Oh my fucking god!!! There is a Forbes “economist” on the board of BitCoin Foundation!!!!

Tags

, , ,

For those not following the bitcoin ridiculousness, I have been talking about it for quite a while.  Why BitCoin is doomed. The quantity problem. Bitcoin doesn’t accomodate banking. Bitcoin predictions. What Bitcoin really is. Bitcoin’s fundamental false representation. Bitcoinica lawsuit.

Oh … my … Gawd!!!! A John Matonis at Forbes is on the board of the BitCoin foundation! No wonder the BitCoiners don’t have a clue how a bank works or how money works.

I am an e-Money researcher and crypto economist focused on expanding the circulation of nonpolitical digital currencies. My career has included senior influential posts at Sumitomo Bank, VISA, VeriSign, and Hushmail. Currently, I serve on the Board of Directors for the Bitcoin Foundation. I am also Editor of The Monetary Futureeconomics blog and board advisor to startups in bitcoin, gaming, mobile, and prepaid.

E-money researcher my ass. Senior influential posts? In marketing maybe.  His columns are oblivious self-satire.

Flerovium: Tangible Nanomoney

Bitcoin Obliterates ‘The State Theory Of Money’

Tradehill Exchange Adds Dark Pools Of Bitcoin Liquidity

First Bitcoin Hedge Fund Launches From Malta

Bitcoin Exchange Deal Repatriates Assets To U.S.

Government Ban On Bitcoin Would Fail Miserably

Bitcoin Casinos Release 2012 Earnings

This Matonis is a complete idiot – except when it comes to filling his pockets with your money.

I am wondering if I have found the key propagandist for the BitCoin bullshit. I think I have.

And talk about conflict of interest. This guy is writing for Forbes about the con-game that he is on the board of?

Yeah. Journalism at its finest.  But about par for the course from Forbes Magazine.

Mt. Gox – The bitcoin roach hotel of the idiotocracy

Tags

,

To call Mt. Gox an “exchange” is rather a stretch. Mt. Gox is the roach hotel of exchanges. On a real exchange, you can buy as much as you want and sell as much as you want. 

On Mt. Gox, you can buy in all you want. But when it comes time to sell out? $1,000 a day is your withdrawal limit. Oh, yeah! Let’s see. How long would it take to cash out on a one million dollar position?  It would take 2.7 years. 

As for bitcoin billionaires, it will take you geniuses 2,739 years to close out your position. There is a guy calling himself BitCoin Billionaire giving away lots of BitCoins. He probably did the math and realized he was screwed by the trolls who run Mt. Gox.

See why I call Mt. Gox a roach hotel? You can check in, but you can’t check out.

Which brings up a question. When you buy on Mt. Gox, whose BitCoins are you buying? Answer – you don’t know. My bet is that you are mostly enriching the owners of Mt. Gox. Why else would they have a $1,000 per day dollar/Euro withdrawal limit? I suppose that it could be that they wanted to make BitCoins climb higher by keeping people in the BitCoin fold.

 I suppose it’s fitting that the Winkelvoss twins are into BitCoin. They aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed, that’s for sure. Have fun in your roach hotel boys! 

Bitcoin hits N’Yawk – the New York Times’ ignoramuses gloss Bitcoin

Tags

, ,

How about those Winkelvoss twins buying up $11 million worth of bitcoins and running up the price? That is the focus of the nitwit article by the bumpkin duo of Popper and Lathman. Weawwy? Weawwya an’ twuwy? We are supposed to care about the Winkelvoss twins, and applaud the acumen shown by Popper and Latham using the cutesy name Winkelvii.

But Popper and Lathman, while saying that the Winkelvoss twins have $11MM worth without stating a conversion rate. (Over the past 3 days, that could be anywhere from 90,000 Bt to 41,000 Bt.) Then they go on to talk about some Maltese company that claims 82,000 Bt. No mention of the elephants in the room. None at all. Popper and Lathman, goobers at large, think these are big positions.

The elephants?

A bitcoin pyramid scam that stole roughly 500,000 Bitcoins from “investors”.

A bitcoin theft of 86,000 Bitcoins, possibly perpetrated by the former owner of Bitcoinica, This led to a lawsuit filed in San Francisco.

What this means is that around 5% of Bitcoins are in the hands of thieves and there is no recourse. So the biggest holders of BeanieBabyCoins are those guys.

But it gets deeper. You see, there is another aspect to the lawsuit filed by Cartmell and company against Bitcoinica LLP. Note when the venture capitalists moved in on Bitcoin competitors? That’s right. They moved in, after the SF Court accepted the lawsuit. That suggests to me that the real instigation for this Cartmell lawsuit against Bitcoinica was that Venture Capitalists wanted assurance that they would have a venue for enforcement.

We shall see if they do or not.

Bitcoin – getting press and bidding up

Tags

, , ,

Well, there it goes. Where it will stop? I think somewhere around $1000. That’s my target price on this clownish, oafish, ding-a-ling, know-nothing, beanie-babie blarney. But hey – who am I not to fleece the sheep? Somebody will, and my participation won’t change the course of this gobble-wobble hobble-brained nitwittery one iota.

I am wondering how the Flexcoin “bitcoin bank” really works. They are paying dividends (a discount payment) every month and charging rough one-percent fees for transfer out of the bank. Since you can’t loan out bitcoins as a banking transaction and create new bitcoin capital that way to expand the money supply, the only thing that makes sense to me is that Flexcoin was set up in order to trade bitcoins on its own account by borrowing the bitcoins on deposit.

But seriously, who is really driving the bitcoin runup? 2.2 million transaction volume on the charts. That represents, at a rough dollar average, a net batch price of  $53 per bitcoin. Total dollar volume of roughly $116 million. (At least according to the charts.)

Mt. Gox charges both ends of the transaction a fee of 0.6% for a take of roughly 1.2%. Let’s cut that in half to be conservative, assuming that some big trader market makers have cut themselves a better deal.

Mt. Gox has made $700,000 this month on fees at minimum. It has probably made around $1.2 million or so.

And that brings me back to Flexcoin again. Who is running that place and what do Flexcoin’s books really look like?

I’m also curious who is bribing news organizations to cover bitcoin? Do I think this latest plastering of bitcoin across the news media “just happened”? Not a chance. News media (particularly in the USA) are corrupt. It’s a shrinking sector with layoffs and loss of career paths forward. Cost of a bribe “pay for play” has gone down, way down.

The Euro’s Doom

Conventional milquetoast wisdom is that the Euro has problems because it hasn’t been willing enough to loan money through the ECB. That’s a surface view. It is technically true, from a very narrow viewpoint. But there is a technical and a cultural problem, interwoven.

Thus, the real primary lesson is none of that. The primary lesson is that a monetary union without a political union will fail because a nation without control of its currency is vulnerable to loan exploitations. Longer term players will work hard and get loans allocated to shorter-term players so that they will have buyers for their stuff. Shorter-term players exploit the longer-term players to get somewhat “free stuff”. And without control over their own currency, the shorter-term players will wind up in hock to the longer-term players.

The lesson of the Euro is that the culture of the Northern-Center exploited the culture of the Southern-Periphery by approving loans to the Southern-Periphery which were obviously going to blow up. That generated sales by the Northern-Center to the Southern-Periphery fueled by the money from the ECB.

The Southern-Periphery exploited the Northern-Center by sucking up loans that were obviously going to blow up. Those loans propped up corrupt, stupid politicians by buying the loyalty of the masses who didn’t care to look forward either.

The globe-shaking flim-flam executed by Wall Street’s big banks put stress on the system in Europe, and the house of cards began to fall.

Predictably, the Northern-Center wants to keep the balances generated by the milder flim-flam that gave loans to the Southern-Periphery in order to benefit the Northern-Center.

Predictably, the Southern-Periphery does not want to be responsible for its governance now any more than it did during the fat-loan-period. Predictably, the Southern-Periphery does not want to pay its government for the cost of the shortfall – not even when that shortfall is (Italy) obviously squirreled away in private bank accounts that are roughly double those of citizens of the Northern-Center.

The USA has its poor states. The USA has its rich states. The poor states are typically red, and net consumers of tax revenue while screeching about how terrible taxation is. The rich states are typically blue, and net payers of tax revenue while typically complaining that the wealthy don’t pay their share. (Which the wealthy definitely do not.)

But in the USA, we don’t have New York getting the Federal Reserve to make huge loans to tin-pot politicians in Mississippi so that industries can sell their goods to them. We have unequal tax allocations that just go on and on. Which keeps the union together and everyone on the same page.

So now Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal and company have to pay on loans made in a currency the government doesn’t control. In the EU, the fundamental cultural problem is what I just stepped through. But the fundamental technical problem is not that the ECB isn’t loaning enough. The fundamental technical problem is that one nation, Germany, together with France, control the ECB.

Imagine the USA if New York and Connecticut controlled the Federal Reserve, and did so mostly for its own benefit. Imagine if there was no government in Washington, D.C, just a few buildings in Delaware housing unelected bureaucrats mostly put there by New York and Connecticut. No federal taxation, only taxation by states. And the Federal reserve throws money at any corrupt politician willing to sign his or her nation-state up for a loan that can’t possibly be repaid.

Run through in your mind how THAT would turn out. Now you understand what is going on in the Euro zone.

If the USA were mired in a system where banks in New York wanted to hang onto the balances they had acquired by exploiting sales created by getting the Federal Reserve to make irresponsible loans – what would making more irresponsible loans do?

Back to normal – Econ folks like to talk global warming impact. – Japan’s methane clathrates mining

Tags

, ,

The blogosphere is humming with alarm over Japan’s methane clathrates extraction from the seabed. There is estimated to be as much carbon tied up in methane there as there is in the rest of the biosphere/atmosphere. That’s definitely something to give one pause.

I haven’t done a full analysis on the impact of burning seabed methane. To do it, I’d have to use the Global Climate Modeler (GCM) – which I have done before. It’s at least a month’s project. But I can talk about the complications and start people thinking.

The core concept is Global Warming Potential (GWP), but it’s not simple. Methane has a GWP of 21-25 (e.g. 21-25X CO2 per ton. Different sources had different values.) So burning methane lowers GWP. But 2.75 tons of CO2 are produced per ton of methane burned. So the reduction in GWP by burning methane is about 8-9 times.

But methane has an atmospheric half-life of 7 years, while CO2 has a half-life of around 70. To drop to 1% of what it was takes about 6 half-lives. (Half-life progression goes: 100%, 50%, 25%, 12.5%, 6.25%… etc.) For 90% of released methane to disappear takes a bit over 21 years. To become negligible takes 42 or so. 

On top of that, the methane clathrates in the seabed are scheduled to float to the surface over the next 50-100 years in a “big fart”. That will spike the amount of methane intensely. If just 20% of methane clathrates do that, we will suddenly have the equivalent of 5 times the total amount of CO2 warming the globe that we have now. That will cause more methane to release, and probable we will have 5-10 times the GWP total in the world that we have to day for somewhere around 150-200 years. (If we don’t burn it.) 

Let’s say we are able to burn 10% of the methane clathrates. (That’s a huge amount.) Then we will have roughly 4.55 times the amount of GW gases that we do today instead of 5X. The .05 is from the CO2 we from burning methane clathrates.

Methane clathrates have already been bubbling up. First reports of refrigerator chunks of “fizzing white ice” on the surface of the ocean were in the 1990′s.

So, it looks to me like it’s best that we mine it like made and burn it.

Our alternative is to shut down 100% of carbon burning and convert over to nuclear power and/or satellite solar power. But the way we are going, with the “party of no” in charge? Saying “No!” means that carbon will be burned.

So may as well go after it.

Dear Steve Ballmer – Wake the F#CK up! Your software sucks! Your company is f#@%ing doomed!

This is a diversion from econ topics, which is most of what I’m focused on. But I did some time tests today and my 2.53 Gigahertz CPU with 4 gigabytes of RAM takes 8.75 times longer to do basic stuff than my Nook! The Nook has 512 GB RAM and an 800 Megahertz CPU.

Yes, I ran the tests with Chrome on my laptop. I even plugged in the Ethernet cable to my laptop and took the Nook to the other end of the house were Wi-Fi signal is weakest. Same results.

Let’s do the math, shall we?

Windows 7 on a 2.53 GHz CPU / Nook-Android on an 800 MHz CPU = 3.1625 Windows 7 instructions executed per Android instruction executed.

Now let’s factor in Windows 7 35 seconds (to completely finish) / 4 seconds Android = 8.75

3.1625 Windows 7 instructions per Android * 8.75 Windows 7 seconds per Android second = 27.67 Windows 7 instructions per Android instruction. (Rough ratio)

In other words Steve Ballmer, you suck as CEO of Microsoft. Not only is the Windows operating system a hodgepodge of crap (Seriously dude, who the fuck got rid of “Search” in the file manager? Are you insane?) but the code is bloated beyond reason and sanity.

Why is Windows bloated pig-shit? We know. We know. It’s because the operating system is full of exploitable garbage that makes it a haven for viruses. WE KNOW! You are helping us! You are protecting us from those bad viruses. Those viruses that mostly only exist because you let Windows 7 turn be built as a pile of crap that  has hooks viruses can exploit.

Pull your head out of your ass Stevie-boy! Your company is going down. See that Android operating system? It is well established on the hardware price point below yours. It’s in phones. It’s in tablets. It’s better than yours in almost every respect except one. It doesn’t have all the software.

Android is eating your lunch you idiot. And all you can do is sit there making it all worse. Bloat that thing! Fuck up the UI with idiocy! Yeah! That’s your legacy.

You know what I want from a computer Steve? I want it to do things for me. That’s it. I want it to be easy to use, easy to understand. I don’t want it in my way. And I sure as fuck don’t want it to steal a month of my time every year while I wait for it to do the most simple things possible!

Computing has always been like that. Utility. That’s it. Period. Windows is a way to flush computing power down the toilet.

Morgen E. Peck – IEEE Bitcoin & cryptocurrency writer doesn’t know what he’s talking about

Maybe Morgen E. peck is a pretty nice guy. He probably is a great fella (unlike me) since he is getting published by IEEE so much. But he’s a clueless goof who doesn’t have the slightest clue what he is reporting about. It’s like reading coverage on nuclear power from Joan Rivers, hearing her exclaim about how Blue Cheese will be such a great power source. (Yes, I know that’s an insult to Joan Rivers, who wouldn’t take anybody seriously who suggested friends and relatives were good credit risks.)

Mr. Peck quite clearly doesn’t know what banking is. That is proven by this quote from his article:

When Fugger built Ripplepay in 2005 and 2006, “the goal was to create a system of debt money without artificially imposed scarcity,” he says in an e-mail. What that meant in practice was giving individuals the power to operate as their own banks, with the ability to issue credit.

That can only be true if the issuer of credit is doing so within a system in which the receiver of the loan deposits it into a bank, which in turn loans it out. You see, banks provide a unique function. They take in deposits and loan most of the money out. That is how money is created by banks. This is different from extension of credit by a private party. (Yes, banks now can borrow from the discount window at the Federal Reserve to cover themselves if they haven’t got enough deposits – but that doesn’t matter for our purposes here.)

What Mr. Morgen E. Peck is discussing in the Ripple article is not empowering individuals to act as a bank. It is acting as an unsecured creditor. It is, at best, giving real goods (like a merchant) without a lien on the goods, to a creditor, in return for a promise to pay. That is a form of money creation, but can only span the distance of one pair of parties.

That form of single-transaction money creation is already exploited to the hilt by businesses. It is called float in finance. For instance, a car manufacturer will send merchandise to dealers who then have a fairly long period of time to pay them. The dealer gets free merchandise to sell, and the more times they can turn their merchandise within their float period, the larger a wad of cash they build up. Expanding businesses make huge amounts of money this way – literally billions. Apple Computer is a master of paying its suppliers late and collecting early. Retail sales lives by float.

Mr. Peck is confusing that with a system in which unsecured parties agree to accept  each other’s IOUs as an alternative currency. So is the designer of Ripple. Ooh, boy. So another clueless software nerd didn’t bother to study anything before setting out on his elfin quest. Too bad.

Nor does the article ever discuss interest on the extension of credit. Oopsie! No motivation for anyone to loan except altruism. Oh, well. Nobody except the suckers is going to do that.

But what the article makes clear is that the Ripple system doesn’t do that. The Ripple system simply empowers individuals to put themselves on the hook for someone else’s money-lending transaction(s) outside the banking system. Money-lending, also known as loan-sharking, is the worst loan anybody can possibly make. Read up on why here and here. And that means that Ripple is simply a system for creating ruin in people’s lives. That’s the reality.

The IEEE’s nitwits are dribbling drivel about “Ripple” and Bitcoin (No, really. They aren’t kidding.)

According to the IEEE, a new ‘trust network’ called “Ripple” is the latest and greatest thing that will save this sorry world from financial ruin. Reported breathlessly, without any apparent capacity for critique, the savior of the world is going to be loans guaranteed by relatives and close friends.

Seriously – What rock does this guy who created ‘Ripple’ live under? Has he ever given a loan to a friend? Has he ever given a loan to a relative? Any financial adviser will tell you that such loans must be considered gifts. They are rarely given on the basis of ability to pay. They are given on the basis of need.

There is a reason that loan officers aren’t allowed to give loans to friends or relatives. D’oh. Come on guys! Has the IEEE lost its wits entirely?

The most laughable part of the article comes at the end,

“Imagine if you had to phone up your friends and ask them to pay up on a $100 balance. I could imagine that could create some awkwardness,” says Gothill. “But then if you can’t rely on friends to build a network, what are you going to rely on?”

Uh, yeah. No shit sherlock. A little awkwardness. You see, all your ‘friend’ has to do is hang up or throw a hissy fit or a crying jag. Trust me. I’ve been there. I am what is known as a ‘soft touch’.

But – there could be a benefit to this system. It could be a great way to expose what not-friends you really have.

The Taliban – Not even close to THE roadblock to polio eradication

According to Time, the Taliban are the only thing in the way of eradicating polio. So I will digress from economics here because I just can’t stand it.

Excuse me? For god’s sake – in the USA we can’t get nice college educated housewives to vaccinate their children. And we blame the Taliban for becoming anti-vaccination?

The CIA used vaccine work as cover to get Osama bin Laden. Then every detail of that mission got trumpeted across the world. That is what caused the Taliban’s blowback campaign against vaccination workers. Who can blame a bunch of uneducated hillbillies for becoming suspicious of all vaccination campaigns? Our drones rain fire from the sky and they can’t see them. A new generation has grown up since 9-11 who know little except that. We have not exactly tamed our own hillbillies with guns, now have we?

Re-ignition of polio by mutation of attenuated vaccine strains into virulent forms is another major problem. This is why Nigeria was almost eradicated and is no longer.

Then there is dealing with the small fraction of people who develop chronic infection and shed virus for years. That takes decades of public health which means sanitation and vaccination.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.