Summary

🌍 Avoiding Tax Legally in Other Countries

Changing tax residency for half a year may help avoid taxes (but it;s complex and rather recommended for very high earnings). You can move for example to: - United Arab Emirates: No crypto tax. - Germany: No tax on crypto sold after holding for 12 months. - Portugal: Similar tax-free policies for holding over a year.

🔄 What Is Taxed?

Transactions converting cryptocurrency into fiat currency (e.g., PLN, USD) or purchasing goods like property or pizza with cryptocurrency are taxable. Pure crypto-to-crypto transactions are not taxable.

📈 How to Calculate Tax

Calculate the difference between the amount spent to acquire cryptocurrency and the amount earned from its sale. Example: If Bitcoin was bought at $30,000 and sold at $40,000, the taxable income is $10,000.

💰 Tax Rate Overview

• Income up to 1 million PLN is taxed at 19%.
• Income exceeding 1 million PLN incurs an additional 4% solidarity tax, totaling 23% for high earners.

📃 Keeping Records

Tax obligations arise at the moment of converting crypto to fiat or goods, not at the time of withdrawal from an exchange. Keep detailed records to avoid issues during audits or when exchanges request proof of funds.

⚠️ Challenges and Advice

Tax laws in Poland are comprehensive and offer few loopholes. Engaging tax professionals is strongly advised to ensure compliance and minimize errors.

🔄 Deferring Tax Payments in Poland Using Stablecoins

One strategy involves converting crypto profits into stablecoins at year-end and selling them in the following year to postpone taxation. Below is a detailed breakdown of how the strategy works and its limitations.

The Concept

Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies pegged to fiat currencies (e.g., USD or EUR) and have stable values. Using stablecoins in Poland offers a way to legally defer tax payments:

1. End-of-Year Transaction:

   • Convert your cryptocurrency gains (e.g., Bitcoin) into stablecoins like Tether (USDT) or USD Coin (USDC) at the end of the tax year.
   • These transactions, as crypto-to-crypto conversions, are not taxable in Poland.

2. Start-of-Year Sale:

   • In the new tax year, sell the stablecoins for fiat currency (e.g., PLN).
   • The taxable event occurs in the following year, deferring the tax obligation.

Benefits of This Strategy

1. Tax Payment Deferral:

   • Delays the payment of taxes on your crypto gains by shifting the taxable event to the next year.

2. Inflation Advantage:

   • Inflation reduces the real value of money over time, decreasing the actual financial burden of the deferred tax.

3. Liquidity Management:

   • Funds remain accessible as stablecoins, which can be reinvested or used in decentralized finance (DeFi) during the deferral period.

How Long Can This Be Done in Poland?

• The strategy can be legally repeated annually for up to 15 years.
• After 15 years, the deferred gains may be treated differently or trigger tax liabilities due to long-term reporting requirements. It's important to monitor evolving tax regulations in Poland to ensure compliance.

Key Considerations

1. Documentation:

   • Maintain detailed records of all transactions, including dates, values, and stablecoin transfers, for tax compliance and audits.

2. Stablecoin Selection:

   • Choose stablecoins with strong pegs to fiat currencies to avoid price fluctuations that may affect gains or losses.

3. Regulatory Changes:

   • Polish tax laws are subject to change. Always confirm that the strategy remains valid before executing it.

Example

• Year 1 (2023):

  • Bitcoin bought for PLN 50,000.
  • Sold for PLN 150,000 at the end of 2023.
  • Proceeds converted to USDT (not taxable in Poland).

• Year 2 (2024):

  • USDT sold for PLN 150,000 in January.
  • Taxable gain of PLN 100,000 is reported in the 2024 tax year.

Limitations

1. Short-Term Transactions:

   • If stablecoins are sold within the same year as the crypto-to-stablecoin conversion, the tax deferral benefit is lost.

2. Exchange Fees:

   • Frequent crypto-stablecoin conversions may incur exchange fees, slightly reducing net gains.

3. Regulatory Risks:

   • Future changes to tax laws or stablecoin regulations could impact the strategy's viability.

This strategy allows you to legally defer cryptocurrency taxes for a significant period, maximizing your financial flexibility and leveraging stablecoin stability. Always consult a tax professional for tailored advice and compliance.

Bitcoin ist wie die Tulpenspekulation. Wenn das Internet am Ende ist, ist auch bitcoin am Ende. Also Fiatgeld.

die leute suchen verzweifelt nach billigen tricks, um den krieg zu überleben...

Die New York Times beschäftigt sich in einem ausführlichen Bericht mit US-amerikanischen Bitcoin Minen. Die 34 Betriebe brauchen jeder mehr Strom als 40.000 durchschnittliche Haushalte. Dabei werden so viel Treibhausgase erzeugt wir von ungefähr 3,5 Millionen Fahrzeugen mit Verbrennermitor. Die Bitcoin-Minen entwickeln neue Geschäftsmodelle, die davon ausgehen, dass sie ihren Strombedarf wesentlich flexibler dosieren können als andere Unternehmen. Die öffentliche Hand muss zum Teil sogar Gewinnausfälle durch Stromabschaltungen finanzieren.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/09/business/bitcoin-mining-electricity-pollution.html

• for: adjacency - Satoshi Nakamoto white paper - bitcoin - P2P Foundation Ning forum

• adjacency between

  • Satoshi Nakamoto white paper
  • bitcoin
  • P2P Foundation Ning website
• adjacency statement
  • I didn't realize that Satoshi Nakamoto first published his paper on the P2P Foundation Ning website.

For example, think about paying your monthly bills. Instead of writing checks and mailing them, you can set up automatic payments through your bank's website. The bank's computer system will send the money to the right places at the right times without you needing to do it every month.

Der jährliche Energiebedarf für Bitcoin ist zur Zeit etwa doppelt so hoch wie der österreichische Stromverbrauch. Der Artikel im Standard führt (unkritisch) gleich eine ganze Reihe der manipulativen Argumentationen auf, die von den Crypto Bros verwendet werden, um diese tatsache zu verstecken oder zu rechtfertigen. https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000146147512/der-klimasuender-bitcoin-in-zahlen-und-wie-er-dieses-image

Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index (CBECI): https://ccaf.io/cbnsi/cbeci

"The Great Crypto Scam." James Jani, Jan 1, 2023

Bitcoin to Blockchains, to NFTs, to Web 3.0... it's time to find out if it's really all the hype or just part of one of the greatest scams in human history.

Original video: https://youtu.be/ORdWE_ffirg

Hello, my name is Evans Dominique from the United States am here to give a testimonial on how I met one of the best Hacker so far on my incredible moment of pain I lost a huge amount of money to a fake investor, I invested 105,000 USD to this investment company with my belief that I will have a huge return when it was time for me to get my return they company no longer pick my calls or reply to my email I was so devasted that my sister saw my pain and sad sorrow she have no choice than to introduce me to this great hacker called Wizard Brixton. I tell him everything about my situation and he asked for the company email address and the mobile number he promises to help me retrieval my funds if I will be able to cooperate and give him the vital information needed less than 24 hours he was able to give me the necessary details about the company and how he will get my funds back without the company approval. Contact him: Wizardbrixton@gmail.com WhatsApp with (+1- /807-23 ) 4-0428 ;) I was very happy when he recovered all my funds and gave me 2% of the profit the company could have given to me. so I promise to make him go viral for everyone to contact him in different aspects of hacking software program in your life he proves the best in his job CONTACT HIM: Wizardbrixton@gmail.com

A professional hacker, I can introduce you to is Wizard Brixton Group of Hackers he is the best Hacker for funds Recovering. Bitcoin recovery, Usdt recovery, Data recovery, Bank account payment recovery, Bitcoin hacks, increased Credit score boost to 800, School result upgrading, cryptocurrency, Binary option funds recovery, Bitcoin Mining, Social media hacks, Payment for our services will only be collected after Customers have certified and confirmed the completion of their job. For no reason do we collect upfront for services? But note that Customers will have to pay for Hacking Equipment if necessary before a job would be done. contact them on ( WIZARDBRIXTON(AT) GMAIL (DOT) COM ) WhatsApp +1- /807-234-0428

Joel Monegro 在 Fat Protocols 这篇文章中探讨了一个观点, 那就是 Web2 的结构中, 基于协议的应用的价值非常大, 而协议的价值很小, 区块链中这个情况则会被扭转.

区块链中协议层的价值占比更大, 给了协议之间的公开性, 数据共享性和互操作性的巨大提升. 例如比特币和以太坊这样的协议 (当然也比如一两年后的 Uniswap 和 AAVE 等) 的价值比链上应用的价值更大, 应用更成功, 人们就会觉得这个协议的潜力还有待发掘. 代币经济在其中起到了一个非常正向的作用. 投资者对协议的投机行为会让协议上的应用生态更加繁荣.

2016 年, 在以太坊的慢慢崛起下, 人们对整个区块链的 “网络” 有了更多的想象力. 对区块链的构建不再是停留在钱包或交易所等基础设施, 而是开始思考基于一个完备的环境中, 能构建怎样的协议. 这个时候道变成了加密精神, 一变成了项目创作者, 二是社区, 三是生态参与者.

Fred Ehrsam 将重点的关注从比特币聚焦到了以太坊上. 比特币的设计太过于完美, 任何改动都仿佛是画蛇添足, 真正的除了钱包和交易所之外的完备应用无法在比特币上诞生. 以太坊能提供完整的计算环境, 从而支撑起了无数的区块链上应用. Fred 提到了在以太坊上建立的 DAO 组织, 也就是在文章发布一个月后遭到攻击导致以太坊分叉的那个.

比特币作为 Crypto 的先驱, 让以太坊得以诞生. 以太坊的智能合约相比比特币的 “智能合约” 更加简单易用, 更加方便开发, 社区更繁荣. 同时 Fred 也指出了, 以太坊的核心开发人员比比特币更加健康, 社区心态更加谦虚, 方向上更加有一致性.

除了这些优点, Fred 也提到了以太坊的一些潜在风险: 资金量还不如比特币高, 尚未经历治理危机 (文章发布一个月后经历了), 因为功能更复杂所以风险更大, 可能会将共识改成 PoS (虽然五年后还是没换), 和网络拓展非常难 (这个问题已被各种 Layer2 慢慢解决).

Fred 没有给以太坊和比特币是竞争还是互补关系下定论, 他认为以太坊的潜力巨大, 他对任何特定的链都不“忠诚”, 只想要任何给世界带来最大利益的东西.

Fred 最后总结说 Crypto 的变化速度正在加快. Crypto 的愿景非常大, 要为整个世界创建一个更好的交易网络. Crypto 与互联网本身一样, 不是一家出售产品的公司, 而是一系列有朝一日会连接每个人的协议. 而且, 像互联网一样, 它的发展需要更长的时间, 但影响将是巨大的.

还有就是他在一年后的 2017 年写了一篇文章, 内容主要是: 区块链是元宇宙的基础层.

“一项神秘的新技术出现了, 似乎不知从何而来, 但实际上是几乎匿名的研究人员二十年紧张研发的结果. 政治理想主义者将解放和革命的愿景投射到它身上; 建制派精英们对它投射蔑视和蔑视. 另一方面, 技术人员, 书呆子被它吓呆了. 他们看到了其中的巨大潜力, 并整晚和周末都在修补它. 最终, 主流产品、公司和行业出现了将其商业化; 其影响变得深远; 后来, 许多人想知道为什么其强大的承诺从一开始就不那么明显. ” Marc Andreessen 说的是什么技术?

1975年的个人电脑, 1993年的互联网, 以及他相信, 2014年的比特币.

Marc Andreessen, 一个对 Web 真正了解的人 (除了创办 a16z 以外, 他还写了 Mosaic 和创办了网景), 看到了比特币技术的颠覆性, 去中心化, 网络效应, 和对现有秩序的重塑.

2014 年依旧是对比特币加强认知的一年. Marc Andreessen 这个现代互联网的 “创造者” 奠定了后来者对比特币理解的基础, 之后对比特币的理解与他所设想的未来几乎无异.

在上一篇文章发布十几天后, Chris Dixon 又表达了自己为什么对比特币产生兴趣的原因. 有些人认为比特币火热单纯是因为自由主义者的支持, Chris Dixon 赞同了很多比特币的早期支持者都是自由主义者, 同时很多重要的计算机领域的运动都是因为意识形态而受到支持.

他不认为比特币的终极目的是替代美联储. 他觉得如果想用科技改变金融, 那么就不仅仅要在现有的基础上建立新增的服务, 而是要彻底重新构建一个新系统和新秩序.

他最初认为比特币是一个投机泡沫以及互联网黄金. 但是他突然意识到比特币正在重建整个支付行业. 他非常看好小额支付的应用.

他最后强调, 科技改善金融的唯一方式就是重建一个不依赖其他现有设施的新服务. 比特币是一个非常有效的改善方式, 是一个值得运行的实验.

2013 年是 Crypto 的早期基础设施和认知建设的一年, 这一年 Coinbase 拿到了 a16z 的投资. 随着大众对比特币的关注提升, 两种对立的声音开始产生, 一部分人坚定认为 Crypto 是个 scam, 而远见者对比特币的认知开始逐渐清晰, 开始思考 Crypto 的未来.

Fred Wilson 在这篇文章中提到了对比特币的概念的赞同, 认为比特币作为一种货币基于对算法和网络的信心的理念非常好.

他说在他和他在 USV 的同事看来, 一种公平且透明的网络构建的替代货币是一个即将实现的想法. 他认为比特币值得观察, 但是货币与政府真正脱钩会产生重大影响, 所以还是要谨慎, 但是依旧是一个非常有趣的投资机会.

对于当时比特币的币价, 他点评到, 可以说比特币失败了 (居然从 29 美元归零到了 13 美元), 也可以说我们刚刚经过了膨胀期望期, 价格回归到了比特币真正的价值. 有趣的是, 目前比特币的价格在三万美元以上.

这篇文章的评论区也极其精彩, 我们可以看看 2011 年的人对比特币是有哪些思考, 质疑, 和辩论的.

2011 年是远见者对 Crypto 探索的一年, 比特币开始逐渐吸引开拓者的目光, 而他们认为 Crypto 的主要作用会是一种替代掉央行的替代货币.

Is this some kind of attribution bias?

At what scale might such cooperative efforts fail?

Look at the scale of the bitcoin bros using crypto and bitcoin as a completely selfish endeavor. Has this reached a scale for social failure? (Separate from the end date at which the bitcoin/crypto system completely fails and collapses?)

https://www.ft.com/content/83a14261-598d-4601-87fc-5dde528b33d0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MM5_VlMKG8

Bitcoin, currencies, and fragility by Nassim Nicholas Taleb

The most stable currencies are those that are most heavily traded between each other and for actual goods and services.

Some of Bitcoins' problem may be that it is so narrowly traded that it is far too volatile to encourage others to use it.

Cryptocurrency Exchange Development

Build a robust, secure and user-friendly Cryptocurrency Exchange Platform for your traders with our Cryptocurrency Exchange Software. As a best-in-class Cryptocurrency Exchange Development Company, Maticz offer top-notch Cryptocurrency Exchange Development Services on White Label mode to ensure growth-centric digital transformation. Get Complete Cryptocurrency Exchange Software solutions to unlock revenue and growth for your Crypto business.

Know more: Cryptocurrency Exchange Development Services

https://www.newsweek.com/bitcoin-laser-eyes-senator-cynthia-lummis-1570644

No, the finance metaphor is so fraught with capital and considerations of the bottom line that I really buck against this. Writing at its best has never been about using it as a currency. It is not BitCoin.

The double spend problem is a subset of what can be called the double update problem. How do we order two updates to the same state?

Organizationally decentralized but logically centralized

Again, this is misleading. The participants still need to agree. Doesn't matter if they're agreeing on a bunch of outputs or on a single output that then spends to a bunch of outputs. And the fees won't be lower, they will be higher.

Lightning implementations limit the number of HTLCs because otherwise the commitment transaction becomes too expensive.

This trick would make the redeeming of these HTLCs more expensive, just the expenses would happen across the time instead of all at once.

Doesn't seem like an improvement to anything. Just adds cost and complexity.

And most HTLCs are not economical to redeem anyway.

Again not Lightning channels, and then one needs two transactions just to create the channel -- and then it only works on one side?

Maybe this is a good idea if user A wants to send a bunch of payments to user B in that single channel that doesn't interoperate with anyone else, if it's really non-interactive. But I can't imagine concrete relevant use cases.

Generally requiring interactivity is an issue when the receiving end is a user that doesn't have an online wallet so Lightning doesn't work for them on that case -- it's hard to imagine many cases of services opening these wasteful channels to each user, or friends opening this kind of channel between themselves just to send a few bucks.

If this refers to Lightning channels then it can't work because they're necessarily interactive anyway and they can already be opened in batched transactions so I don't understand how this is supposed to work or be an improvement.

Since "Lightning" is not mentioned here it seems these are some other kind of channel that is less useful than Lightning channels.

I think this is a misuse of the term "Channel Factories" which referred originally to multiparty channels powered by Eltoo. The idea there was not to make channels (although the name implies that) but to actually have a super channel with child channels inside it. These child channels can later exit the super channel and become their own, but that's a worst case scenario. Ideally they don't have to do this because they will just keep working within the super channel and not consume extra blockchain space.

So the idea here is to actually increase blockchain space usage while simultaneously adding the requirement for the users who are withdrawing to have a wallet that understand OP_CTV and the way these transactions are batched? Sounds like a bad idea.

Even if I'm wrong on the specifics the general argument sounds weak: instead of making a single big transaction that will cost relatively less (or pay relatively more on fees for that) the idea is that exchanges will prefer to make a larger number of smaller transactions to reduce the immediate cost but increase the cost in the future? And then most users will have to wait anyway.

Why not make a single big transaction and just wait until it clears from the mempool?

Even if I'm wrong twice on the above and this is actually a good idea, this sounds like a super niche and debatable use case and it's hard to imagine anyone supporting it.

more BTC historical context.

Historical context for bitcoin

Bitcoin

Bitcoin transactions are slow & the currency is very unstable

Blockchain isn't also yet fully free from third-parties to check the payments

Why bitcoin was created to replace banks

https://web.archive.org/web/20200901145543/https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/first-amendment-center/

Our mission: providing resources to help the public understand how their First Amendment freedoms of speech, press, religion, assembly and petition work, and how they can be protected.

FIRST AMENDMENT EXPERTS The First Amendment Center’s nationally recognized experts David Hudson, Lata Nott, and Gene Policinski regularly provide the media with information and commentary on First Amendment and free expression issues. Interested in contacting one of our experts? Please email media@newseum.org or call 202/292-6200.

Smart k

But they didn't. Because they didn't they entered a more secure network

The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of the second bailout for banks

powping (https://powping.com/about) Features

1. VALUE EXCHANGE NETWORK Provide value and get Bitcoin micropayments, or send Bitcoin to others for providing value. Or simply socialize, or tell stories. Any activity that has a perceived value to someone else can get a micropayment.

2. FREE TO PLAY You do NOT need Bitcoin to get started. Anyone can INSTANTLY join the Bitcoin value exchange economy without spending any money or buying Bitcoins.

3. BITCOIN NATIVE PowPing is powered by Paymail, a Bitcoin-native identity system. All actions on PowPing are cryptographically signed by your Bitcoin wallet's Paymail and encoded in Bitcoin transaction format. They are stored on the PowPing server and anyone can export and use them as absolute evidence.

4. PEER TO PEER ON STEROIDS Take advantage of all the Bitcoin magic without having to pay any money for storing stuff on the blockchain. Settle evidence on the blockchain only when money gets involved through tipping.

Philosophy

1. FREE, OPEN, PUBLIC We are an open community for everyone, not an exclusive group. Every interaction and every message on the site is open and public. And every action is FREE (except for when you want to tip). You DO NOT need Bitcoin to get started. The entire world is invited. Bring your "normal friends" to the party!

2. MONEY IS BY-PRODUCT We do not focus on "monetizing". We focus on creating the best community for frictionless value exchange through social interactions. Money is just a by-product that naturally happens wherever there's value exchange.

3. INTERACT, NOT SHOUT We encourage interactions rather than talking down. It's not where a small number of important people talk loud and the rest listen. Most of the value creation and exchange will take place in the comments section.

4. PEER TO PEER ACCOUNTABILITY We are a community where people are held accountable for actions they take and statements they make. Every action you take is immutably signed by your Bitcoin wallet's Paymail and publicly distributed through the social network. Because of the public nature, everything on the site is a cryptographic evidence. All you need to do is be nice and keep your words.

5. LONG TERM NETWORK VALUE We aim to build a long lasting value network where people make and nurture lasting and productive relationships. This is not a place designed to extract short term profit from people.

https://hyp.is/8zABhsVwEeq10ItzxA0Rzg/powping.com/about

Archived Link: https://web.archive.org/web/20200404230101/https://master-plan.21e8.nz/metacoin.svg

Bitcoin Halving 2020 Analysis --> more bullish than before!

This paragraph explains how blockchain hides one's individual identity and privacy, while giving them a secure way of using the funds. In my opinion lot hacker ransomware are done using block-chain technology coins, this and one more paragraph here is really interesting to read about how blockchain helps protect personal data. and i also related this this hacking and corruption or money laundering

US v. Edward Snowden Complaint

Hosted on Bitcon, tx 1526def70508762cb293eb4100b440a9207a29c9126b4c9dd83ce495741d4ea7

TX: https://whatsonchain.com/tx/1526def70508762cb293eb4100b440a9207a29c9126b4c9dd83ce495741d4ea7

https://bico.media/1526def70508762cb293eb4100b440a9207a29c9126b4c9dd83ce495741d4ea7.pdf

Facebook want another way to circumvent government? Well, let's circumvent Facebook.

We hope you enjoy our curations of blockchain content across the internet as well as our guides. You can find us at https://ethdocs.github.io and join the conversation!

The TLDR is: Zuller proposes that social capital and financial capital form a virtuous circle for cryptonetworks, allowing first movers such as ethereum to gain a decisive advantage against competitors. Ethereum's accumulated social and financial capital make it difficult for a challenger to emerge as a general-purpose decentralised smart contract platform.

My thought is Zuller's analysis of social capital ignores the long established body of work on on the topic, and this analysis could be better applied in the case of ethereum. I also think bitcoin is an interesting study in the effects of social capital and the viability of a decentral crypto network.

These projects are all funded or founded by individuals with significant social and financial capital. They are therefore well positioned to challenge ethereum's dominance.

By contrast, consider Satoshi Nakamoto's launch of the bitcoin network. As a pseudonymous persona with no history attached to it, Nakamoto had no social capital to speak of. This social capital had to be bootstrapped through a corpus of communications on the cryptography mailing list, and other fora.

So bitcoin was launched with minimal social capital, by contrast to ethereum.

<big>评：</big><br/><br/> 中本聪是「神」吗？<br/><br/> 在回答这个问题前，应当扪心自问：我们是「人」吗？在技术原教旨主义大行其道的年代，技术从业者的世界观亦逐渐被这一行行二进制符号定义、控制、编码。既然如此，精神领袖是否有必要在三次元世界存在对应的物质实体？中本聪真实身份的探寻者们忽视了比特币主网络上线运行那一刻的即时意义——在那一刻，Satoshi Nakamoto 的身份迷思就已倾然瓦解。这使人联想到艺术家丹尼尔 · 布伦（Daniel Buren）对于「在场」（on-site）概念的演绎——他的作品总是诞生在它所处的位置上，而不是如同绝大多数艺术家那样在工作室实现后再转移到展厅展示。布伦在艺术上是成功的，但这群探秘者却给自己设下了一道无解谜题。

<big>评：</big><br/><br/>在中国人的习武观里，讲究「天下武功，唯快不破」。快，即应变迅速，无论是在追求高 TPS 的技术环境，还是在需要快速迭代的商业世界，「快」都不失为一计上策。 <br/> <br/> 但是要如何才能保使自己在迅速登上高度的同时，不失风度？中本聪给出的答案从侧面应证了日式「侘寂」（wabi-sabi）美学对此问题的态度——「接受短暂和不完美」。中国人能否在自己的哲学智慧里寻到一个类似解呢？我看是有的，所谓「上善若水，以柔克刚」。

<big>评：</big><br/><br/> 「比特币这种无主权货币背后的区块链技术，赋予了国家发行具有主权性质的密码货币的能力」，此番境遇，放到加密货币市场遇冷的 2019 年初来看，着实有股「有心栽花花不开，无心插柳柳成荫」的意味。分布式账本技术真的能在国际政坛间再度搅起波澜吗？区块链技术真能引导现有体系走向开放性金融（Open Finance）吗？或许，人类自身的求生欲会给予上述提问一个肯定的答复，但是这种充满跳跃性的惊喜感赖以维系的前提在于——比特币是一种无主权的货币，信息技术能够自由流动。

<big>评：</big><br/><br/> 比特币诞生初期，就有人欢呼 “We don't need banks anymore”。时至今日，对此愿景翘首以盼的拥趸也大有人在，只不过他们把目光移向了比普惠金融更高阶的开放性金融，措辞也变得更为「绅士」：By crypto like Bitcoin we can “bank” the unbanked（为那些没能享受到金融基础服务的底层民众提供服务）。试问，假以时日加密货币登上舞台，人类是否还需要银行？如果需要，这种状态还会持续多长时间？在未来，银行这条清结算渠道是否会演化成其他范式，而非被取代？ <br/><br/> 对此，许多人认同「非黑即白」的二元论答案，或者再暧昧一点，他们会说，要达到质变的最终目的，不过是时间长短的问题。「将 DNS 提供商比作警察，交易所比作银行」，如是比喻固然沿袭了旧世界的工程化思维，却无疑给了这群人当头一棒。

<big>评：</big><br/><br/>在第 004 期「公论日报」里，我们曾讨论过比特大陆裁员一事引发的道德争议。那期的点评以一句 “Be nice” 画上句号，但这位「家道中落」的矿机制造商的故事并未就此停止——近日其推出了矿机分时共享平台「比特小鹿」，一时坊间盛传「大鹿变小鹿，探索自救之路」。 <br/><br/> 如今看来，这位仁兄也玩起了「金融」衍生品游戏，而 TOS 用户协议里这句话所散发出的魅力，对于比特币玩家来说又是那么的似曾相识。当玩家们还在盘算成本犹豫进场时，仁兄已经找到了一份两全其美的双保险。

<big>评：</big><br/><br/> 大众获得加密货币的渠道越来越广，这是件好事吗？抛开「万事都有好坏两面」的哲学论断不谈，我们似乎没有理由认为这是件坏事——加密货币愈加普及和流行，愈加深入日常生活，从而间接影响到人们的思维观念。但值得关注的是，在这五花八门的渠道里，有多少被中心化的力量操控着？当比特币像烟草一样成为专营专卖的「商品」和重要的财政收入来源，当大头交易所托管了市面上流通的绝大部分数字资产，「去中心化」的理想可能又将化为一纸空谈。届时人们关心的不是「怎样构筑新的价值体系」，而是「怎样挣更多的钱抽更好的『烟』」。

<big>评：</big><br/><br/>比特币工程师 Lopp 的此番回应是一件很刺激的事情，就像听到尼采说「上帝死了」一样令人激动。在 19 世纪，便有人说：「上帝是一个无用而且很花钱的假设，因此我们不需要他」。200 年后，依然有人扛着如是的观点大旗在卖力宣扬革命。这说明什么？<br/><br/>说明后资本主义时代，人的精神依然处于被压迫、剥削、异化的状态。价值是必须能够被验证的东西，and that's why we have fewer and fewer nice things.

<big>评：</big><br/><br/>What did Jimmy specifically mean when he talked about the group of “Bitcoin users”? And similarly, how to define the gap between the military and the civilian when we talk about some certain power to follow?<br/><br/>可供参考的是，在《人性的弱点》一书里，作者卡耐基反复强调着「人始终只关注自己的利益」。更好的规则？更好的秩序？在利益面前皆为浮云。选择站队的权力确实由个体掌握，但这并不影响到权力是否会被团体以违背个体意志的方式行使。更何况个体意志并不总是「弱者」的代名词，「作恶」也绝非市场垄断者一家之嫌。

<big>评：</big><br/><br/>战争，灾害，外来星体撞击——人类对未知的恐惧迫使科技在人文主义的荫蔽下谨小慎微地拓展边界，如履薄冰。假设最糟糕的情况下，地球上所有节点同时离线，所有无线沟通渠道中断，届时比特币网络会荡然无存吗？<br/><br/>发射卫星来同步比特币网络的做法在许多人看来是不可理喻的，甚至有点病入膏肓的可笑，但这艘「诺亚方舟」所承载的纯朴愿景，足以破封我们现世所面临的诸多困境。没有什么是永垂不朽的，如果有，那将是太阳系最后一个比特币区块，以射线的形态在浩瀚银河里砥砺前行。

We must be careful to distinguish between blockchain ledgers and proof-of-work, because they are separate things that just happen to have been combined to make Bitcoin. There are energy-efficient ways of managing blockchain ledgers, such as proof-of-stake algorithms. Some of these algorithms are already being implemented by rival cryptocurrency schemes

. . .

PoW is obscenely wasteful, consuming more electricity than all of Ireland to generate an endless stream of mathematical garbage.

Looks like S&P changes its mind. See S&P price chart here

A long article critical of cryptocurrencies

can bitcoin be duplicated? If it is possible, what makes such currency reliable?

This is what makes Bitcoin such a prominent method of payment for illegal trading since it is unable to be traced and very easily to be sent. This is very efficient for places such as the Black Market and the Dark Net, places where things that are no good take place.

Why is that? Why doesn't bitcoin have a centralized website where money can be converted instead of third party websites handling this? Could it be because these third party websites have already mined the bitcoin and now they are at the liberty to sell it?

When it says that cryptography secures the digital currency, does that mean that cryptography is some form of the inscription that we discussed?

How will quantum computing affect bitcoin?

How exactly will quantum computing affect bitcoin?

[...] Our argument is that bills, charters, declarations, and manifestos would have stronger imaginary force if they also derived their performative force from everyday acts through the Internet: how people uptake positions as citizens of cyberspace, how they respond to callings to participate in cyberspace, how they create openings for constituting themselves differently, how they struggle for and against closings, and how they make digital rights claims in or by performing digital acts.[85] They would also have more performative if not legal force if they arose from not only a universal commitment but also regional commitments to understanding how the figure of the citizen is being articulated differently in cyberspace and how this figure is essential for bringing the force of law into being. The most significant space for thinking about the politics of the Internet and the political subject it has given rise to—the digital citizen—is the space between the inscription of rights and their enactment.

Hasta qué punto las criptodivisas y criptocontratos son una reiteración de este "yo, nosotros, ellos" y sus acuerdos a través de un algoritmo? La idea de inscribirse o excluirse son las únicas posibilidades. El resto de la política ocurre en repositorios de código y en "propuestas de mejora" técnicas.

El caracter recurrente del Data Week es una manera de hacer enactivos los compromisos que nos juntan como comunidad. La página es un acto de enunciación que es reiterado a través del Data Week

ATHENS (Reuters) - Greek police arrested a Russian man suspected of running a money laundering operation involving turning $4 billion from illicit business activities into the digital currency bitcoin, they said on Wednesday.

A good primer on decentralization

Early Free Software (predating Open Source) was about protecting community rights: in this case the ones of the hacker communities and authors sharing the software. The extreme depolitization of modern open source, particularly in USA and The Valley, brings hide politics and governance, as is documented in the bitcoin case, the hidden politics of the "apolitic" money. So, there is some kind of pendulum movement from plain Open Source to its re-politization showing again a concern for governance and sustainability of software as a commons.

Twenty five hundred years ago the pressure of trade forced the minting of the first coins. Eleven hundred years ago the weight of all those coins forced the printing of paper money. Seven hundred years ago the challenges of international trade forced the development of bills of exchange. And fifty years ago the mainframes gave birth to the credit revolution.

Right now we’re on the cusp of a similar revolution. Because our smartphones want our money. They don’t want to have to talk to a bank for an authorisation. They just want to hand over the cash. But they can’t, because we haven’t got money that fits into a smartphone. Yet.

Sometime in the next few years, one of these big central banks is going to introduce its own blockchain-based money — blockchain money issued by a government. It’s been nicknamed ‘fedcoin’.

Looking forward to digging into this!

This post seems to have gotten the conversation started across some important sites about the idea of a federal backed cryptocurrency in the US.

Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies<br> https://www.coursera.org/course/bitcointech

In other words, it can facilitate a deferred payment system that works when the payer provides payment in escrow, like Kickstarter and other crowdfunding systems. It could manage deposits on purchase-and-sale agreements and handle escrows on legal judgments, without a third party holding title to the money. The core financial system itself could hold the money.

Could it be made into a complete deferred payment system for managing loans, mortgages, and coupon bonds? I don’t know how, since the source of those payments is outside the bitcoin system and generally doesn’t exist at the time of the loan or bond purchase. But imagine if a financial system was entirely built around a programmable trust system, then financial instruments themselves become a part of the logic of a company’s assets and liabilities. When a corporate bond coupon comes due the company treasurer doesn't create a transaction, instead the coupon payment is automatically transferred to the holder of the bond by the financial system itself. That is, the structure of the bond has been integrated directly into the financial system for automatic execution.

If a future government were to implement blockchain technology and legislate its adoption throughout the financial community (perhaps as an option, in parallel with the pre-existing system), it could 'write the code' for legally certified instruments like corporate bonds, mortgages, car loans. It could further write legally permissible derivatives of those instruments (yes, derivatives have tremendous value in reducing risk, when used wisely).

At that point, financial companies like Vanguard or Fidelity could issue mutual funds whose prospecti assert that the only kind of instruments held by the fund were those certified by the government to use the legislated systems. This could reasonably allow safe and less expensive adoption of powerful financial instruments with far less risk to the system.

Sure there are plenty of flaws and dangers in this kind of a system. But could they be worked out to create a safer, less expensive, more transparent and more accessible financial system than we currently have? Would it help engender some of the trust that has most recently been lost?

The concept of trust, in the sociological and economic sense, underlies exchange. In the 15th-17th centuries, the Dutch and English dominance of trade owed much to their early development of instruments of credit that allowed merchants to fund and later to insure commercial shipping without the exchange of hard currency, either silver or by physically transporting the currency of the realm. Credit worked because the English and Dutch economies trusted the issuers of credit.

Francis Fukuyama, a philosopher and political economist at Stanford, wrote a book in 1995, Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, on the impact of cultures of trust on entrepreneurial growth. Countries of ‘low trust’ have close family culture who limit trust to relations: France, China, S. Italy. Countries of ‘high trust’ have greater ‘spontaneous sociability’ that encourages the formation of intermediate institutions between the state and the family, that encourage greater entrepreneurial growth: Germany, England, the U.S. – I own the book and (shame on me!) haven’t yet read it.

I thought of this article in those contexts – of the general need for trusted institutions and the power they have in mediating an economy, and the fascinating questions raised when a new facilitator of trust is introduced.

How do we trust? Across human history, how have we extended the social role of trust to institutions? If a new modality of trust comes available, how does that change institutional structures and correspondingly the power of individuals, of institutions. How would it change the friction to growth and to decline?

Prior to reading this article, I had dismissed Bitcoin as a temporary aberration, mostly for criminal enterprises and malcontents. I still feel that way. But the underlying technology and it’s implications – now that’s interesting.

In any reporting on a controversy in science or technology a journalists job is first and foremost to find out whether there’s overwhelming support for one side among experts and if there is to report that straightforwardly.

I don't know enough about bitcoin to have an opinion about this controversy. Regardless of that, this is a very good point. "Impartial" shouldn't mean giving equal credence and equal time to fringe viewpoints -- unless they are coming from some noteworthy experts with strong evidence.

Mike Belshe, CEO of BitGo, says they need to increase the blockchain size immediately.<br> http://belshe.com/2016/01/18/bitcoin-blocksize-and-the-future/

http://r3cev.com/s/Watermarked-tokens-and-pseudonymity-on-public-blockchains-Swanson.pdf

Yet if a network is comprised of known and trusted entities with legal, off-chain obligations to fulfill, then you have a set of different security assumptions to build around. And in the case of financial institutions, a feature such as proof-of-work via mining, which is currently core to public blockchains is an unnecessary and even redundant.

This paper explores several of the drawbacks and challenges of using public blockchains for securing off-chain titles and concludes that these types of networks are not fit-for-purpose for globally regulated financial institutions.

I need to learn more about bitcoin.

Why the blockchain cannot fork (for long).

i should really read the whole thing..

Who does that someone have to be?