PSA: Attack on BTC is ongoing (reddit.com)

If y’all check the other sub, the narrative is that this was only the first step. Bitcoin has a difficulty adjustment coming up (~1800 blocks when I checked last night), and that’s when they’re hoping to “strike” and send BTC into a “death spiral.” (Using their language here.) Remember that Ver moved a huge sum of BTC to an exchange recently, but didn’t sell. Seemed puzzling at the time, but I’m wondering if he’s waiting for that difficulty adjustment to try and influence the price. Just a…

Bitcoin

ICYMI: Another attack on bitcoin coming from Congress (bill would ban “aggregated transactions,” attempts to make “concealment” of data a crime, proposes freezing bank accounts, and would require individual users of “digital currencies” to be regulated to the same level as banks).

The whole text of their proposal: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1241/text

If in the U.S.: Write your representatives to oppose S.1241: https://democracy.io/

Write to Administration to demand a veto of S.1241 or anything like it if it were ever to reach the White House for signature or veto: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

An opposition letter to S.1241 has been developed by the Bitcoin Foundation, but I don't think it goes far enough. I think any organizational opposition letter (e.g. from EFF, Bitcoin Foundation, or other org) should call for total and absolute death by fire of S.1241 or anything like it. (See second season of Stranger Things if you have any question about what I mean about death by fire.) https://bitcoinfoundation.org/redraft-%c2%a71241-combating-money-laundering-act-2017/

(The following is my recent letter over the weekend sent to the U.S. Administration regarding S.1241, requesting that a position be taken on the bill to announce that a veto would be provided if the legislation were to be advanced. Please feel free to copy and paste from it or develop your own.)


This is regarding S.1241 – the so-called "Combating Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing, and Counterfeiting Act of 2017."

This proposal is a sick joke. Its proponents have given a fancy name to something that simply put, is designed to attack the American worker and would do absolutely zero in relation to what the title implies.

The bill would brings cryptocurrencies under the umbrella of civil forfeiture. It also would require the DHS to provide, within 18 months of ratification, a report on strategies to detect cryptocurrencies at border crossings, which would be impossible since there is no technology that can do that.

I can put a bitcoin on a paper wallet or memorize seed words in my brain that represent a whole wallet and cross borders physically or virtually, then later reproducing the wallet at will. This law would attempt to prohibit me from exercising my memory to access my resources across borders, a ridiculous approach to finance. Finance is of course cross-border and private.

Section 13 of the proposed Act is just one particularly vicious aspect of it, constituting nothing less than an attack upon the American worker.

Sec. 13 of S.1241 seeks to define anyone issuing, redeeming, or cashing bitcoin as a financial institution, requiring them to comply with the Bank Secrecy Act, 31 U.S.C. §5312 and requiring INDIVIDUALS AND SMALL BUSINESSES to adopt the same formal reporting procedures as financial institutions for the purpose of reporting suspicious financial transactions.

In effect this Act would treat INDIVIDUALS as though they were BANKS and impose the same financial licensing and reporting obligations on them.

Please communicate to those who are pushing S.1241 forward that it will get nothing but a Veto.

Thank you.

submitted by /u/pcvcolin
[link] [comments]
Bitcoin

Exposed: How Bankers are trying to centralize and highjack Bitcoin by buying “supporters” and promoters (like OpenBazaar team) for the B2X (S2X/NYA) attack on Bitcoin.

These guys have very deep pockets.

Regarding OpenBazaar:

B2X (S2X/NYA) is nothing more than an open attack on Bitcoin, not an "upgrade" as they want to sell it. This attack has no 'consensus', at all. It was "agreed" by a bunch of miners and corporations behind closed doors, with no community nor developers support. Only miners and a few millionaires that stand to profit from the B2X attack support it. The vast majority of the Bitcoin community is totally against this attack on Bitcoin. Most of those companies are under DCG group:

Every bitcoiner should know about what DCG (Digital Currency Group) is, and call out publicly these people that are working for the Corporations/Bankers against Bitcoin:

Tony Gallippi, Jamie Dimon, Mike Belsche, Ryan X Charles, Brian Hoffman-Sam Patterson-Chris Pacia (and all OB1 team), Gavin Andresen, Jeff Garzik, Mike Hearn, Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, John Mcaffe, Craig Wright, Barry Silbert, Larry Summers, Blythe Masters, Stephen Pair, Erik Voorhees, Vinny Lingham, Olivier Janssens and Brian Armstrong.

Once people are informed, they won't be fooled (like all the poor guys at r/btc) and will follow Bitcoin instead of Bizcoin2x or Bcash or any other centralized altcoin they come up with disguised as Bitcoin.

DCG (Digital Currency Group) is the company spearheading the Segwit2x movement. The CEO of DCG is Barry Silbert, a former investment banker, and Mastercard is an investor in DCG.

Let's have a look at the people that control DCG:

http://dcg.co/who-we-are/

Three board members are listed, and one Board "Advisor." Three of the four Members/advisors are particularly interesting:

Glenn Hutchins: Former Advisor to President Clinton. Hutchins sits on the board of The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where he was reelected as a Class B director for a three-year term ending December 31, 2018. Yes, you read that correctly, currently sitting board member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Barry Silbert: CEO of DCG (Digital Currency Group, funded by Mastercard) who is also an Ex investment Banker at (Houlihan Lokey)

And then there's the "Board Advisor,"

Lawrence H. Summers:

"Chief Economist at the World Bank from 1991 to 1993. In 1993, Summers was appointed Undersecretary for International Affairs of the United States Department of the Treasury under the Clinton Administration. In 1995, he was promoted to Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin. In 1999, he succeeded Rubin as Secretary of the Treasury. While working for the Clinton administration Summers played a leading role in the American response to the 1994 economic crisis in Mexico, the 1997 Asian financial crisis, and the Russian financial crisis. He was also influential in the American advised privatization of the economies of the post-Soviet states, and in the deregulation of the U.S financial system, including the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Summers

Seriously….The segwit2x deal is being pushed through by a Company funded by Mastercard, Whose CEO Barry Silbert is ex investment banker, and the Board Members of DCG include a currently sitting member of the Board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and the Ex chief Economist for the World Bank and a guy responsible for the removal of Glass Steagall.

It's fair to call these guys "bankers" right?

So that's the Board of DCG. They're spearheading the Segwit2x movement. As far as who is responsible for development, my research led me to "Bitgo". I checked the "Money Map" https://i.redd.it/15auzwkq3hiz.png And sure enough, DCG is an investor in Bitgo.

(BTW, make sure you take a good look take a look at the money map and bookmark it for reference later, ^ it is really helpful.)

"Currently, development is being overseen by bitcoin security startup BitGo, with help from other developers including Bloq co-founder Jeff Garzik."

https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-segwit2x-scaling-proposal-miners-offer-optimistic-outlook/

So Bitgo is overseeing development of Segwit2x with Jeff Garzick. Bitgo has a product/service that basically facilitates transactions and supposedly prevents double spending. It seems like their main selling point is that they insert themselves as middlemen to ensure Double spending doesn't happen, and if it does, they take the hit, of course for a fee, so it sounds sort of like the buyer protection paypal gives you:

"Using the above multi-signature security model, BitGo can guarantee that transactions cannot be double spent. When BitGo co-signs a BitGo Instant transaction, BitGo takes on a financial obligation and issues a cryptographically signed guarantee on the transaction. The recipient of a BitGo Instant transaction can rest assured that in any event where the transaction is not ultimately confirmed in the blockchain, and loses money as a result, they can file a claim and will be compensated in full by BitGo."

Source: https://www.bitgo.com/solutions

So basically, they insert themselves as middlemen, guarantee your transaction gets confirmed and take a fee. What do we need this for though when we have a working blockchain that confirms payments in the next block already? 0-conf is safe when blocks aren't full and one confirmation should really be good enough for almost anyone on the most POW chain. So if we have a fully functional blockchain, there isn't much of a need for this service is there? They're selling protection against "The transaction not being confirmed in the Blockchain" but why wouldn't the transaction be getting confirmed in the blockchain? Every transaction should be getting confirmed, that's how Bitcoin works. So in what situation does "protection against the transaction not being confirmed in the blockchain" have value?

Is it possible that the Central Bankers that control development of Segwit2x plan to restrict block size to benefit their business model just like our good friends over at Blockstream attempted to do, although unsuccessfully as they were not able to deliver a working L2 in time?

It looks like Blockstream was an attempted corporate takeover to restrict block size and push people onto their L2, essentially stealing business away from miners. They seem to have failed, but now it almost seems like the Segwit2x might be a culmination of a very similar problem.

Also worth noting these two things, pointed out by /u/Adrian-x:

  1. MasterCard made this statement before investing in DCG and Blockstream. (Very evident at 2:50 – enemy of digital cash watch the whole thing.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tu2mofrhw58

  2. Blockstream is part of the DCG portfolio and the day after the the NYA Barry personal thanked Adam Back for his assistant in putting the agreement together. https://twitter.com/barrysilbert/status/867706595102388224

So segwit2x takes power away from core, but then gives it to guess who…Mastercard and central bankers.

So, to recap:

  • DCG's Board of Directors and Advisors is almost entirely made up of Central Bankers including one currently sitting Member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and another who was Chief Economist at the World Bank.

  • The CEO of the company spearheading the Segwit2x movement (Barry Silbert) is an ex investment banker at Houlihan Lokey. Also, Mastercard is an investor in the company DCG, which Barry Silbert is the CEO of.

  • The company overseeing development on Segwit2x, Bitgo, has a product/service that seems to only have utility if transacting on chain and using 0-Conf is inefficient or unreliable.

  • Segwit2x takes power over Bitcoin development from core, but then literally gives it to central bankers and Mastercard. If segwit2x goes through, BTC development will quite literally be controlled by central bankers and a currently serving member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Did we just spend so much time fighting and bickering with core that we totally missed the REAL takeover of Bitcoin, happening right before our eyes, by the likes of currently serving Federal Reserve Bank of New York Board Members?

Edit: Formatting.

submitted by /u/readish
[link] [comments]
Bitcoin