The Budapest Memorandum is not a treaty. In any case, the US has met it's obligations under the agreement.

The only "aid" that the US is obligated to provide Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances is to seek UN Security Council action in the event that Ukraine is attacked (or threatened) with nuclear weapons.

The agreement is a one page document written in plain language. It's hard to imagine anyone who's read it would interpret it as you do.

Seems to me they are providing a very specialized form of computing power - one that Google's current cloud services don't offer. I guess Google could have built this service themselves, but I'm sure it was more cost-effective to simply acquire an existing service and integrate it into their platform. Put another way, Zync just got Borged. (much to the delight of Zync's owners I'm sure)

Ah, the turning point in my life. I remember it clearly. It all started on September 7, 2001.

That may be true generally, but unfortunately they appear to be 100% competent at at least one thing: cashing the blank check Congress has given them.

So a service provider gathering data on the way its customers use the service for marketing purposes (which the customer agreed to by contract) is worse than the government secretly surveilling its own citizens?

Nice!

Look, if you've honestly put in the effort to research the issues and are satisfied with your conclusion that FRB is possible with bitcoin, than I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. But as I stated earlier, I'm not interested in taking the time to spell out my position. Additionally, I'm certainly not interested in digging up the various threads/posts/papers I've read over the past years in order to spoon-feed them to "some guy on the internet". I pointed you in a direction where you might come across some good arguments challenging your position; if you went down that road and remain unconvinced, then so be it.

Lemme get this straight, you're claiming that:

• 1) because people had BTC on account with MtGox in order to facilitate trades, they were actually using MtGox as a bank
  2) MtGox could have started writing loans using its customer's BTC balances

...have I got that right?

OK, then. I think I now have a much better idea of where you're coming from.

Cheers!

Apparently you didn't bother to click through the links on that page (or read any of the threads on the forum) that express opposing viewpoints. Now, I don't really follow bitcoin that closely anymore, but the last I checked the matter was hardly settled.

But hey, if you can point to a real world example of an operational bitcoin bank practicing fractional reserve banking, I'd certainly be willing to reconsider my position. : )

Please, spare me. I can assure you that my professional credentials in the banking arena are...well, let's say they're above average.

Off-topic, but you can't be serious. The total amount of stolen bitcoins compared to the total amount in circulation is staggering.

OK...did you find this page? Did you click the link on that page pointing to the debate on the topic here? Did you try searching Google using "fractional reserve" site:bitcointalk.org?

How dare you try to lay our sorry state of affairs at the feet of President Jackson! Don't you realize what a fucked up country he inherited from John Quincy Adams?!? You've obviously been spending WAY to much time in your RWEC. (Right-Whig Echo Chamber)

Nope. That's too much of a chore, boy.

Sorry, with bitcoin I'm afraid it's not that simple. At this point in the discussion, I'm not going to bother with writing out a treatise explaining my position. If you really want to understand the issues involved, I suggest you check the bitcoin wiki along with the many threads on the topic at bitcointalk.org.

[sigh]

Again, you seem to have a different definition than everyone else of what constitutes "lending". If individuals at MtGox were appropriating customer deposits, that's not a lending activity, that's a criminal activity. And it's still criminal even if they returned the BTC with interest.

Furthermore, at no time did MtGox sell or offer for sale any BTC loan products. If you're not making loans, you're not a bank by any generally accepted definition.

...only if one subscribes to your ridiculous position that appropriating customer deposits is equivalent to lending. But please, continue making up new definitions for common words...it's quite entertaining. I'm sure you're a real hit at cocktail parties.

Cheers!