Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Stack)   IBM apparently set to create the digital dollar together with U.S. Federal Reserve, thanks Bitcoin for the blockchain and says it may leave now   (thestack.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, IBM, national currency  
•       •       •

1760 clicks; posted to Fandom » on 13 Mar 2015 at 12:27 PM (6 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



32 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2015-03-13 10:02:14 AM  
Doesn't matter to me. I moved all my assets to Betamax stock so see you later suckers.
 
2015-03-13 10:32:46 AM  
That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.

Except for the odd chance I'm eating at a roadside ramen shop, I really don't need cash at all.
 
2015-03-13 11:46:19 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.

Except for the odd chance I'm eating at a roadside ramen shop, I really don't need cash at all.


notsureifserious.jpg
 
2015-03-13 12:33:25 PM  

stilted: AverageAmericanGuy: That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.

Except for the odd chance I'm eating at a roadside ramen shop, I really don't need cash at all.

notsureifserious.jpg


I can't rag on him, that is how I thought it was spelled/pronounced for ever.  Until I saw the correct phrase in a book, I always thought it was 'intensive purposes" since I only ever heard it vocally.

intensive porpoises is really where it is at though.
 
2015-03-13 12:34:38 PM  
blogs-images.forbes.comView Full Size

Accept no substitutes.
 
2015-03-13 12:36:44 PM  
Anything to cut out those ACH rent-seekers.
 
2015-03-13 12:37:27 PM  

Hyjamon: stilted: AverageAmericanGuy: That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.

Except for the odd chance I'm eating at a roadside ramen shop, I really don't need cash at all.

notsureifserious.jpg

I can't rag on him, that is how I thought it was spelled/pronounced for ever.  Until I saw the correct phrase in a book, I always thought it was 'intensive purposes" since I only ever heard it vocally.

intensive porpoises is really where it is at though.


It's not for all in tents and porpoises?
 
2015-03-13 12:40:56 PM  
I think he is trying to create a Fark meme...
 
2015-03-13 12:42:21 PM  
Will we need barcode tattoos or implanted RFID chips to make purchases?  Because when you think of the Antichrist, the IBM boardroom comes to mind.
 
2015-03-13 12:42:34 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.


They're not trying to change that. They're working on a system that will help you do all those transactions without having to rely on various banks to process them.

It's looks like they're trying to separate a useful application of bitcoin technology from all the idiocy that surrounds bitcoin.
 
2015-03-13 12:45:56 PM  
This IS the natural progression of things, although I'm convinced the banks will have quite a bit to do with it.
I expected UBS or another Euro bank to be the first to back a bank centric cryptocurrency.
If not them, then a tax haven bank in the Caribbean.
I don't do Bitcoin, so what follows is uninformed but I could easily see a premined cryptocurrency backed by a bank which is in turn backed by, say, gold deposits.
No, it wouldn't shred the use of Bitcoin so much as replace it in the many niche situations where it works better than cash.
 
2015-03-13 12:51:29 PM  

SVenus: This IS the natural progression of things, although I'm convinced the banks will have quite a bit to do with it.
I expected UBS or another Euro bank to be the first to back a bank centric cryptocurrency.
If not them, then a tax haven bank in the Caribbean.
I don't do Bitcoin, so what follows is uninformed but I could easily see a premined cryptocurrency backed by a bank which is in turn backed by, say, gold deposits.
No, it wouldn't shred the use of Bitcoin so much as replace it in the many niche situations where it works better than cash.


From the looks of it they're just looking at the fund transfer utility if bitcoin, presumably the actual units you'd be working in would be USD.
 
2015-03-13 1:12:17 PM  
II do all my banking in credit chits...

vignette1.wikia.nocookie.netView Full Size
 
2015-03-13 1:14:56 PM  

SVenus: This IS the natural progression of things, although I'm convinced the banks will have quite a bit to do with it.
I expected UBS or another Euro bank to be the first to back a bank centric cryptocurrency.
If not them, then a tax haven bank in the Caribbean.
I don't do Bitcoin, so what follows is uninformed but I could easily see a premined cryptocurrency backed by a bank which is in turn backed by, say, gold deposits.
No, it wouldn't shred the use of Bitcoin so much as replace it in the many niche situations where it works better than cash.


Wouldn't make sense.  The idea is to not be trackable.  The blockchain adds complete transparency to what's happening to your money.  The government would love to convert our currency to this.
 
2015-03-13 1:30:55 PM  

stilted: AverageAmericanGuy: That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.

Except for the odd chance I'm eating at a roadside ramen shop, I really don't need cash at all.

notsureifserious.jpg


PN school of trolling student.
 
2015-03-13 1:50:23 PM  
You can't beat the military industrial complex from the outside because it has more money than you.

It will buy out your idea and do it bigger and more successfully.

It will take any criticism you make of it,

and sell it back to you.
 
2015-03-13 1:57:53 PM  

FrancoFile: Will we need barcode tattoos or implanted RFID chips to make purchases?  Because when you think of the Antichrist, the IBM boardroom comes to mind.


SIX!
SIX SIX!
THE NUUUUMBER OF THE BEEEAST!
 
2015-03-13 2:01:27 PM  

Target Builder: AverageAmericanGuy: That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.

They're not trying to change that. They're working on a system that will help you do all those transactions without having to rely on various banks to process them.

It's looks like they're trying to separate a useful application of bitcoin technology from all the idiocy that surrounds bitcoin.


So instead of keeping my money in a bank (or their servers), or keeping a pile of cash under my mattress or buried in a coffee can in the backyard, I can instead keep my money in a digital currency form and keep it in, say, a portable hard drive?
 
2015-03-13 2:05:18 PM  

whosits_112: Target Builder: AverageAmericanGuy: That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.

They're not trying to change that. They're working on a system that will help you do all those transactions without having to rely on various banks to process them.

It's looks like they're trying to separate a useful application of bitcoin technology from all the idiocy that surrounds bitcoin.

So instead of keeping my money in a bank (or their servers), or keeping a pile of cash under my mattress or buried in a coffee can in the backyard, I can instead keep my money in a digital currency form and keep it in, say, a portable hard drive?


Only your private keys. The blockchain is a ledger of who has what. Nobody actually has possession of a bitcoin, but the key that allows them to be transferred to another account.
 
2015-03-13 2:14:18 PM  

Your Company's Computer Guy: whosits_112: Target Builder: AverageAmericanGuy: That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.

They're not trying to change that. They're working on a system that will help you do all those transactions without having to rely on various banks to process them.

It's looks like they're trying to separate a useful application of bitcoin technology from all the idiocy that surrounds bitcoin.

So instead of keeping my money in a bank (or their servers), or keeping a pile of cash under my mattress or buried in a coffee can in the backyard, I can instead keep my money in a digital currency form and keep it in, say, a portable hard drive?

Only your private keys. The blockchain is a ledger of who has what. Nobody actually has possession of a bitcoin, but the key that allows them to be transferred to another account.


Interesting. Thanks!
 
2015-03-13 2:36:31 PM  
s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.comView Full Size
 
2015-03-13 3:05:04 PM  
do you want to use their fiat centralized digital money or your decentralized Bitcoins?

Dammit, if he'd just worked "statist" in there, I'd have had Libertarian Bingo.
 
2015-03-13 3:17:35 PM  

Hyjamon: stilted: AverageAmericanGuy: That's interesting, but for intensive purposes my money is all electronic as it is. My paycheck is deposited directly into my bank account. My bills are paid automatically from the account. I use a credit card for any purchases.

Except for the odd chance I'm eating at a roadside ramen shop, I really don't need cash at all.

notsureifserious.jpg

I can't rag on him, that is how I thought it was spelled/pronounced for ever.  Until I saw the correct phrase in a book, I always thought it was 'intensive purposes" since I only ever heard it vocally.

intensive porpoises is really where it is at though.


Yup - I got bagged for that one in HS when a paper was returned with that red-lined and corrected.  It's a tricky one since 'intensive purposes', while nonsensical, seems to convey the intention even though it's completely wrong.  I was embarrassed enough by the error though that I've never made it again.  Seemed like 10th grade was a little late to be figuring that one out.
 
2015-03-13 3:21:42 PM  

bhcompy: SVenus: This IS the natural progression of things, although I'm convinced the banks will have quite a bit to do with it.
I expected UBS or another Euro bank to be the first to back a bank centric cryptocurrency.
If not them, then a tax haven bank in the Caribbean.
I don't do Bitcoin, so what follows is uninformed but I could easily see a premined cryptocurrency backed by a bank which is in turn backed by, say, gold deposits.
No, it wouldn't shred the use of Bitcoin so much as replace it in the many niche situations where it works better than cash.

Wouldn't make sense.  The idea is to not be trackable.  The blockchain adds complete transparency to what's happening to your money.  The government would love to convert our currency to this.


Couldn't they mitigate some of the lack of secrecy by reworking the blockchain algorithm to scramble transaction data after a certain clearing period? Like, design it so that the blockchain contains the record of the last ~2 weeks of transactions plus a meaningless but unique hash created by scrambling prior transactions? Then you could trace back the source of money to probably the last account that had it but not much further.

I don't know much about the math involved, maybe that would make it overly vulnerable to abuse.
 
2015-03-13 3:28:04 PM  
Just reload my Walmart shopping card and call it a day

/way to keep the most ethically problematic part of Bitcoin, a virtual papertrail
 
2015-03-13 3:48:59 PM  

bhcompy: Wouldn't make sense.  The idea is to not be trackable.  The blockchain adds complete transparency to what's happening to your money.  The government would love to convert our currency to this.


I don't think the idea HERE is to not be trackable. I think the idea is to have a way to conduct business without using banks as the intermediary, but only as the place of final exchange. Money goes in, changes hands from two to two hundred times, money comes out and only one bank profits from the transfer.

Untrackable money will still be an important niche that this won't fill.
 
2015-03-13 5:49:12 PM  

FrancoFile: Will we need barcode tattoos or implanted RFID chips to make purchases?  Because when you think of the Antichrist, the IBM boardroom comes to mind.


They do have experience with human-barcodes.
 
2015-03-13 6:10:41 PM  
Two advantages for this:
1)  The Federal Reserve becomes the only bank necessary 
2)  The technology will be designed so every transaction can be tracked (sender and recipient).

Otherwise there would be no incentive for the Federal Reserve to do this.  A decentralized, anonymous monetary system would make them obsolete and the government would lose control of taxation, money laundering, terrorist financing and most importantly - the golden fleece of absolute control over every citizen.

Believe the Bible or not - the ability to predict this as a viable scenario 2,000 years ago is quite astonishing.
 
2015-03-13 6:25:57 PM  

madgonad: Anything to cut out those ACH rent-seekers.


By inserting a new middleman that would probably cost just as much to maintain?
 
2015-03-13 8:38:09 PM  

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: bhcompy: SVenus: This IS the natural progression of things, although I'm convinced the banks will have quite a bit to do with it.
I expected UBS or another Euro bank to be the first to back a bank centric cryptocurrency.
If not them, then a tax haven bank in the Caribbean.
I don't do Bitcoin, so what follows is uninformed but I could easily see a premined cryptocurrency backed by a bank which is in turn backed by, say, gold deposits.
No, it wouldn't shred the use of Bitcoin so much as replace it in the many niche situations where it works better than cash.

Wouldn't make sense.  The idea is to not be trackable.  The blockchain adds complete transparency to what's happening to your money.  The government would love to convert our currency to this.

Couldn't they mitigate some of the lack of secrecy by reworking the blockchain algorithm to scramble transaction data after a certain clearing period? Like, design it so that the blockchain contains the record of the last ~2 weeks of transactions plus a meaningless but unique hash created by scrambling prior transactions? Then you could trace back the source of money to probably the last account that had it but not much further.

I don't know much about the math involved, maybe that would make it overly vulnerable to abuse.


What's to stop someone from just making an unscrambled copy of the blockchain?
 
2015-03-13 10:36:17 PM  
Shakin_Haitian:
What's to stop someone from just making an unscrambled copy of the blockchain?

Like I said, I don't really understand the math.

But it seems like it should be possible to encrypt the chain using an ad hoc one-time pad and deleting the cipher, leaving only a unique but otherwise meaningless jumble of characters.
If you concatenated all transactions older than X days ago with the existing hashed value before each new encryption, the time needed to decrypt each successive transaction into the past would approach infinity--the only information you would be able to glean is the approximate number of times that virtual coin has changed hands based on the length of the hash, and even that should be possible to spoof using a salted algorithm that lengthens the ciphertext at random.

I'm not even close to a crypto-nerd, though. There are farkers who could better explain how it could or couldn't work.
 
2015-03-14 11:20:37 AM  

SVenus: bhcompy: Wouldn't make sense.  The idea is to not be trackable.  The blockchain adds complete transparency to what's happening to your money.  The government would love to convert our currency to this.

I don't think the idea HERE is to not be trackable. I think the idea is to have a way to conduct business without using banks as the intermediary, but only as the place of final exchange. Money goes in, changes hands from two to two hundred times, money comes out and only one bank profits from the transfer.

Untrackable money will still be an important niche that this won't fill.


Tax haven banks,  like you specified,  don't want that level of tracking
 
Displayed 32 of 32 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.