Comment: Not necessarily so. Using

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Right, but the point is... (see in situ)

Not necessarily so. Using

Not necessarily so.

Using their massive size to drum up volatility, could (I'm not saying I believe they do) be a way to make Bitcoin appear less useful for anything other than silly gambling.

Guys selling 1 oz of gold yesterday for 6 BTC, are going to have an awfully hard time today, unless they spaced their BTC/USD/GLD trade pretty tightly. Same goes for other business processes, many of whom are conducted in a way that implicitly depends on some semblance of value stability of the currency they use.

Of course, just as people are free to use Bitcoin to avoid being pillaged by the Fed, the Fed is free to make it as hard for them as they please. Over time, mechanisms for dealing with volatility will evolve, and perhaps become integral to those conducting business in BTC. Even Wall Streeters may be good for something, you know, even besides than target practice..