Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Overall, I'm going to conclude these agencies are at least 40% incompetent.
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.
Yes, marketing is worse than government surveillance...
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?
It...but certainly Mt. Gox could have done it well before its collapse. People were using it as a bank.
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.
No, I used the on-site search, and missed that page. It says that FRB with Bitcoin is possible, which contradicts what you are saying.
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. : )
Back to my example
Please, spare me. I can assure you that my professional credentials in the banking arena are...well, let's say they're above average.
They also used to have a role in safeguarding money, much less important with Bitcoin.
Off-topic, but you can't be serious. The total amount of stolen bitcoins compared to the total amount in circulation is staggering.
Derp. Welcome to America. As it's been this way since the days of Andrew Jackson.
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)
Yeah, but does it do windows?
Nope. That's too much of a chore, boy.
This is fractional reserve banking. It works with any currency, as long as there's a way to lend it out.
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.
Lending of those assets? Check.
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.
Sure sounds like it meets at least one public definition of fractional reserve banking.
...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.
The original request said the system did not allow fractional reserve [banking], and you cannot believe that in light of the evidence that fractional reserve did exist.
You're right, I don't believe fractional reserve banking with bitcoin can exist, and you have yet to provide any evidence to the contrary.
MtGox was operating with a fractional reserve for some time. Either intentionally (criminal) or not (negligent).
So...in your mind, BTC exchanges are operating as fractional reserve banks. That's a rather...um, unique position to hold. I suspect the operators and customers of the exchanges would disagree with you, though.
There is at least one bitcoin "bank" currently offering to pay interest on bitcoin deposits.
Just because businesses are paying interest on bitcoin deposits and/or charging interest on BTC loans does not mean they qualify as fractional reserve banks. But since your definition of fractional reserve banking seems to differ from the generally accepted definition, I guess you can make any claim you want. In any case, it sure would help your argument(s) if you could back them up somehow.
Excellent points. I'd add another: it's tough to imagine why anyone would want to deposit BTC with a bitcoin "bank" in the first place. All of the usual reasons (other than earning interest) for storing money with another party simply don't apply when it comes to BTC.
And most definitely gold and bitcoin have both been used in fractional reserve situations.
I hope you won't mind if I ask you to cite a real-world example of a legitimate BTC business operating as a fractional reserve "bank". I'd be very interested to see exactly how that was done.