News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:In Bitcoin Debate, Larry Summers Sides with the History o... by smtddr on Wednesday April 30, 2014 @09:54PM (#7677755)
Agreed. FDIC backed bitcoin(and some easy way to deal with the IRS taxes wrt bitcoin) would make things a lot smoother. But it's very hard for me to imagine a universe where anyone would dare to insure bitcoin; a property that you can't even prove was stolen or who it currently belongs to. The only way I can see that happening, is to take away the concept of the end user holding the private-keys. But I don't know what bitcoin is without that element to it. The way I understand bitcoin's goal is about giving control to the public and preventing "The Elite One Percent" from pulling stunts like this[1]. If all private keys are controlled by coinbase/btc-e/bitstamp/etc, then we're kinda back to banks. At that point what's the difference between the USD balance I see in my online bank account vs the BTC balance at Coinbase?

1. http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2010/12/07/visa-ma...

Re:In Bitcoin Debate, Larry Summers Sides with the History o... by vojfox on Friday May 02, 2014 @05:09AM (#7684707)
Hold your own keys yourself, possibly with the addition of multi-sig service(s) to make this safer and more convenient. That is undoubtedly the long-term vision of bitcoin, and it's quite different from banks/USD.