Spring RTS Engine

Bitcoin has very effective bookkeeping.

That is _absolute_ bollocks. There is no register of who owns which wallets. Relying on subpeonas is just fantasy since, regardless of the further attempts you point out to evade any possibility of effective oversight, Bitcoin in part operates in countries where the concept of a "subpeona" does not even exist.

Every time you make a payment your ip is revealed. This ultimately gives your identity to law enforcement.

The fact you call something a serious failure just because it functions more like cash than banking is just absurd.

Every time you make a payment your ip is revealed.

Nope. An ip is revealed, which may or may not have any identifiable connection to my own.

The fact you call something flawed just becasue it functions more like cash than banking is just absurd.

I made no such statement.

Just as someone making a transfer in the bank can be anyone, only needed is a fake id. What sets them apart is that banking recors can be falsified, unlike bitcoin transfer records.

If something has a serious failure in it, isn't it flawed?

Just as someone making a transfer in the bank can be anyone, only needed is a fake id.

Lol, good luck with that one. Even if that were true, its somewhat easier to fake an IP address than fake a passport/etc.

The fact you call something flawed just becasue it functions more like cash than banking is just absurd.

If something has a serious failure in it, isn't it flawed?

Read your own words more carefully. "Just because it functions more like cash than banking" has nothing to do with any of my comments.

Of course Bitcoin is capable of neither of these things, since, by design (and unlike the banking sector), it has no system of oversight, no record keeping and no way of enforcing accountability.

You are envisioning modern banking as the not flawed system. I see cash as the not flawed system.

Bitcoin is something in between.

You are envisioning modern banking as the not flawed system.

Errrr.... nope. I have pointed out several respects in which Bitcoin & friends have (often by design) flaws that are far less present in the banking system.

Perhaps unlike yourself, I have no difficulty seeing the bad points of the system that I do favour.

And you (edit: although you have now deleted the post that this replies too) have now resorted to personal insults without providing any justification for your claims - good day.

varikonniemi, or something wrote: And you have difficult in constructing a coherent picture of the system you criticise.

I think if you re-read what i have said you will find that accusation to be quite unjustified.

Silentwings wrote:And you (edit: although you have now deleted the post that this replies too) have now resorted to personal insults without providing any justification for your claims - good day.

I tried to be civil and deleted my response when i saw you edited your personal insults away. Now you go batshit insane trying to act like a martyr. Rest assured i won't try to explain your misunderstandings anymore, at least not politely.

when i saw you edited the personal insults away.

Bollocks, my "personal insult" above, which is actually a reference/repeat of the observations many others have already made about your attitude in this thread, is still present and will remain so forevermore.

The fact one other have used same insult does not give you the right to use it. You realized this yourself because you quickly edited it away. Now you are in full damage control mode.

The fact one other have used same insult does not give you the right to use it.

Actually, from a purely legal perspective it does (you can look it up for yourself), provided I attribute it correctly, which I will now do so in full, as my final contribution to your ode a la Bitcoin. These are selected opinions, in chornological order, of the most recent five people to reply to you.

hoijoi wrote:you strike me as a kind of ultra fanatic, trying to illegalize anything besides blind and total compliance to what someone else proclaims. that is dangerous.

smoth wrote:You asked why people called you fanatic, I tried to explain it. If your reality is so fragile that you must wail and bear fangs at the slightest disagreement, then maybe your carefully constructed social reality is flawed?

Anarchid wrote:Some of your posts seemed a bit too defensive for "just enthusiasm".

knorke wrote:Hm varikonniemi seems bit like you are cured from BTC fever now? In 2013 I (and others) warned about ...

silentwings wrote:Perhaps unlike yourself, I have no difficulty seeing the bad points of the system that I do favour.

You quoted one insult. Hoijui already took a (half) step back from it. Quoting yourself for justification seems schizophrenic.

If someone happens to say you are a retard, do you think it is OK if i keep calling you a retard based on that? Where is your logic? (no i am not going to look it up)

It's not my logic, it's the law in my country. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_quote.

Also, for completeness, if anyone wants to see the "half step back":

hoijoi wrote:why i said you are a fanatic:
you did not accept any critique on bitcoin in 30 pages of thread. now maidsave is "the perfect system" (vari. quote). just for the mind mastery of you understanding that bitcoin is actually not the perfect system, because maidsave is, i give you some credit, but not a lot.

Enough.