3 ms·
I love the comments by illumin8 in that first one. It describes the seemingly only legitimate threat at the moment for the future of BitCoin (long term). I'm su
by easy_rider 13y ago
I love the comments by illumin8 in that first one.
It describes the seemingly only legitimate threat at the moment for the future of BitCoin (long term).
I'm suspect that governments are now probably more interested in the 'monitoring' of the system rather than governing.
In the case of Silk Road, feds seem to have done their homework when it comes to tracking down the money. But they cracked down SR, and BitCoin dipped slightly, and the crackdown actually seemed to boost confidence in the currency.
There are points to be made I think that governing entities would want to keep a system like BC alive (for a while), solely because it would be used as probable platform for money laundering. However if indeed, they are not confident that they can track down on money, or will be able to in the future, they would surely want to shut down BTC as soon as possible.
In the age of the war on terrorism, organized crime syndicates and drug cartels. One could think of many reasons to give when opting for that solution.
I might be considered a conspiracy nut: But "decentralized, anonymous, crypto" + "currency" sounds like a contradictio in terminis to me. Especially the "anonymous" part.
- zymhan 13y agoIt may sound like a contradiction to you, but that certainly doesn't mean that anonymous currency has to be a contradiction.