Joined Jan 27, 2008
7,405 Blog Posts
© Copyright 2007-2024 iBankCoin All rights reserved under penalty of bodily harm. DISCLAIMER: This is a personal web site, reflecting the opinions of its author(s). It is not a production of my employer, and it is unaffiliated with any FINRA broker/dealer. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of anyone other than myself. The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only, and are not investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities. DATA INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO THE USERS "AS IS." NEITHER iBankCoin, NOR ITS AFFILIATES, NOR ANY THIRD PARTY DATA PROVIDER MAKE ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND REGARDING THE DATA INFORMATION, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE. Privacy Policy
Interesting. Sounds like the next open frontier for organizations interested in new avenues for money laundering.
The true value/threat here is the peer to peer method of transaction, because if it catches on, the modern day banking and reserve system would effectively collapse overnight.
Holding the bitcoins themselves though is probably a bad idea. The holders need to set up a closed ring of goods and services to minimize holding duration. Enormous exposure risk.
Thieves with anonymous (or stolen ID) accounts using the same system as you sounds scary. An account without some sort of demonstrable time-limited restriction or cap on transfers would leave you exposed. Unlike the mugger at an ATM who can only squeeze $200 out of you, they could get everything. Do such limitation options exist?