The more dysfunctional they are, the higher the price of bitcoin.

5) The nomination of Jannet Yellen as federal reserve chairman.   She will probably be responsible for more money printing than anybody in history.   This drives inflation, and drives people to secure assets (gold, silver, bitcoin).    Again, bitcoiners have "opted out" of the system so we dont care.

6) The continued dysfunction of ALL governments world wide.    Argentina LOVES bitcoin.

7) The Chinese government had a press release saying "we need to de-Americanize the world, and we need to use a "super sovereign" currency.link. read it seriously   How would one develop a "super sovereign" currency.   A currency that cannot be manipulated?   Sovereign meaning "self governing, independent"
    -Bitcoin is essentially an un-manipulatable database.   There is no way to change a block once its written.   Could it be used as a database to track world trade?     Once this current 'trust based' world trade system breaks, i'm pretty sure we'll move to something that is a 'trustless' system.   That means that because I cannot trust one person(or group of persons) I will design a system that trusts nobody.

I see the recent run up in price as more of a 'correction'.   This software has the ability to change the entire world, yet we get a 2 billion dollar market cap.   Facebook has a 90 billion dollar market cap with 700 million people posting lolcats on their pages.  Bitcoin will defund world governments and will stop endless war.
   A string of good news for bitcoin, and bad news for world governments has led this rally.   I do however think this is just getting started.   Once the price breaks 267, it will be a new high.    It will get run through the media, fuelling it to further highs.  I would bet somebody lunch that we will be at $500 by the end of the year, which BTW will only be a 6 billion dollar market cap.  This idea is just too big to be valued so small.

The first bitcoin bubble the price went from $2 -> $32, followed by a crash.   Bubble caused by media attention for the silkroad. This was a 16x return.

The second bitcoin bubble went from $32-$266, followed by a crash..   Bubble caused by Cryprus event.  This was an 8x return.

The third bitcoin bubble will have price going from $135 --> ???? followed by a crash.   Caused by the events described above. Perhaps we get a 4x return on this bubble, with a peak price of $540??

Cornerstone Money Post

This will be a huge post, and a challenge to people that I know.   The challenge is to sit down with somebody and watch these series of videos.   It will take 2 hours.  Instead of watching  "Survivor" tonight, lets educate each other.

No economics teacher will disagree with ANY of the information in these videos.   I agree with all the information in these videos.   The only people that disagree with the information in these videos are central bankers.   This guy teaches the truth, with no exaggerations.or deceit..

Pop some popcorn, grab a beer, sit down with a significant other and take two hours.  Note that these were made around 2011, and bitcoin as a project was just getting off the ground.    In video 3 he produces 4 possibilities for the new monetary system of the 21rst century.   I believe there is a 5th option now, based on the internet, through bitcoin.

I'll also through out a note that these guys are trying to get you to buy gold/silver from them, and you can see a tiny bit of advertising, however it is not intrusive or annoying.


 

The future of the internet?

I have no ability to do this... but I feel its an interesting concept that could be the future of the internet.

decentralized mesh networks monetized with bitcoin.

Through a combination of a tor like browser, high strength wireless routers, and monetization through bitcoin, one could have neighborhood area wifi.

Idea is an internet “miner” hosts has an ISP and a high strength antenna. get neighbors to connect through the miners antenna, and they pay per kilobyte of data transfer.

With bitcoin and micro transactions, internet users can pay for internet usage on a very small scale.

Want to load facebook? That will be 1/100th of a cent please.

The neighborhood internet “miner” could also host data that could be further monetized. If you want to host 10TB of web pages, one could further monetize access to that data. Facebook server farms wouldn’t be monetized with advertisements, they would be monetized by internet access. Netflix is paid for by access to their data, not with a subscription plan. Content providers are monetized by the value of their data (new york times, netflix, music/bands , youtube, etc)

Through a P2P technology, when you add storage to your internet ‘mining’ setup, it downloads the most accessed web pages in your area, reducing ping. (web pages updates would be problematic, or only hosted on corporate servers)

Through a tor style ‘onion’ type encryption, the consumer sends 1/100 of a cent with his request to netflix. In a way, distance from data centers would reflect the cost of access to that data. Home values near data centers would raise, because they have easier access to that data.

High strength wireless antennas begin to connect subdivision to subdivision, neighborhood to neighborhood, city to city and state to state. Cell phones begin to connect as a VOIP and each minute costs fractions of a penny. Verizon, AT&T get disrupted as their service is no longer relevant.

Consumers perhaps have cheaper access to the internet, or at least one that’s based on usage, and we get a decentralized internet. New professions arise in local internet hosting building and hosting. Data centers start popping up in shopping malls near local communities, selling access to that data.

I love the potential economics behind it. We live in Oregon and want to access data from New York. That data would cost a lot of money because it has a long distance through the network. Say it would cost 10 cents per kilobyte. A local internet miner sees a profit opportunity, and opens a satellite based ISP to reduce the cost.

In general, it could give consumers options. We would still have frontier as an ISP option, but in the event that gets censored there are other options.

3 reasons why Fed may not taper until 2014

shocking.... absolutely shocking..

3 reasons why Fed may not taper until 2014

First they say 'September"

When September comes, Bernake play a good old switch-er-roo on Wall street and says "fooled you".  He does not taper.

In reality, he will never taper, because as soon as he does, the US Government starts to default.  If you didn't read my previous post on why, how dare you.   But as a reminder.

At what rate would an average investor loan money to the US Government?

17 trillion in debt x 6% interest rate = 1 trillion dollars in interest (gov income only 2.5 trillion, spends 3.4 trillion)

To keep interest rates low, they print money
17 trillion x 2% interest rate = 140 billion in interest.

Lets not even talk about actually paying their debt down....

The Silk Road

  Bitcoin has huge news yesterday.   Perhaps the biggest news since I've been watching it around April.

The Silk Road has been shut down.

For those that dont know, the Silk Road was an illicit drug market.    Users could covert their fiat dollars to Bitcoin, go to "ebay" style drug website, select their products, pay in bitcoin and receive their goods in the mail.  Yes... it was mail order drugs.... the real kind.

The website was suppose to be "un-shutdownable" due to bitcoins "un-stoppableness" and TOR's "privacy"

Regardless, the FBI found the guy running it because he had made a couple HUGE mistakes, neither of which had anything to do with Bitcoin.*  There was nothing wrongs with Bitcoins security.

The reaction of the bitcoin market was a drop in value of around 40% in the short term.  Today its only down about 10%.

This is both good and bad for bitcoin... here is why.

The Bad:
   The Silk Road was opened in 2011, and was perhaps the first proof on concept of the power of bitcoin.   Users of Bitcoin can spend them wherever they damn well please without government interference.    In two years, the silk road had handled about 9.5 million bitcoin.   There are only 11.7 bitcoin available right now, so about 80% of all bitcoins have travelled through the silk road.   If you have 10 bitcoin, 8 of them on average have travelled the silk road.
   Two years, silk road may be been 90% of the utility of Bitcoin.   Most users and holders of Bitcoin probably only used them for the Silk Road.... this has lead to Bitcoins reputation of being used to buy drugs.   Just refer to any CNN article or any main stream media article and it will reference using bitcoin to buy drugs, because in 2011 that was all it was really good for.
  Fast forward to late 2013, and perhaps only 10% of bitcoin is used to buy drugs, but we still have this bad reputation... which leads to the good.

The Good:
   The reputation of Bitcoin was improved yesterday with the shut down of the Silkroad.    The main stream media can now dis-connect BTC and the Silkroad because the Silkroad no longer exists.  This is good in the long term.  Yes you can still buy drugs with bitcoin on other markets, but they are small and not well known.
   Why would Amazon, Paypal, or Google want to be associated with a currency that "was" only used to buy drugs?   Thats just bad business.  
  I believe that with Silk Road out of the way we now have fewer barriers to mainstream adoption.
  In the short term, yes the value is down, but it will only take one company to take bitcoin to drive its price to the moon.    It almost seams as though bitcoin was designed for Amazon.com or Paypal.

The Neutral:
    I 110% guarantee you that "The Polyester Road" began being designed yesterday.   The profit margins are too huge to assume that there will be no black market.  It will come back, somebody just needs the time to design it.   This person will also not be as stupid as the guy that ran the Silk Road.

Still cant make this stuff up.....

From a CNN article today"

"U.S. stock futures and global markets were pushing higher as investors now anticipate Janet Yellen will take over as Fed chairman.

All three major U.S. indexes were moving up by more than 1% ahead of the opening bell, bringing the S&P close to its record of 1,709 from Aug. 2. The U.S. dollar was slipping.

Investors are excited at the prospect of Yellen taking over from current Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, since she is widely expected to pursue a similar policy of stimulating the economy to bring the unemployment rate down

Investors had been concerned that Summers, the previous frontrunner for the top Fed job, would have been more aggressive at pulling back on the monetary stimulus measures that have been pumping cash into the system and supporting stock markets around the world."

So essentially that article is stating that Yellen is more likely to print money.   Lawrence Summers, who was the other top pick, suspiciously drop out of the race for the fed chair over the weekend.  Perhaps in a sit down with Obama, he refused to continue the money printing?

Perhaps there was secret competition between the two, of who promised to print the most money for the Federal Government?

Here is how this goes down.   Ben Bernake starts printing money.  Ben Bernake wants to stop, and he just might slow down, however Bernake is retiring in Janurary.    Obama looks for a new money printer that will continue the money printing.   Janet Yellen steps up and says "I'll print the most money" so she gets the job.

Another thing that makes me laugh is that their money printing cycle is self fulfilling.   Here's how it goes.

Step 1) Bernake says "we'll stop printing money when employment drops"
Step 2) Employment drops (because people stop looking)
Step 3) Slow down money printing
Step 4) Federal government cuts budgets because they are out of money, leading to higher unemployment
Step 5) Repeat.

Comedic Gold

I'm young enough I have only watched the adoption of a couple disruptive technologies.

The cell phone.

Netflix and the break away from 'appointment tv'

When I talk about disruptive technologies, I'm talking about new technology that changes the world as we know it.   Part of this process is the news cycle.   A properly disruptive technology is often in the news.

Because Bitcoin is massively disruptive, never before in my life have I been so excited to wake up in the morning.   I wake up, grab my phone, and read through all the news that happened in just the past 8 hours.

This is real life people, and its happening before your very eyes.

This morning I got a really really good one.  Sometimes I feel like I couldn't even make this stuff up, its comedic gold.

Here is the article. Fed Warns of 'Escalating Threats' to U.S. Payment System

The FEDERAL RESERVE has noted these deficiencies in their current system

1) Checks are old and outdated, people prefer electronic.

2) Other countries have real time payments, but the US does does not

3) People desire these features

            A) A real-time validation process assuring the payee that the payer’s account exists and it has enough funds or available credit to cover the payment;

            B) Assurance that a payment will not be returned or reversed;

            C) Timely notification to the payer and payee that the payment has been made;

            D) Near-real-time posting / availability of funds to both the payer’s and payee’s accounts; and

            E) Masked account details, eliminating the need for end users to disclose bank account information to each other. (checks and credit cards are literally giving somebody else access to your bank account)

4)  In general, cross-border payments from and to the United States are slow, inconvenient, costly, and lack transparency regarding fees and timing. (HA!)

Those bullet points above describe Bitcoin to a capital "T"  Note that they did not specifically call out bitcoin, but they described it.   The Feds do not like to call attention to bitcoin, as it only furthers bitcoins adoption.   Imagine the media frenzy if the paper mentioned Bitcoin?   CNN would be running stories for months about how Bitcoin is better than the federal payment system.

In general the FEDERAL RESERVE has just said they consider Bitcoin an  Escalating Threat to U.S. Payment System

The point of the article was the FEDERAL RESERVE asking for help on how they can innovate their payment system.   Comments are due by December 13, 2013.   I'm sure at the speed of government they will have some decisions by December 13, 2014, with actions by December 13, 2015.   By that time Bitcoin will STILL be light-years ahead of their 'payment system'

On a side note I've written a couple topics on "Currency Competition".   If the only thing Bitcoin does is provide competition for the monopoly over government money, the world will be better for it as governments are forced to innovate their systems, or go bankrupt.

And here is the advertisement I was looking for....

Syria

It kind of cracks me up that President Obama is essentially running an ad campaign to start a war with Syria.   I'll laugh if we start seeing commercials on TV.

Yes I believe that Assad used chemical warfare

No, he should not have done that

Yes, women and children died and thats horrible.

But if you look at the statistics, I think 93% if Americans are against any action in Syria.   American is *hopefully* on the tail end of 12 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.  President Obama promised during his election he would end the war (of which he did nothing BTW).    Why does he want another war SO BAD?

It doesn't make any sense why a nation tired of war would go start another one... until.......

wait for it....

You realize that the President needs war in order to get the federal reserve to continue printing money.  Then it all makes sense.

Ben Bernake is rumoured to stop his printing press pretty soon.   The federal reserve has stated that he will end QE3 when inflation is above 2% or employment falls below 7%.

Employment just fell to 7.3% and rumor is that the federal reserve might begin to taper QE3 in September.

If you follow the situation in Syria, you essentially have the ingredients for WWIII.   If we attack Syria, Syria and its allies will attack US allies in the region.  It is then the US's 'responsibility' to defend its allies.

A war with Syria means another recession for the US.  Another Recession for the US means more money printing.    More money printing means inflation, and another couple years for the United States Budget.

Obama doesn't want war, I dont believe anybody does.   Obama and the United States need reasons to keep the printing presses going.   As soon as those presses stop, the US defaults.

Prove me wrong?