Knuckleheads.......
-
Friend of mine posted this on Facebook today.
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/03/05/bitcoin-firm-ceo-found-dead-in-suspected-suicide/
-
@ajstringham Can't wait to hear the results of that one...
Hopefully it won't be anything like the the 'results' of this one: http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/man-found-decapitated-police-suspect-suicide/nYNZh/
-
@Bud said:
@ajstringham Can't wait to hear the results of that one...
Hopefully it won't be anything like the the 'results' of this one: http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/man-found-decapitated-police-suspect-suicide/nYNZh/
What?? That...just...what?!?!?!
-
shakes head
-
@Dashrender About every other day for the past few weeks I've seen articles about another exchange vanishing and people losing their investments in real dollars when the exchange for bitcoins vanishes. Like I said, I don't have a problem with the idea, but it's just not solid or regulated and I just couldn't bring myself to want to invest in it. You have no security in it if they firm goes belly up, like you do with FDIC insurance.
-
Nothing gets accomplished without some level of risk taken. It may be volatile, but isn't that the nature of something that is truly free? Regulation may sterilize the market for investor's purposes, but that eliminates the "free" nature of it and just makes it another government institution. Any great move/paradigm shift has winners and losers. The winners (speaking of investors here) take the same risk as the losers, but with 1 part savvy and 3 parts blind luck, someone comes out on top and some get beat up. That's the beauty of the true free-market. It's vicious, but tenacity pays off. In my opinion, the last thing we need is more regulation of anything. Those who are willing to sacrifice freedom in exchange for security will end up with neither, but instead, tyranny.
-
@art_of_shred Does that make someone free then to steal and not be subject to repercussions? That could be why that Bitcoin firm ceo was found dead? Commerce requires rules.
-
@Bill-Kindle Many argue that the only rules needing to be in effect for real commerce are factors like "the invisible hand" of supply/demand, etc. Others say everything needs to be moderated and controlled. What's worse? Anarchy or tyranny? Many will argue for either side. In the commerce side, I agree some regulation does need to be in place but the problem has always been who would enforce it? Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is a system where there is no winning. The best of solutions eventually fail or crumble. There is no fix. Just patches.
-
Of course this doesn't make it OK to steel. But really stealing has nothing to do with commerce either (other than drive up prices to compensate for it).
The CEO of the exchange that happened to sell BitCoin might be dead because they felt personally liable for the situation they allowed their company to be in by not being secure enough to keep the hacker at bay. Really we'll probably never know. -
It's a tough call, but don't we already have laws in place about stealing and murder?
