It's obv a little more complicated than that, but it does go to show the kinds of change and decisions each country is facing. There are many countries that have even more incentive to adopt bitcoin as their currency. Argentina, south africa, and much of south america, as there moneyies often have huge inflation issue. The infrastructure is being set up, and although it will take time, its creating a build up of momentum ready to break though. Below is some relevant comments from Nash on Scotland. It might have seemed like non sensical gibberish a few years ago, but eventually the world is going to turn to his writtings and realize that he's given the most incredible "manifesto" in the history of man.
I think the world is in shock, each and every one of us, and we don't know it yet, but we will. A quick search of bitcoin will show ever significant bank and government has bitcoin on their agenda and has no idea what to do with it. At first it seemed like a "fad" you could brush off, but each and every day it becomes more and more clear we are dealing with dramatic change.
People call it the "fringe" view I guess, although its sounding less and less crazy, but generally the "bitcoiners" have not read the material I have because they don't know about "ideal money"
If the money used in the central capital areas of a nation
is also used in the provinces and if the provinces also have governments and local taxes then the quality of the money ordained by the Sovereign on the national level will affect the conditions for trade and investment, etc. in any province. For example we could think of the UK and of Scotland as the province. If, say, a Scot named Adam Smith has a temporary surplus of earned income over expenses then what can he do with this surplus that is both cautious and wise?
Mr. Smith must logically have some concern over the conjectural probabilities regarding the value of the currency he would use (which we can presume to have the same value per unit as that used in London).
And similarly in Edinburgh there is the possibility of locally founded concerns about the pound.
In relation to these considerations I suggest that, in general, if the money that must be used by a set of provinces of an aggregative state is of a comparatively higher level of quality then that this circumstance
can favor decisions in the provinces in favor of more thrifty options or alternatives.
He basically crept around to every country explaining in lectures and papers what their reaction "could" be in relation to coming changes in their economic environment and possible new "currencies".
Player owned sites will do well and I think are nice to have around. We might see many more of these in the very near future. I think they are likely to get swept away well before they are established but we should appreciate the coming competition in the industry.
Their business model is silly though in a sense, because they MUST know they are just going to get copied and decentralized. Basically saying, why play on a site that spends your rake money on professional players rather than charging less and keeping it in the game.
Something else fun, I've been trolling the annual meeting vote for the player representative to meet with poker stars, and my newly constructed "views" on the future of the game and the underlying math behind it earned me a nomination to fly to the isle of man and bargain on behalf of the players...
of course I was snap banned once they found out who I am.
Not that I've done anything wrong, just presented the "math" too soon, upset a bunch of regs and economics majors.
I think rather they are going through a crypto currency revolution/crisis, and could use all the advice they can get. Stars has certainly had a monopoly over online poker for quite some time, but they are going to soon be looking for creative solutions to hold their market. It's getting to easy to for players to "shop" elsewhere, and the brand name doesn't carry the same weight as it used to. To me it suggests stars might be forced to listen to at least ideas that inspire mutually favorable change.
so pokerstars is threatened because a few pros want to start a site with low rake? i think you are negating the value of the network effect. this is a facebook vs myspace kind of thing.
or are they threatened because jurisdictions won't allow their citizens to participate? wouldn't that impact these new guys, too?
how does bitcoin make these guys more competitive?
i don't get the whole crytpo love.
* there is no intrinsic value. (you could say the same about fiat money but there are reasonable arguments against that) you could just invest your money in the next pokemon cards.
* there is no secure way to store it (wallets get lost/stolen, hard drives fail, passwords are forgotten, PCs get hacked, 'banks' get hacked, some 'banks' are scammers)
* it is NOT anonymous. it is about as traceable as credit card payments.
* i don't get no rebates on transactions like i do with my capital one!
* it is open to a lot of scams without a middleman like paypal to ensure delivery of goods.
* in the not too distant future, the encryption will be hacked. if that guy is smart, he'll keep quiet about it, preferring riches over showing people how 'smart' he is
* i could go on but i don't feel like putting any more time into this
but you'll probably get rich investing in it. just like buying and selling bre-x, nortel or rim at the right time.
so pokerstars is threatened because a few pros want to start a site with low rake? i think you are negating the value of the network effect. this is a facebook vs myspace kind of thing.
or are they threatened because jurisdictions won't allow their citizens to participate? wouldn't that impact these new guys, too?
how does bitcoin make these guys more competitive?
My full explanation would be difficult to believe at this point, but I can say we are heading for a decentralized business model for the game. First we will see an explosion of different poker site projects each offering a hybrid of today's model and the decentralized model. The significance is in decentralized poker there are no servers needed, no staff, no legal fees, no regulation fees and so on. Just like bitcoin, poker can run on its own network owned and operated by nothing but the community that uses it. We are little ways from this but we are already seeing projects on the go.
So one site will offer 5% rake, and shortly after a clone will appear with say 4%. As poker players get smarter (which the general field is), this will become a very significant factor in which games they choose to support.
Stars and other big sites will have difficultly adjusting to this change because their "network" is not scalable in this manner, they cannot keep up with the granular change these sites will offer.
Those that wish to adhere to regulations can, and bitcoin regulations in this sense are tending to be favorable in most of the significant parts of the world (completely legal in Canada for example.)
Players will soon demand that sites store players money on an observable block chain so their money can always be accounted for. Governments and players alike will appreciate this. Sites that don't do this, won't be trusted anymore.
i don't get the whole crytpo love.
* there is no intrinsic value. (you could say the same about fiat money but there are reasonable arguments against that) you could just invest your money in the next pokemon cards.
I think you make a valid point about collectables, and in fact it was exactly that quiltiy of currency Nick Szabo pointed out in "shelling out" Shelling Out: The Origins of Money | Satoshi Nakamoto Institute I encourage everyone to read the paper as it is quite interesting. A small history of money in relation to the Americas pre and post Columbus with a very important solution to the Kula ring.
I am of the opinion this is the essay Nash is referring to in the opening line of ideal money (plus adam smiths welath of nations). The essay is important to understanding bitcoin which to me means that it was the missing link in our economic history that was needed to extrapolate the concept. It also has suggestion about how we might view early man (Neanderthal etc.)
More importantly though, gold, and fiat, do not really have intrinsic value, which always seems funny that people like to point out bitcoin has none. Bitcoin sucks its value from the inefficiency of our markets it absorbs and solves, it is like a virus that is smaller than other currencies and it can work its way to places that other's cant. This has the effect of bridging different aspects of our economy we never though possible, and this brings value to the world as a whole while simultaneously creating a channel for this value.
Basically everything we covet gold or fiat for, bitcoin can clone and do better (way better) and more.
* there is no secure way to store it (wallets get lost/stolen, hard drives fail, passwords are forgotten, PCs get hacked, 'banks' get hacked, some 'banks' are scammers)
I'm not sure how you could think this is different than money, and what's truer to say is that your money is never "safe" in anyway of these ways and bitcoin can have any level of safety one choose. Forgotten passwords can be protected in many ways, but most important is that again, bitcoin is far more secure than fiat, ask Argentina their government confiscated their bank accounts.
* it is NOT anonymous. it is about as traceable as credit card payments.
well I think its quite alot less traceable actually, but there are many crypto coins that are completely anonymous, and one just needs to transfer into them and out to break the path of transactions.
* i don't get no rebates on transactions like i do with my capital one!
Yes but I think we are not accounting for the 20% interest plus other hidden fess such as POS with the machine. Bitcoin transactions cost far less than any credit card network could hope to provide, this will put pressure on them in the short term and dissolve them in the long term. But new projects come out every day that will offer a superior product to your credit card.
* it is open to a lot of scams without a middleman like paypal to ensure delivery of goods.
just think of bitcoin paypal then
* in the not too distant future, the encryption will be hacked. if that guy is smart, he'll keep quiet about it, preferring riches over showing people how 'smart' he is
This part I wanted to get to and hope you read. It's simply not true and this is what we will find is actually a religious belief we never knew we had. We are used to these kinds of things being "too good to be true", but the "magic" of bitcoin or the reason people are fanatic about it, is because it really is that good.
In order to hack bitcoin you don't just hack a program, you have to have more computing power than 51% of the bitcoin network, and that means you are fighting with the entire community that wants to keep it up and running. Currently the power is something like 2500 time 500 supercomputers. There is not enough computing power in the world to hack the network, other than the network itself!
Its quite simple, the size of the encryption or level is adjust to the network attacking it, effectively rendering it un decryptable. In 1955 to present day, the governments would hunt you down for this knowledge. We are lucky it got out.
V. Buterin the 20 year old kid from around your area who is going to rock the world with ethereum, explained that even a quantum computer (which we don't have) can't crack bitcoin.
If we follow the game of economy though, we can see bitcoins purpose (in the grand scheme of the creator of man), is to creative incentive to crack it by use of quantum computing. There is now incredible economic drive for man and governments to create a quantum computer, and I think we will see this very shortly as bitcoin starts to really take hold in our global civilization. But of course by then everyone will have so much wealth, it won't be one of those end of the world things, but the beginning of a new era.
* i could go on but i don't feel like putting any more time into this
but you'll probably get rich investing in it. just like buying and selling bre-x, nortel or rim at the right time.
Please do go on, i like hearing from grounded view points because I'm obviously too immersed in the material.
But imagine for example everyone saving 1 cent on 1 transaction in the world on one day, in the context that there actual was less waste and so the value stays in the economy. That value gets reinvested to create more efficiency, which creates and saves more value.
This is happening on a mass scale, and there will be some resistance friction and lag....but it turns out all these issues in the world were waiting to be solved by a universal currency. The issue always was that no government could create such a currency.
I also read a post with the same initials as the bitcoin's creators pseudonym suggesting that the "brics" network could invest 250 million in bitcoin and create a financial network that could create a perfect couterpoint to SWIFT. There has been mega economic wars and suppression that the general people have no idea exists, brics taking on bitcoin as their network would create and economy statelmate between the world to biggest superpowers (divided by swift and non swift) overnight.
Bitcoin was presented to the public as a gimmick to get it to the point where the network could not be hacked by any superpower in the world, now that it is there, we have it....we win.
What % of the population actually uses Bitcoin exclusively? I would think that it is an incredibly small percentage overall with spikes in certain areas due to demographics. I am thinking that some dirt farmer in Western China (and billions like him throughout the globe) could give a rat's ass about any of this, and that is what is going to keep crypto currency a niche market. Nothing wrong with that, but I doubt it becomes the industry leader, so to speak, in this decade, or the next. In my lifetime? Maybe . . .
What % of the population actually uses Bitcoin exclusively? I would think that it is an incredibly small percentage overall with spikes in certain areas due to demographics. I am thinking that some dirt farmer in Western China (and billions like him throughout the globe) could give a rat's ass about any of this, and that is what is going to keep crypto currency a niche market. Nothing wrong with that, but I doubt it becomes the industry leader, so to speak, in this decade, or the next. In my lifetime? Maybe . . .
Bitcoin was presented like a niche, since the obvious worry of its creator was that the public would instantly reject and dislike the idea (many people do today, scrunch their nose to the mention of it). Much of the 'genius' was the presentation of this technology in a form that it is not. But its not completely methodical genius, but rather if we think of an alien civilization, that evolved through competition, and got to the same point we did...they too would have their "bitgold". It's not about aliens of course, but its sometimes helpful to think beyond the box.
How to get the public to accept something they might fear? Present it as a secret gold.
In this way we use societies greed and competitive nature to cooperate on the adoption of bitcoin. This we already saw happen as the machine behind bitcoin (peer to peer network) is already fully self sustaining, both economically and technologically. This has the hallmark of John Nash you see, as one of the solutions to cooperative games is to break it down into its non cooperative parts.
So then bitcoins adoption is really then only subject to the force of the invisible hand, Adam Smith described. Which means, if i can convince you it has tangible usefulness, its inevitable and unstoppable.
Like the internet, the Chinese farmer might not realize bitcoin exists until well after it effects his life. But we might observe the change first on a bigger scale. If bitcoins adoption grows and it starts to outpace the usd, money paid to China for example from us in usd will start to weaken. We would expect China and its government to want to hedge vs this. And then of course the US would need to counter hedge.
I don't know if you know SWIFT and BRICS but you might understand them better than me, this is an incredibly simple yet interesting post about how 250 million usd could incite economic stalemate in the most macro economic war going on today Bitcoin, SWIFT and the BRICS : Bitcoin
..is a 2-d sort of representation of what might happen when bitocin connects previously unconnected rings of our economy.
So really the infrastructure change is happening from the top down.
We can hear it from the US gov:
The Federal Reserve conducts monetary policy to affect the flow of money and credit to the economy in order to achieve stable prices, maximum employment, and financial market stability. At Bitcoin’s current scale of use, it is likely too small to significantly affect the Fed’s ability to conduct monetary policy and achieve those three goals.
However, if the scale of use were to grow substantially larger, there could be reason for some concern. Conceptually, Bitcoin could have an impact on the conduct of monetary policy to the extent that it would (1) substantially affect the quantity of money or (2) influence the velocity (rate of circulation) of money through the economy by reducing the demand for dollars.
The U.S. economy reaps considerable benefit from having a single well-defined and stable monetary unit to work as a medium of exchange and unit of account to facilitate its vast number of daily economic transactions.
If greater use of Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies) leads to multiple monetary units, these benefits could be threatened, particularly if these new currencies continue to exhibit a high degree of price volatility. (Price volatility is discussed more fully below.)
They admit wide bitcoin adoption curtails their ability to print money. This is valuable to the citizens of the world, because destabilizing nation economies, destabilizes the global economy.
It seems it was in fact this sort of "confession" that lead to the extrapolation of the solution:
It was the observation of a new "line" that has become popular with those responsible for "central banking" functions relating to national currencies that gave us the idea for the study of "asymptotically ideal" money. The idea seems paradoxical, but by speaking of "inflation targeting" these responsible officials are effectively CONFESSING that, notwithstanding how they formerly were speaking about the difficulties and problems of their functions, that it is indeed after all possible to control in inflation by controlling the supply of money (as if by limiting the amount of individual "prints" that could be made of a work of art being produced as "prints").
You are somewhat correct tho, I read a disheartening piece on keyna. Where the currency monopoly is m-pesa, a mobile phone banking system. If you try to set them up with technology they just sell it for 3 months salary (teacher/doctor etc) and there are huge import taxes on electronic goods so they are worth even more to sell. They can't handle the volatility either obviously.
But the infrastructure to fix all that is coming within months.
We must consider the foreign works and their remittances, the costs save are weeks and month of living expenses they send home from 1st world counties
I've seen some amazing projects so far, even uni's are starting to offer degrees in cryptocurrency. One uni gave their diplomas out on the bitcoin blockchain for example.
It is the new internet, but before we understand what it is ethereum will come out. Ethereum is to bitcoin what computers where to electrify. This will certianly happen in our lifetime, look how fast the internet grew, and we didn't have the internet to grow it at the time!
Conclusion ideal money:
So there may be an analogy to this as regards those called "the Keynesians" in that while they have claimed to be operating for high and noble objectives of general welfare what is clearly true is that they have made it easier for governments to "print money".
So I see the Keynesians as in a weak sense comparable to the "Bolsheviks" because of the support of both parties for a certain "lack of transparency" relating to the functions of government as seen by the citizenry. And for both of them it can be said that they tend to think in terms of government agencies operating in a benevolent fashion that is, however, beyond the comprehension of the citizens of the state.
And this parallel makes it seem not implausible that a process of political evolution might lead to the expectation on the part of citizens in the "great democracies" that they should be better situated to be able to understand whatever will be the monetary policies which, indeed, are typically of great importance to citizens who may have alternative options for where to place their "savings
Comments
I think the world is in shock, each and every one of us, and we don't know it yet, but we will. A quick search of bitcoin will show ever significant bank and government has bitcoin on their agenda and has no idea what to do with it. At first it seemed like a "fad" you could brush off, but each and every day it becomes more and more clear we are dealing with dramatic change.
People call it the "fringe" view I guess, although its sounding less and less crazy, but generally the "bitcoiners" have not read the material I have because they don't know about "ideal money"
He basically crept around to every country explaining in lectures and papers what their reaction "could" be in relation to coming changes in their economic environment and possible new "currencies".
Their business model is silly though in a sense, because they MUST know they are just going to get copied and decentralized. Basically saying, why play on a site that spends your rake money on professional players rather than charging less and keeping it in the game.
It's getting fun tho...
of course I was snap banned once they found out who I am.
Not that I've done anything wrong, just presented the "math" too soon, upset a bunch of regs and economics majors.
tapatalk puts this here to annoy YOU
I think rather they are going through a crypto currency revolution/crisis, and could use all the advice they can get. Stars has certainly had a monopoly over online poker for quite some time, but they are going to soon be looking for creative solutions to hold their market. It's getting to easy to for players to "shop" elsewhere, and the brand name doesn't carry the same weight as it used to. To me it suggests stars might be forced to listen to at least ideas that inspire mutually favorable change.
or are they threatened because jurisdictions won't allow their citizens to participate? wouldn't that impact these new guys, too?
how does bitcoin make these guys more competitive?
i don't get the whole crytpo love.
* there is no intrinsic value. (you could say the same about fiat money but there are reasonable arguments against that) you could just invest your money in the next pokemon cards.
* there is no secure way to store it (wallets get lost/stolen, hard drives fail, passwords are forgotten, PCs get hacked, 'banks' get hacked, some 'banks' are scammers)
* it is NOT anonymous. it is about as traceable as credit card payments.
* i don't get no rebates on transactions like i do with my capital one!
* it is open to a lot of scams without a middleman like paypal to ensure delivery of goods.
* in the not too distant future, the encryption will be hacked. if that guy is smart, he'll keep quiet about it, preferring riches over showing people how 'smart' he is
* i could go on but i don't feel like putting any more time into this
but you'll probably get rich investing in it. just like buying and selling bre-x, nortel or rim at the right time.
So one site will offer 5% rake, and shortly after a clone will appear with say 4%. As poker players get smarter (which the general field is), this will become a very significant factor in which games they choose to support.
Stars and other big sites will have difficultly adjusting to this change because their "network" is not scalable in this manner, they cannot keep up with the granular change these sites will offer.
Those that wish to adhere to regulations can, and bitcoin regulations in this sense are tending to be favorable in most of the significant parts of the world (completely legal in Canada for example.)
Players will soon demand that sites store players money on an observable block chain so their money can always be accounted for. Governments and players alike will appreciate this. Sites that don't do this, won't be trusted anymore.
I think you make a valid point about collectables, and in fact it was exactly that quiltiy of currency Nick Szabo pointed out in "shelling out" Shelling Out: The Origins of Money | Satoshi Nakamoto Institute I encourage everyone to read the paper as it is quite interesting. A small history of money in relation to the Americas pre and post Columbus with a very important solution to the Kula ring.
I am of the opinion this is the essay Nash is referring to in the opening line of ideal money (plus adam smiths welath of nations). The essay is important to understanding bitcoin which to me means that it was the missing link in our economic history that was needed to extrapolate the concept. It also has suggestion about how we might view early man (Neanderthal etc.)
More importantly though, gold, and fiat, do not really have intrinsic value, which always seems funny that people like to point out bitcoin has none. Bitcoin sucks its value from the inefficiency of our markets it absorbs and solves, it is like a virus that is smaller than other currencies and it can work its way to places that other's cant. This has the effect of bridging different aspects of our economy we never though possible, and this brings value to the world as a whole while simultaneously creating a channel for this value.
Basically everything we covet gold or fiat for, bitcoin can clone and do better (way better) and more. I'm not sure how you could think this is different than money, and what's truer to say is that your money is never "safe" in anyway of these ways and bitcoin can have any level of safety one choose. Forgotten passwords can be protected in many ways, but most important is that again, bitcoin is far more secure than fiat, ask Argentina their government confiscated their bank accounts.
well I think its quite alot less traceable actually, but there are many crypto coins that are completely anonymous, and one just needs to transfer into them and out to break the path of transactions.
Yes but I think we are not accounting for the 20% interest plus other hidden fess such as POS with the machine. Bitcoin transactions cost far less than any credit card network could hope to provide, this will put pressure on them in the short term and dissolve them in the long term. But new projects come out every day that will offer a superior product to your credit card.
just think of bitcoin paypal then
This part I wanted to get to and hope you read. It's simply not true and this is what we will find is actually a religious belief we never knew we had. We are used to these kinds of things being "too good to be true", but the "magic" of bitcoin or the reason people are fanatic about it, is because it really is that good.
In order to hack bitcoin you don't just hack a program, you have to have more computing power than 51% of the bitcoin network, and that means you are fighting with the entire community that wants to keep it up and running. Currently the power is something like 2500 time 500 supercomputers. There is not enough computing power in the world to hack the network, other than the network itself!
The solution is actually in this letter from nash to the nsa in 1955 https://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/nash_letters/nash_letters1.pdf
Its quite simple, the size of the encryption or level is adjust to the network attacking it, effectively rendering it un decryptable. In 1955 to present day, the governments would hunt you down for this knowledge. We are lucky it got out.
V. Buterin the 20 year old kid from around your area who is going to rock the world with ethereum, explained that even a quantum computer (which we don't have) can't crack bitcoin.
If we follow the game of economy though, we can see bitcoins purpose (in the grand scheme of the creator of man), is to creative incentive to crack it by use of quantum computing. There is now incredible economic drive for man and governments to create a quantum computer, and I think we will see this very shortly as bitcoin starts to really take hold in our global civilization. But of course by then everyone will have so much wealth, it won't be one of those end of the world things, but the beginning of a new era.
Please do go on, i like hearing from grounded view points because I'm obviously too immersed in the material.
But imagine for example everyone saving 1 cent on 1 transaction in the world on one day, in the context that there actual was less waste and so the value stays in the economy. That value gets reinvested to create more efficiency, which creates and saves more value.
This is happening on a mass scale, and there will be some resistance friction and lag....but it turns out all these issues in the world were waiting to be solved by a universal currency. The issue always was that no government could create such a currency.
I also read a post with the same initials as the bitcoin's creators pseudonym suggesting that the "brics" network could invest 250 million in bitcoin and create a financial network that could create a perfect couterpoint to SWIFT. There has been mega economic wars and suppression that the general people have no idea exists, brics taking on bitcoin as their network would create and economy statelmate between the world to biggest superpowers (divided by swift and non swift) overnight.
Bitcoin was presented to the public as a gimmick to get it to the point where the network could not be hacked by any superpower in the world, now that it is there, we have it....we win.
How to get the public to accept something they might fear? Present it as a secret gold.
In this way we use societies greed and competitive nature to cooperate on the adoption of bitcoin. This we already saw happen as the machine behind bitcoin (peer to peer network) is already fully self sustaining, both economically and technologically. This has the hallmark of John Nash you see, as one of the solutions to cooperative games is to break it down into its non cooperative parts.
So then bitcoins adoption is really then only subject to the force of the invisible hand, Adam Smith described. Which means, if i can convince you it has tangible usefulness, its inevitable and unstoppable.
Like the internet, the Chinese farmer might not realize bitcoin exists until well after it effects his life. But we might observe the change first on a bigger scale. If bitcoins adoption grows and it starts to outpace the usd, money paid to China for example from us in usd will start to weaken. We would expect China and its government to want to hedge vs this. And then of course the US would need to counter hedge.
Here is a real time graphic of currency exchange for bitcoin in the world Fiatleak - watch the world's currencies flow into BTC in realtime
I don't know if you know SWIFT and BRICS but you might understand them better than me, this is an incredibly simple yet interesting post about how 250 million usd could incite economic stalemate in the most macro economic war going on today Bitcoin, SWIFT and the BRICS : Bitcoin
This seemingly innocent solution proposed here An Explanation of the Kula Ring
..is a 2-d sort of representation of what might happen when bitocin connects previously unconnected rings of our economy.
So really the infrastructure change is happening from the top down.
We can hear it from the US gov: They admit wide bitcoin adoption curtails their ability to print money. This is valuable to the citizens of the world, because destabilizing nation economies, destabilizes the global economy.
It seems it was in fact this sort of "confession" that lead to the extrapolation of the solution: You are somewhat correct tho, I read a disheartening piece on keyna. Where the currency monopoly is m-pesa, a mobile phone banking system. If you try to set them up with technology they just sell it for 3 months salary (teacher/doctor etc) and there are huge import taxes on electronic goods so they are worth even more to sell. They can't handle the volatility either obviously.
But the infrastructure to fix all that is coming within months.
We must consider the foreign works and their remittances, the costs save are weeks and month of living expenses they send home from 1st world counties
I've seen some amazing projects so far, even uni's are starting to offer degrees in cryptocurrency. One uni gave their diplomas out on the bitcoin blockchain for example.
It is the new internet, but before we understand what it is ethereum will come out. Ethereum is to bitcoin what computers where to electrify. This will certianly happen in our lifetime, look how fast the internet grew, and we didn't have the internet to grow it at the time!
Conclusion ideal money: