Texas Governor Candidate Plans To Make Texas the 'Citadel For Bitcoin' 284
Texas governor candidate Don Huffines said he is "committed to making Texas the citadel for bitcoin and has released a plan detailing the effort. "As a leader in innovation, Texas needs to lead the nation in Bitcoin & cryptocurrency adoption," it reads. "Not only by acknowledging, supporting, and promoting the industry, but by also using our natural resources and the power of our state to legitimize Bitcoin as a store of value, medium of exchange, and unit of account."
Huffines says the state must stop the federal government from "discriminating against Bitcoin holders" and "trying to shut down or limit freedom-loving Texans investing in Bitcoin." Not only does the plan call for a declaration making bitcoin a legal tender but it calls for establishing the Bitcoin & Cryptocurrency Policy Commission, "which will be tasked with identifying the utility of currencies that can be recognized as accepted Texas currency."
Do you agree with what Huffines proposes or do you think he's simply pandering for votes by capitalizing on the red-hot crypto craze?
Huffines says the state must stop the federal government from "discriminating against Bitcoin holders" and "trying to shut down or limit freedom-loving Texans investing in Bitcoin." Not only does the plan call for a declaration making bitcoin a legal tender but it calls for establishing the Bitcoin & Cryptocurrency Policy Commission, "which will be tasked with identifying the utility of currencies that can be recognized as accepted Texas currency."
Do you agree with what Huffines proposes or do you think he's simply pandering for votes by capitalizing on the red-hot crypto craze?
Texas (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm guessing he's ignoring the environmental costs, the transaction fees and the fact that it doesn't work as a currency because it can only do about 5 transactions per second in the entire world.
Apart from that his plan is very Texan and full of Bald Eagles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: Texas (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: Texas (Score:4, Informative)
Texas power grid is hardly the most important concern, but to be clear it has not "demonstrated the ability to lose power for weeks at a time". The Texas grid lost power for days ONE time, and not in metropolitan areas. Furthermore, it was not the grid but the politics that caused it.
It is amazing how hard posters on /. will wave their personal red flags.
Re: Texas (Score:4, Insightful)
As far as your claim of "ONE time" it hasnt even been a year yet. Go 5 more years without another incident before you write that one off as a fluke. For all we know this is a new normal. You have not proven another ice storm will not repeat the same cascade of events. Ice storms knock out power everywhere they occur. This particular one created an amplification due to a house of cards design.
Re: (Score:3)
Not a metropolitan area??? Im so glad the 4.5 million people left without power, heat, and water are considered so insignificant they dont rate "metropolitan" in your book. Nor the 248-750 deaths directly and indirectly attributed to it. Not to mention the $191Billion in property damage. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
As far as your claim of "ONE time" it hasnt even been a year yet. Go 5 more years without another incident before you write that one off as a fluke. For all we know this is a new normal. You have not proven another ice storm will not repeat the same cascade of events. Ice storms knock out power everywhere they occur. This particular one created an amplification due to a house of cards design.
Yes, because huge blackouts never ever happen where libs run things, no sir [wikipedia.org]. And the one in Texas at least was caused by extreme weather, while the northern one was pure 100% lib incompetence, without any extreme weather or any other vis major factors.
The outage you linked was caused by a company in "liberal run" Ohio. *gigglesnart*
The person you replied did not mention anything related to politics at all, they didn't even blame the state government, or any public policy. What is totally undeniable, is the Texas power grid did not handle a week of below freezing temperatures. How the shit did you read that as an attack on your conservative values, or whatever the dumb fuck thing triggered your oppressed conservative bullshit response?
Akron, Ohio, capi
Re: Texas (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The entire grid nearly collapsed. Texas sued for this right.
https://www.texastribune.org/2... [texastribune.org]
Re: Texas (Score:4, Informative)
False [wikipedia.org].
In addition to equipment problems, demand for electricity in Texas hit a record 69,692 megawatts (MW) on February 14 — 3,200 MW higher than the previous record set in January 2018 and 12,329 MW higher than its current capacity.
Texas power load records appear to be set in the winter, not the summer as you claim. And when your demand is 12+GW above your capacity, the only move is rolling blackouts or total grid collapse. Literally any other states than Alaska, Hawaii, and Texas have the option to pull extra energy from neighboring regions, and Alaska has a plan [akenergyauthority.org] to connect to British Columbia that they haven't yet moved on. Hawaii is just fucked geographically, and Texas is fucked because they choose to be.
And why wasn't there enough supply? Could it be that the valves on natgas pipelines were frozen, due to not being properly winterized as would be the regulatory requirement if they were in FERC's jurisdiction, or followed the recommendations that FERC gave them the last time it happened in 2011 [houstonchronicle.com]. Or 1989.
If they would have done what they were told to do the last two times this exact thing happened they would have been far more resilient. But they didn't. So roll those dice again, because I'll bet they didn't fix a fucking thing in the last 11 months, so here comes February.
Re: (Score:2)
But Freedom. Because Freedom! and FREEDOM! (but only for the wealthy)
The poor and underprivileged will need to pull their boot straps up, keep their head down, keep a big happy smile, be grateful for what you have even if is the best you can afford and still is down wind of pollutants and the water is contaminated with heavy metals. and do what the boss says and don't try to shake things up, because you will be interfering with your bosses FREEDDOMM!
And your boss really does want the freedom that a 3rd hom
Re:Texas (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
He probably also ignores that the Texas power-grid is crap.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe... but there's still no particular problem that Bitcon solves and the environmental costs of using it are staggering.
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
Re: Texas (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Problem with gold is that it's too big to squeeze through the Internet tubes. Gold's a perfect store of value but a poor medium of exchange in the digital world.
Bitcoin has the opposite problem; being a near-perfect medium of exchange but a poor store of value
Re: Texas (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Government fiat currency has a much flatter curve over time
True, but historically all fiat currencies eventually flatten their curve on the Y axis. USD has only been fiat since ~1971 when the silver window was closed.
BTC price fluctuates significantly but apart from adoption cycles seems to roughly follow the cost of energy. Definitely agree it's not stable though (which is why we price Bitcoin in dollars and not the other way around.)
Re: Texas (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and these issues are irrelevant. This is already a solved problem and Bitcoin brings nothing to the discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
Bitcoin brings nothing to the discussion.
The appeal of cryptocurrencies seems to rely on their mathematical scarcity. IE: Bitcoin cannot be 'printed' the way that central banking currencies can.
Tangible assets have this scarcity advantage as well, but they tend to lack in either portability, divisibility, or durability. The petrodollar is a great example of this.
Re: Texas (Score:3)
Re: Texas (Score:5, Insightful)
Currencies (and commodities) are unstable when they are thinly traded.
ShanghaiBill, meet the housing market. Housing market, ShanghaiBill. Hope you two get acquainted.
Crypto's value is all over the place because nobody can agree on what it's really worth. The value is entirely based on greater fool speculation and name recognition, because if you just wanted to turn your fiat into a number in a distributed blockchain database, any of the various forks of Bitcoin can accomplish exactly the same thing.
Most other traded commodities at least have a value that hinges on their being an end-use for the product. Oil will be made into petrochemicals or used as fuel, houses will be lived in, coffee beans make a nice hot cup of joe. Even then, the value still fluctuates based on supply and demand. Cryptocurrency has no such end-use; it exists only to be re-sold to the next bigger fool.
Re: Texas (Score:5, Insightful)
Right, Bitcoin's value is precisely zero. It is ignorance and speculation that causes it currently to be overvalued.
Of course, traditional currencies have similar problems but they are backed by the nations that issue them. Bitcoin is backed by literally nothing other than greed. Tomorrow it could disappear and one day it will.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Cryptocurrency has no such end-use; it exists only to be re-sold to the next bigger fool.
It does have an end use though, a decentralized currency allows circumventing laws that fiat abides by. It bypasses court orders, lawful repossession, taxes on speculation, sanctions, and attempts to stop individuals from taking their money out of a country as long as someone else can be found who is willing to put money into that country. It is still one of the quickest and cheapest ways to exchange between different fiat currencies. It facilitates money laundering. Just because many of the end use c
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Adopted and traded are different things.
Heavily traded items are often unstable due to the reason for the heavy trading.
The claim is not testable because "wore widely adopted" and "more stable" are not defined.
There is no evidence that Bitcoin is capable of being sufficiently heavily traded to become "stable" depending on the definitions.
Those who pump Bitcoin would already have fully grifted by the time such "stability" would exist, making this claim totally self-serving.
But hey, ShanghaiBill, at least you
Re: (Score:3)
The value of bitcoin is far from stable.
Currencies (and commodities) are unstable when they are thinly traded.
If/when Bitcoin is more widely adopted, it will be more stable.
So you mean never? Makes sense to me.
Stable Bitcoin is mathematically impossible (Score:5, Informative)
You are thinking of real things, which have negative feedback loops. BTC has a positive feedback loop, so the more popular it is the more wildly the price swings.
The basic design of Bitcoin, the rules of Bitcoin, is that it's inherently astable. The price can never stabilize. Mathematically, it can only shoot up until it shoots down. That's a permanent, mathematical property of the Bitcoin model.
Price is determined by demand over supply. When demand increases (people want more), the price goes up. When more X is made, the price of X goes down.
The fed increased the supply of US dollars by 24% in 2020 in order to keep the price stable, because the demand went up by almost that much. In order to have the price stable, when the demand goes up you have to increase the supply to match. Make sense?
A "selling point" of BTC is that nobody can increase the supply!
There is a fixed (and now insignificant) rate at which BTC are generated.
There is no fed to keep the price stable by increasing and decreasing supply to match demand!
That bears repeating. A key design element of BTC is that *there is no fed to keep the price stable* by increasing and decreasing supply to match demand.
An astable price, constant price swings, are inherent to the design of the system.
People buy Bitcoin because the price increases, and when it's increasing. Price goes up, people want to make money, so they buy Bitcoin. That make sense so far?
When more people want to buy more Bitcoin because the price is going up, we call that "increasing demand". Because you can;t increase production to satisfy their desire to buy BTC, the only thing that can happen is the price goes up even more! It's a cycle of price changing at an exponential rate. Specifically, it's called a "positive feedback loop".
On the other hand, when the price dips, some people get out. Which causes the price to drop further. Which causes more people to get out. That's why the price had dropped to almost half in just the last month. Same thing happened in September.
Same positive feedback loop.
Contrast USD, For USD, increased demand means the fed increases supply, pushing the price back down. That's a negative feedback and that's what causes stable prices.
Because BTC has a positive feedback loop, prices can only swing wildly. They can never, ever, be stable under any circumstance at any price other than zero. Only when nobody buys or sells BTC can the price be stable. Because of the positive feedback loop.
You might ask "what about other things that don't have a fed stabilizing the price? What about say, paper cups, or phone chargers?"
When more people want paper cups, so the price of paper cups goes up, that gives paper companies a good reason to do what? To make and sell more paper cups! More demand = higher price = higher production = lower price. A negative feedback loop, stabilizing the price. BTC explicitly prevents that from happening, it prevents increased production of BTC. Which prevents the price from stabilizing.
* they overshot slightly. 24% increase resulted in 7% of that going to inflation. The ideal increase would have been 20%.
To whom it may concern... (Score:4, Funny)
But you do you and just keep spreading your FUD.
In this context FUD, just like GM, GN, GM/GM, NGMI, WAGMI, DIAMOND HANDS, PAPER HANDS, TO THE MOON, HFSP... [youtu.be] are both in-group shibboleths for those deep into the NFT hole - and an expression of cult-like belief structures within that group.
Only true difference being that, the group being self-assembled out of individuals self-selecting as vulnerable to such influences, there is no cult leader, promising rewards for good behavior while hoarding power. Yet.
But seeing politicians jump at the opportunity to round up all those gullible people into a force that will push them, personally, upward... that may not remain so for long.
The entire thing is ripe for an evangelist to take over and establish some real world top-down hierarchies, using all those apes as cannon fodder that they are.
As for the evilquaker up there... My guess is that his house will soon be on the market.
You can tell based on the self-identification as someone who "invested" into NFTs, belief in "it will be fixed later" and toxic levels of passive aggressiveness.
He's in a hole.
Re: (Score:2)
The entire thing is ripe for an evangelist to take over and establish some real world top-down hierarchies, using all those apes as cannon fodder that they are.
Relevant citation: "All my Apes! Gone!"
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing he's ignoring the environmental costs, the transaction fees and the fact that it doesn't work as a currency because it can only do about 5 transactions per second in the entire world.
Any implementation would use an L2 solution like Lightning network, which scales up to 100k tps. But you do you and just keep spreading your FUD.
Oh you mean some highly experimental or completely unproven tech that must work reliably and securely to be of any use? Yeah, right.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All they're asking is that you get vaccinated and temporarily to wear a mask when you're in public places.
Is that so difficult to do when people are dying of this?
Re: (Score:2)
There are no such politicians who desire this, there are only the previously described politicians that use this straw man as an attack and people like you that lick it up.
Security (Score:2)
Before I form a solid opinion, a question: just how viable is it, right now or in the near future, to conduct a 51% attack on the core BTC chain?
Re: (Score:3)
Extremely non-viable, in that it'd cost a huge amount of money, and would need to be sustained, and would ultimately not earn enough money to pay for it.
A 51% attack means you're winner on average. You can't just do that once, you have to keep going and keep on out-competing everyone else. It would be an incentive for other parties with an interest in bitcoin to try to outcompete the attacker, bringing additional capacity in, which would mean the attack would need to ramp up beyond the current 51%.
But if it
Re: (Score:2)
What I was thinking of is a finer-grained manipulation of the chain, such as manipulating transfers maliciously by redirecting or changing amounts, or capturing payment information (much like credit card payments data, I guess). Not quite destroying but subverting it to your needs.
That aside, I agree that right now it's a game of global hot potato - I like that metaphor. But I do see merit in the underlying technology.
I think Erste has converted its internal accounting to use Ripple XRP, and they reported a
Re: (Score:2)
51% attack allows you to double-spend your coins. You cannot alter the amounts or redirect the transactions of other people, because those are signed. To do that you would need to break the hash or the signature algorithm in addition to doing a 51% attack.
Re: (Score:3)
Classic case of nerds forgetting the $5 wrench attack.
Re: (Score:2)
Because what I'm thinking of is not simply hacking an exchange or wallet and siphoning off the funds, but the ability to completely subvert the payment system of an entire state, to the point of redirecting legitimate payments or manipulating transferred amounts. That's not quite like the $5 wrench attack.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
If you can steal loads of money from loads of people almost at will, that does more damage to a state's credibility to maintain a system than any 51% attack would.
That's the $5 wrench attack.
Re: (Score:2)
I know why
You are a one trick pony. You will be regurgitating the same dogma-based crapola next year.
You are wrong once again, while trying so desperately to turn accurate information into your dishonesty support group. The information will never support your dogma.
Re: (Score:2)
Because you have literally no argument, and more importantly, no evidence against it.
You haven't before and you haven't now. What you're doing now is trying to make it seem like I have the burden of coming up with new arguments. This is a distraction tactic. Trying to distract people from seeing your Emperor's New Clothes. You have nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
Before I form a solid opinion, a question: just how viable is it, right now or in the near future, to conduct a 51% attack on the core BTC chain?
Google for images of "bitcoin mine" then get back to us.
(popcorn)
Re:Security (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That was my gut feeling as well, except I was thinking of just subverting the system by redirecting or falsifying transactions.
Re: (Score:2)
Before I form a solid opinion, a question: just how viable is it, right now or in the near future, to conduct a 51% attack on the core BTC chain?
Unclear. There is a strong concentration in BTC on a small number of entities. It is quite possible that they can already do a 51% attack at any time, but chose not to as the morons keep flowing in. As BTC is not regulated, nobody besides the potential attackers really knows.
He's a freedom loving Texan (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:He's a freedom loving Texan (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Do you mean to make their payments system as stable as their electricity system?
Of course. Can't have the federal gov'ment tell US Texans what to do; just send money when we fuck up...
Re: (Score:2)
Buy your backup generator now (Score:5, Insightful)
Owing to the fragility of Texas' power grid, if you rely on an external source to keep you alive such as a ventilator, better get your backup generator now. If you thought the hundreds of deaths from last February's power outage was bad, just wait until power sucking bitcoin miners come onboard.
Re: (Score:2)
Who do you think owns ventilators that keep people alive? Hospitals? Do you think hospitals do not have backup generators? Are you an idiot?
Re: (Score:2)
Bitcoin mining is nearing its end, as there are only about 2 million left to mine (though I am unsure actually how current that number is, it can only get smaller over time). Once they have all been mined, one significant incentive to participate in the system will vanish. It will be interesting to see what happens to the value of bitcoin at that point. My guess is it will tank, but really that is just a guess.
Re: (Score:2)
Bitcoin won't do it, and it won't get done, because Texas is a shit show. I know a lot of good people in Texas, poor fuckers
Re: (Score:3)
this bitcoin argument is like immigration, the politician thinks it is a way to get elected. There is no reason to believe that anything would become of it regardless.
Texas has one of the most ineffective and corrupt state governments in the nation. That has always been true. This is not about actually making Texas anything, it's about talking about it.
Texas is not a shit show, but its government is. Texas history is absolutely appalling.
Re: (Score:2)
Texas is not a shit show, but its government is. Texas history is absolutely appalling.
Not all of that appalling history relates to government actions. And there's also a whole lot of willful support of those bad government acts. I stand by my statement.
Re: (Score:2)
That begs the question: Why do they not get out?
Legal tender (Score:3)
So does that mean that I will have to accept bitcoin as payment ... this is usually what is meant by "Legal tender" ?
Re:Legal tender (Score:5, Informative)
There is a difference between what one accepts as currency, versus "legal tender for all debts, public and private". The reason for the "legal tender for all debts, public and private" dates back to companies who only paid in scrip, and only would allow debts to be paid back in their scrip. Even if someone was able to get rich by other means, they had to find a way to convert their currency to company scrip to pay back what was owed. With the "legal tender for all debts, public and private" in place, this gets rid of that whole racket completely.
Bitcoin is too old to be a good currency for everyday transactions. The Lightning Network helps, but people don't want a condom purchase to be forever on the blockchain for all to see. What is needed is a "Bitcoin 2.0" which combines the best of CPU/GPU mining, anonymity like Monero, low exchange fees, a blockchain that can be pared down so transactions can drop off of it, without fear of being double-spent, and the ability to do microtransactions with relatively small amounts of energy used. If something comes along that can beat PayPal, it might just be what is needed for a true cryptocurrency.
Re:Legal tender (Score:5, Insightful)
Mining needs to go away. As well as being an environmental disaster, it favours those who get in early and those who have capital to buy mining equipment. It also incentivises corruption, e.g. subsidised energy costs to make mining more profitable.
If you make transaction fees lower then the inventive to provide computing power to validate them goes away, and the time taken for transactions to process goes up.
Re: (Score:2)
Seems like a perfect fit for Texas, then.
Re: (Score:2)
> If you make transaction fees lower then the inventive to provide computing power to validate them goes away, and the time taken for transactions to process goes up.
Could (in this new world of coin we're discussing) transaction fees be based on time? Longer transactions cost more, short ones less. Potentially, micropayments don't need the entire blockchain to agree before they're allowed, so could have smaller fees. Big transactions need more agreement, so cost more (or some such).
Either way, Bitcoin ha
Re: (Score:3)
The way it works at the moment is the higher the transaction fee the faster the payment is processed.
Ideally transactions should be free, or extremely low cost, but because crypto currencies only work because there is a significant cost associated with validating them.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and if mining went away then all interest in such currencies would also go away. That's exactly what is needed.
If you can convert scalable expenses into profit, then you get wealthy without doing anything. That is the entire formula for Bitcoin, it is the mining that is the scalable expense and the Bitcoin value that represents the profit. Bitcoin itself is zero-sum, there is no tangible asset produced only the perceived value of a mined "coin". Without mining, cryptocurrencies are nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
hat is needed is a "Bitcoin 2.0" which combines the best of CPU/GPU mining, anonymity like Monero, low exchange fees, a blockchain that can be pared down so transactions can drop off of it, without fear of being double-spent, and the ability to do microtransactions with relatively small amounts of energy used.
sounds like cash to me. Whats wrong with cash?
Re: (Score:2)
If something comes along that can beat PayPal, it might just be what is needed for a true cryptocurrency.
A true cryptocurrency that could "beat PayPal" and challenge the traditional banking industry would be one issued and backed 1:1 against fiat, by the federal government. Granted, you wouldn't be able to mine it or play your greater fool imaginary stock trading games anymore, but those of us who still get paid in fiat (as in, pretty much everyone), the killer app is being able to send/receive money without having to buy/sell it on some sketchy exchange first. It's why we don't use Euros or Pounds Stirling
Re: (Score:2)
Funny how rare it is to find true perspective in this discussion. It's not as though mankind needs to invent currency again, and I love how the standard to consider is PayPal, a true sleeze of a company that exists purely because it could skirt banking regulations. A classic goal of Bitcoin believers.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's El Salvador that's trying this and it's not going as well as the president hoped. Even the World bank seems to be suggesting they stop it.
Texas... (Score:2)
Texas seems like an ideal match for bitcoin. Not just for consuming, but for "producing" too, with their resilient power grid! Go bitcoin! (freedom to launder our money) Down with vaccines! (freedom for our own bodies) Down with abortions! (eh.. on second thought screw our bodies, let's go with freedom for our foetuses)
1.35 trillion details. (Score:2, Interesting)
Earlier this week the w.p. posted an article about crypto liising 1.35 trillion dollars in a week. Details .. details .. ..
not mentioning that texas can't keep it's grid up during winter and now they want to add more load on it
bravo bravo .. how bright ..
Re: (Score:2)
Based on my experience, some crypto fanatic will come yelling that somehow it's not reasonable to look at BTC over the last 3 months, or that the USD is worse because while it didn't lose as much, at least the government didn't cause BTC, or, the absolutely batshit one, that the BTC is perfectly stable it's the USD that is volatile.
Or alternatively it's only unstable because some unreasonable people are speculating and we should ignore them and focus on the 'inherent value', whatever that is supposed to be,
Can't gamble or buy hard liquor on Sundays (Score:5, Informative)
He be in the tank for btc but he's no Matt Gaetz. (Score:2)
Of course he is (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you agree with what Huffines proposes or do you think he's simply pandering for votes by capitalizing on the red-hot crypto craze?
Of course he's pandering. This is the same asshole that has billboards plastered all along my drive home, with lines like "Stop giving ILLEGALS your money!" and "Eliminate property taxes!" with all of them done in black background, with white base text and red emphasis, while he looms behind it all. It's classic scaremongering design, and it's pure pander towards a blindingly obvious demographic. I'm not surprised he's glommed on to this shit too.
The only reason he even has a remotely viable chance is because of extensive gerrymandering, the same kind that has Austin "represented" in state congress entirely by GOP members. Texas is far more purple than many realize, but it sure as hell isn't represented thanks to such corruption.
Fuck Huffines and everything about him.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't see how gerrymandering would help him in a state governor's race. What am I missing? Maybe the new restrictions to disenfranchise some segments of the pop.?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, restrictions and the like. I was thinking gerrymandering resulting in an extremely one-sided state congress, which has been doing everything it can to further tilt the playing field through changes in election laws and rules (and of course, lots more gerrymandering [texastribune.org]). This has been a work in progress for many years; it's not new. What's new is the rapidly accelerated pace and shear boldness [texastribune.org] of the most recent
Re: (Score:2)
Then you don't understand what gerrymandering is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think "we need to keep the prices down" is a good argument for allowing harmful worker exploitation, even if the workers are desperate enough to accept it. We have a moral duty to protect each other from exploitation, and the morally correct answer is to address the desperation (not take advantage of it).
Yes, if these illegal immigrants were either deported or naturalized (and given all the worker protection benefits of citizenship), then the cost of construction would go up. Though, there would a
Poor timing (Score:4, Insightful)
There aren't enough articles... (Score:5, Funny)
...and comments about bitcoin, cryptocurrencies, etc. on Slashdot & the community simply aren't stepping up to fill the void. Please, do your bit (no pun intended) & use algorithms to generate more articles & comments. Here's a handy Markov chain generator to help you: http://babel-generator.herokua... [herokuapp.com]
Decentralised on an agriculturalist will always be a part of mankind. Currency is the most fundamental postulate of mankind; some to agronomists and others to embarkation. an abundance of deconcentrate lies in the area of semiotics along with the field of theory of knowledge. Due to the fact that cryptology countenances increasing salvers, human life should attenuate currency immediately.
As I have learned in my reality class, human society will always intensify decentralise. While the same orbital may produce two different neurons of the study of philosophy, the plasma counteracts a gamma ray. Gravity catalyzes pendulums with authorizations to react. Simulation by community is not the only thing an orbital spins; it also emits brains on the dictator at cryptanalytics. Since speculations are provoked by decentralize, superfluously but superfluously commanding amygdalas relent equally for currency. The more plethora inaugurates allocutions which explain the exposition, the sooner a convulsion can perilously be grout.
A performance of inducement, often to reprobates, might preclude cryptanalysis. As a result of disseminating concessions, currency which should atrociously be the quarrel with the axiom can be more ingeniously excommunicated. Additionally, as I have learned in my semiotics class, human life will always pilfer cryptanalytics. In my experience, none of the propagandists at my casuistry convulse and depreciate the interlopers involved. In any case, knowing that zenith advances or is irreverent yet somehow eternal, most of the contradictions of our personal assassin by the confluence we abandon acquiesce and append or pledge prisons. Our personal account on the demolisher we sanction depletes capstone. a specious decentralise may be the accession for our personal retort to the authentication we dictate as well. Masochism preaches intercessions, not an egotistically unsophisticated disruption. In my literature class, some of the reprovers to my orator presume edification but divulge ateliers at many of the domains. Cryptography which will decently be the allegation changes a dearth of currency.
A adjuration, typically of dislocation, may be fetishistic but not assented at cryptography. If fetid inquiries yield, those in question which diverge whine to the same extent for cryptography. Additionally, the salver on sanctions, normally by irascibility, can probe decentralize. In my experience, just about all of the precincts with our personal celebration of the arrangement we edify subjugate quibble. The inspection that shrieks might, nonetheless, be startlingly and gaudily precarious. In my semantics class, none of the orations to my dictum belittle scenarios. Subsequently, admiration is expressly or efficaciously circumspect or contravenes oratory on our personal reprimand at the aggregation we mesmerize. a pallid promulgation will peripatetically be intensification of the demolisher, not the analysis. My appetite should be a rightfully tranquil denigration. The more reprobates quibble but postulate rancor, the less authorizations which sequester appetites and solicit virtual utterances by propinquity provoke the exposition.
Decentralised has not, and undoubtedly never will be compassionate yet somehow judicious. Still yet, armed with the knowledge that a denouncement may be militiaman, all of the sophists with our personal agriculturalist for the amygdala we annotate renege. Because sophists for agronomists are delineated on decentralised, the audaciously or confrontationally scintillating cryptography can be more indispensably affirmed. Cryptanalysis to the report has not, and doubtless never will be discrepant in the extent to which we stipulate most of the assassins. Deconcentrate is egotistic because of its substantiated dictators.
Who is Don Huffines? (Score:5, Informative)
Jan 11 Republican PRIMARY Poll [newsweek.com]:
1. Allen West: 38.4%
2. Greg Abbott: 32.5% (incumbent)
3. Ricky Lynn Perry: 12.1%
4. Don Huffines: 5.0%
He has about as much support as the percentage of people who have "No Opinion" on the "way Congress is handling its job." [gallup.com]
Just play roulette instead (Score:2)
Wouldn't it make more sense to open casinos everywhere in Texas instead? Just fill them full of roulette wheels, which pretty much approximates the entire cryptocurrency ecosystem. Some players win, some players lose, and the state of Texas takes its cut instead of miners taking their fees.
It would be a lot more energy efficient, and frankly a lot more honest.
Re: (Score:2)
Wisconsin (Score:5, Insightful)
With Bitcoin you wont even get the road.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Or that Trump was going to "build the wall" and his supporters contributed to a charity to fund it? Why even look for a more obscure example, the GOP grifts continually in plain sight.
I think you should offer a filter (Score:2)
Do you agree with what Huffines proposes or do you think he's simply pandering for votes by capitalizing on the red-hot crypto craze?
I think Slashdot should just, finally, offer a filter for cryptocurrency stories. But of couse we all know that won't happen, since this is just another form of Slashvertisement.
Re: (Score:2)
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If we had a filter for crypto-bro pump and dump stories we'd only see about three stories a week on the front page.
I'm glad we moved out of there (Score:2)
Constitution forbids this (Score:3)
Section 10 of the US constitution explicitly reserves this right to the federal government. Obviously, it doesn't mention cryptocurrency but the intention of the author's was to prevent splintered currencies.
Re: (Score:3)
Some "Conservatives" seem to think that the Constitution is only "Freedom of Speech" and the Second Amendment.
Stupid people gonna stupid.
Re: Constitution forbids this (Score:2)
Thanks, that is good to know. It clarifies exactly which this is a problem. Texas does not have the constitutional authority to do what he is saying:
...power of our state to legitimize Bitcoin as a store of value, medium of exchange, and unit of account.
I think federal courts would not uphold banks holding Bitcoin, or Texas laws requiring merchants to accept bitcoin. But, what if Texas decided to say that merchants must accept Pesos and that banks could report accounts in Pesos or Euros -- since I imagine that the Fed agrees that is currency. Would that be ok? It seems like it would conflict with a lot of banking laws. But maybe if Texas said banks could do it both ways - would that be ok? Would the FDIC insured a bank account held in Pesos or Euros?
How Will They Make This Cost Effective for Miners? (Score:2)
Didn't people get crazy high electric bills during peak demand when they had that really bad storm a while ago? This seems like the worst possible kind of volatility for bitcoin miners... gets too cold or too hot one day and your utilities suddenly add a couple extra 0s to your bill.
Huffines is a non-factor (Score:3)
Haven for money launderers and crooks (Score:5, Informative)
Crooks, tax dodgers, drug runners, bent politicians are the ones salivating at a chance to make an end run around federal banking regulations. They imagine crypto to be totally untraceable anonymous currency. They are wrong in many fronts.
Only the connection between their real identity and their crypto wallet is anonymous. And all it takes is one transaction with someone else who can identify you and and the wallet to rat on you, ALL your transactions are public. When you use crypto to pay for some real world goods or services, there is potential for you to be identified. With enough data they will find you.
If it really truly anonymous, by mixing enough wallets together and enough transactions through these wallets to make it truly anonymous, then it is just as safe as stuffing mattress with cash. One compromise of your system, robbed at gun point to transfer money, boom, it is gone and no one can find it for you. And law enforcement is not going to be thrilled to help you find the thieves.
The crooks want lots and lots of legitimate wallets to send their money laundering operation going. They would even pay lots of premium for money laundering. Moves like Texas or that country helps the crooks/tax dodgers and they are the ones influencing and lobbying for expanding crypto into masses.
Texas, USA's El Salvador ? (Score:2)
How does it go again? (Score:2)
Oh yes...
"Planet-incinerating Ponzi grifters" (jwz [twitter.com])
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes a New York Post citation poking a Republican hot button. You never disappoint.