Having it alone is not enough to manipulate the markets, you have to move it through exchanges. I guess it's not impossible, just tricky. I think when the rich sell their crypto, they don't do it on the open exchange as they don't want to the price to move when they do so.
Odds are they helped develop and encourage it's adoption.
Results of crypto
1. One of the primary attack vectors on gold, one of the main enemies of the dollar and federal reserve.
2. Mass speculation and greed in crypto has led to it's adoption, which has led to the talk that we need a digital currency for several reasons. Results of a fully digital currency? Every dollar is tracked, no need for the $600 bank reporting requirement to catch the RICH
3. I still can't see the developer of Bitcoin not being a large group associated with government. Who could resist the temptation to be one of the richest people in the world from your creation, a group who is utilizing it for another purpose.
I mean, of course? It seems like it could be a pretty useful tool for open-source intelligence gathering.
> "If it came out (and was proven) that Bitcoin was created by the CIA, it wouldn’t significantly diminish my bullishness. The only thing it would change is my view of Satoshi. But, crucially, Satoshi is not Bitcoin. That connection was severed years ago," tweeted Spencer Schiff, who is a Bitcoin promoter and the son of stock broker and anti-crypto advocate Peter Schiff.
Honestly, I'd be surprised if anything would diminish the bullishness of a "Bitcoin promoter." They often give off this weird power of positive thinking vibe where they treat their desired goal as an axiom. Isn't the joke that they'll respond "_____ is good for Bitcoin" in response to pretty much anything, good or bad?
Plus a perfect way to fund spies and dissidents. Bank transfers too easy to track, cash incriminating, handing over a public key for a one-off account trivial.
> Plus a perfect way to fund spies and dissidents. Bank transfers too easy to track, cash incriminating, handing over a public key for a one-off account trivial.
No? The reasons Bitcoin is useful for open-source intelligence are the exact same reasons why it would be a terrible choice for those use cases. I hope the the CIA isn't dumb enough to have their spies use cryptocurrency that leaves a public record the Chinese Ministry of State Security can trace, now or in the future.
Bitcoin does not provide privacy, since any opsec failure, now or in the future, will compromise it.
What’s a one-off address? It somehow got coins attached to it, and they came from somewhere, which is shown on the ledger. And whoever receives the coins will eventually want to spend them, which will also be shown in the ledger.
Funding spies and dissidents has never been a challenge. The challenge is it's very difficult for them to spend more money than they officially earn without drawing the attention of their home government's counterintel operations. No currency can solve this because it isn't the transfer of currency that gives you away. It's the receipt of whatever you purchased.
> Isn't the joke that they'll respond "_____ is good for Bitcoin" in response to pretty much anything, good or bad?
I filled in the best and worst things I could think of and the result is "false" for the best but "true" for the worst. I picked post-scarcity for "best". I'll leave "worst" as an exercise for the reader.
My hypothesis is that bitcoin was invented by a contractor at the CIA/NSA/etc.
Tons of security/crypto nerds who are strongly discouraged from doing outside projects, and often too much spare time.
Also explains why the $55 billion in bitcoins is sitting there: their contracts forbid them from outside projects, and their employers are allowed to keep any proceeds from illicit projects.
I’m sure B. Allen would love $55bil in bitcoin.
I mean if you look at the skill set necessary to the create bitcoin, and who possesss that skill set, the US intelligence establishment seems like a good candidate.
Report to POTUS on foreign adversaries, overthrow democratically-elected leaders, steal information, and drone American teenagers and innocent families. They're not a law-enforcement organization.
Edit: They're an international paramilitary insurgent branch of the Executive Branch.
I’m not that surprised that CIA is deep into the ecosystem.
But please guys, the conspiracy of “CIA created Bitcoin”? Seriously?
Next phase is gonna be “CIA created Bitcoin to control novax”
34 comments
[ 3.8 ms ] story [ 83.3 ms ] threadAt best it's regurgitated news that you should already be aware of from other more direct sources. At worse it's this.
Results of crypto 1. One of the primary attack vectors on gold, one of the main enemies of the dollar and federal reserve.
2. Mass speculation and greed in crypto has led to it's adoption, which has led to the talk that we need a digital currency for several reasons. Results of a fully digital currency? Every dollar is tracked, no need for the $600 bank reporting requirement to catch the RICH
3. I still can't see the developer of Bitcoin not being a large group associated with government. Who could resist the temptation to be one of the richest people in the world from your creation, a group who is utilizing it for another purpose.
> "If it came out (and was proven) that Bitcoin was created by the CIA, it wouldn’t significantly diminish my bullishness. The only thing it would change is my view of Satoshi. But, crucially, Satoshi is not Bitcoin. That connection was severed years ago," tweeted Spencer Schiff, who is a Bitcoin promoter and the son of stock broker and anti-crypto advocate Peter Schiff.
Honestly, I'd be surprised if anything would diminish the bullishness of a "Bitcoin promoter." They often give off this weird power of positive thinking vibe where they treat their desired goal as an axiom. Isn't the joke that they'll respond "_____ is good for Bitcoin" in response to pretty much anything, good or bad?
No? The reasons Bitcoin is useful for open-source intelligence are the exact same reasons why it would be a terrible choice for those use cases. I hope the the CIA isn't dumb enough to have their spies use cryptocurrency that leaves a public record the Chinese Ministry of State Security can trace, now or in the future.
Bitcoin does not provide privacy, since any opsec failure, now or in the future, will compromise it.
Then you exfiltrate your spy and they have their goodies safely awaiting them.
I filled in the best and worst things I could think of and the result is "false" for the best but "true" for the worst. I picked post-scarcity for "best". I'll leave "worst" as an exercise for the reader.
Tons of security/crypto nerds who are strongly discouraged from doing outside projects, and often too much spare time.
Also explains why the $55 billion in bitcoins is sitting there: their contracts forbid them from outside projects, and their employers are allowed to keep any proceeds from illicit projects.
I’m sure B. Allen would love $55bil in bitcoin.
I mean if you look at the skill set necessary to the create bitcoin, and who possesss that skill set, the US intelligence establishment seems like a good candidate.
Totally could imagine Satoshi working at the NSA :)
Edit: They're an international paramilitary insurgent branch of the Executive Branch.
It was at this point that the person or people known as Satoshi stopped communicating.