6 ms·

I actually know someone who receives her salary in Bitcoin. She's a remote contractor who lives in a country where the banking industry imposes really unreason

I actually know someone who receives her salary in Bitcoin. She's a remote contractor who lives in a country where the banking industry imposes really unreasonable fees on international transfers. To me, she is using Bitcoin the way it was originally intended: to break the stranglehold of the monopolies in banks for financial transactions. Similarly, I'm not entirely sure that the "Pay with Bitcoin" approach, where an exchange converts the currency for you is that far removed from this idea. Before Bitcoin, my options for payments were pretty limited. Either credit card or Paypal -- both of which are convenient in the US, but at the time very inconvenient (to the point of impossibility) for people living in poorer countries. I've read the early mailing list archives for Bitcoin to see if I could understand Saotoshi's intent in creating Bitcoin. Interestingly, he doesn't seem to discuss it much at all. It seems to be all about the tech. I think the "bitcoin is going to replace fiat currency" narrative is something that was adopted by overenthusiastic people who arrived on the scene later. I think Bitcoin (and potentially other digital currencies) still has a number of hurdles to get over, but it's succeeded at wresting the payment industry from the banking monopoly (plus Paypal) far better than I originally suspected it might. I certainly hope it can continue.

superuser2 11y ago
I don't think it matters (or should matter) to regulators what Satoshi intended, or what one person does, or what a few hundred people do. I agree paying with Bitcoin is a good option and I hope it becomes more accessible (and that the price stabilizes). That doesn't mean regulators should treat it like currency when, practically, the real world doesn't use it that way.
joeyspn 11y ago
> I've read the early mailing list archives for Bitcoin to see if I could understand Satoshi's intent in creating Bitcoin. The answer could be here: Thus, bit gold will not be fungible based on a simple function of, for example, the length of the string. Instead, to create fungible units dealers will have to combine different-valued pieces of bit gold into larger units of approximately equal value. This is analogous to what many commodity dealers do today to make commodity markets possible. Trust is still distributed because the estimated values of such bundles can be independently verified by many other parties in a largely or entirely automated fashion. In summary, all money mankind has ever used has been insecure in one way or another. This insecurity has been manifested in a wide variety of ways, from counterfeiting to theft, but the most pernicious of which has probably been inflation. Bit gold may provide us with a money of unprecedented security from these dangers.
- kristianp 11y ago
  That quote is from Nick Szabo. Here's a Satoshi quote: The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve. Also the text in the Genesis block suggests bitcoin was a response to the failure of banks in the GFC: The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
  - joeyspn 11y ago
    > That quote is from Nick Szabo. Precisely. Do the math...
the_mitsuhiko 11y ago
> She's a remote contractor who lives in a country where the banking industry imposes really unreasonable fees on international transfers. And she most likely converts her bitcoins into whatever local currency she needs to pay for her goods.
- jabgrabdthrow 11y ago
  I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a criticism of bitcoin's utility or not, but if it is I think you missed the point. The point is she has more currency units now than before, because she didn't have to pay the bid bad bank, even if she had to use local fiat to buy bananas.
  - kbenson 11y ago
    No, I think the point is that her method of receiving payment is functionally no different than if they drop shipped gold bullion to her. She must convert it into a usable currency in most cases.
    - dpc_pw 11y ago
      So when I was getting paid in dollars, and converted it to my local currency right away, I was proving that USD is a commodity? I could not get anything with USD, so it is not a currency? Interesting. What people miss is that commodity and currency are not exclusive. And the difference between them does not really matter all that much.
      - kbenson 11y ago
        > So when I was getting paid in dollars, and converted it to my local currency right away, I was proving that USD is a commodity? Yes. It is a commodity. People trade in it every day. > I could not get anything with USD, so it is not a currency? For your use at that location, apparently not. > What people miss is that commodity and currency are not exclusive. Yes, and I said as much in a separate reply. > And the difference between them does not really matter all that much. Except for when they are classified as one and not the other and taxed differently.
tomphoolery 11y ago
So what happens when Bitcoin crashes? Does she just not make as much money that year?
- Spivak 11y ago
  She very likely receives payment in "dollars worth of bitcoin" and not a fixed bitcoin amount.
- nickpinkston 11y ago
  She probably quickly exchanges it for local currency
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
joefarish 11y ago
Surely her contract specifies she will receive $X,000 worth of BTC rather than a fixed amount of BTC each month?
- StavrosK 11y ago
  Sure, but what's your point? My contract states the same and my national currency is the Euro.
  - varjag 11y ago
    You have your salary denominated in dollars even though your national currency is Euro?
    - StavrosK 11y ago
      Yes. It's not unusual for contractors to choose to fix their rate in any currency. Sometimes I denominate it in GBP, even if neither of the two parties is in the UK.
joosters 11y ago
Perhaps she and her company should take another look at what remittance companies are out there: the 'fact' that Bit-coin is a cheap way to transfer money (and that 'traditional' money transfer is expensive) is mostly wrong: https://www.saveonsend.com/blog/bitcoin-money-transfer https://www.saveonsend.com/blog/bitcoin-money-transfer TL/DR: shop around the money transfer companies and you can save a fortune, their fees vary wildly. Online companies can be very cheap indeed. Comparisons with bit-coin mostly cherry-pick the expensive companies to make themselves look competitive.
kaffeemitsahne 11y ago
Somewhat similarly, many Dutch people don't use credit cards (which is very wise IMO hehe), and over here we have something called "iDeal" that's really only supported by Dutch webshops. Bitcoin can be a handy alternative to cc/paypal for us.
- toothbrush 11y ago
  As a Dutch person who does hold a credit card, i am always baffled by the near-taboo reaction when it comes up in conversation (noticed this in both France and the Netherlands). People seem to take pride in an almost pious/religious way in the fact that they want nothing to do with credit cards. I just don't get it. I know what the downsides of using a credit card can be (e.g., high interest rates) but they certainly have advantages, too (they work everywhere i travel, there are neat insurance policies). I use mine as a debit card for online and foreign purchases: there's an automatic payment at the end of the month from my current account into the credit card account, so i end up never ever paying interest, it only costs me the €x per year in card fees.
  - Shorel 11y ago
    The public attitude in Colombia towards credit cards is very similar.
  - bkor 11y ago
    Credit card is more difficult to keep track of your finances. You don't notice your balance changing until the end of the month. Further, you're doing things on credit, where most Dutch mentality is to save, then spend. The insurance policy is there because of a lack of security. Plus you pay it back anyways. E.g. if you pay with your credit card abroad they make money on the currency conversion plus they charge the merchant significantly more. Hidden costs that you don't notice. The bank cards / Meastro system is way cheaper. If you stay within the EU you can just pay with your bank/debit card. Only if you travel outside of the EU you'd really need a credit card. Not too many people need that, so someone having a credit card is not that common (though IIRC Rabobank automatically gives you one). Plus the whole confusing difference between credit card and the bank cards. I'd highly prefer things to go out of my bank account immediately. My bank card doesn't have the credit card number and isn't accepted. I'd wish my bank provided a better (integrated) overview.
emodendroket 11y ago
Personally I wouldn't want to receive my salary in a currency whose value, relative to the money I have to use everywhere, fluctuates wildly all the time.
- rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
  I think the intent was to show how easily one can transfer Bitcoin as a means of payment, then transfer the amount into a more preferred currency, which presumably, in a country with poor financial institutions/regulation, is easier than directly wiring USD
kanzure 11y ago
> I've read the early mailing list archives for Bitcoin to see if I could understand Saotoshi's intent in creating Bitcoin. Interestingly, he doesn't seem to discuss it much at all. It seems to be all about the tech. http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-source?xg_source=activity http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-sour...

superuser2 11y ago

I don't think it matters (or should matter) to regulators what Satoshi intended, or what one person does, or what a few hundred people do. I agree paying with Bitcoin is a good option and I hope it becomes more accessible (and that the price stabilizes). That doesn't mean regulators should treat it like currency when, practically, the real world doesn't use it that way.

joeyspn 11y ago

> I've read the early mailing list archives for Bitcoin to see if I could understand Satoshi's intent in creating Bitcoin. The answer could be here: Thus, bit gold will not be fungible based on a simple function of, for example, the length of the string. Instead, to create fungible units dealers will have to combine different-valued pieces of bit gold into larger units of approximately equal value. This is analogous to what many commodity dealers do today to make commodity markets possible. Trust is still distributed because the estimated values of such bundles can be independently verified by many other parties in a largely or entirely automated fashion. In summary, all money mankind has ever used has been insecure in one way or another. This insecurity has been manifested in a wide variety of ways, from counterfeiting to theft, but the most pernicious of which has probably been inflation. Bit gold may provide us with a money of unprecedented security from these dangers.

kristianp 11y ago
That quote is from Nick Szabo. Here's a Satoshi quote: The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve. Also the text in the Genesis block suggests bitcoin was a response to the failure of banks in the GFC: The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
- joeyspn 11y ago
  > That quote is from Nick Szabo. Precisely. Do the math...

the_mitsuhiko 11y ago

> She's a remote contractor who lives in a country where the banking industry imposes really unreasonable fees on international transfers. And she most likely converts her bitcoins into whatever local currency she needs to pay for her goods.

jabgrabdthrow 11y ago
I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a criticism of bitcoin's utility or not, but if it is I think you missed the point. The point is she has more currency units now than before, because she didn't have to pay the bid bad bank, even if she had to use local fiat to buy bananas.
- kbenson 11y ago
  No, I think the point is that her method of receiving payment is functionally no different than if they drop shipped gold bullion to her. She must convert it into a usable currency in most cases.
  - dpc_pw 11y ago
    So when I was getting paid in dollars, and converted it to my local currency right away, I was proving that USD is a commodity? I could not get anything with USD, so it is not a currency? Interesting. What people miss is that commodity and currency are not exclusive. And the difference between them does not really matter all that much.
    - kbenson 11y ago
      > So when I was getting paid in dollars, and converted it to my local currency right away, I was proving that USD is a commodity? Yes. It is a commodity. People trade in it every day. > I could not get anything with USD, so it is not a currency? For your use at that location, apparently not. > What people miss is that commodity and currency are not exclusive. Yes, and I said as much in a separate reply. > And the difference between them does not really matter all that much. Except for when they are classified as one and not the other and taxed differently.

tomphoolery 11y ago

So what happens when Bitcoin crashes? Does she just not make as much money that year?

Spivak 11y ago
She very likely receives payment in "dollars worth of bitcoin" and not a fixed bitcoin amount.
nickpinkston 11y ago
She probably quickly exchanges it for local currency
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

joefarish 11y ago

Surely her contract specifies she will receive $X,000 worth of BTC rather than a fixed amount of BTC each month?

StavrosK 11y ago
Sure, but what's your point? My contract states the same and my national currency is the Euro.
- varjag 11y ago
  You have your salary denominated in dollars even though your national currency is Euro?
  - StavrosK 11y ago
    Yes. It's not unusual for contractors to choose to fix their rate in any currency. Sometimes I denominate it in GBP, even if neither of the two parties is in the UK.

joosters 11y ago

Perhaps she and her company should take another look at what remittance companies are out there: the 'fact' that Bit-coin is a cheap way to transfer money (and that 'traditional' money transfer is expensive) is mostly wrong: https://www.saveonsend.com/blog/bitcoin-money-transfer https://www.saveonsend.com/blog/bitcoin-money-transfer TL/DR: shop around the money transfer companies and you can save a fortune, their fees vary wildly. Online companies can be very cheap indeed. Comparisons with bit-coin mostly cherry-pick the expensive companies to make themselves look competitive.

kaffeemitsahne 11y ago

Somewhat similarly, many Dutch people don't use credit cards (which is very wise IMO hehe), and over here we have something called "iDeal" that's really only supported by Dutch webshops. Bitcoin can be a handy alternative to cc/paypal for us.

toothbrush 11y ago
As a Dutch person who does hold a credit card, i am always baffled by the near-taboo reaction when it comes up in conversation (noticed this in both France and the Netherlands). People seem to take pride in an almost pious/religious way in the fact that they want nothing to do with credit cards. I just don't get it. I know what the downsides of using a credit card can be (e.g., high interest rates) but they certainly have advantages, too (they work everywhere i travel, there are neat insurance policies). I use mine as a debit card for online and foreign purchases: there's an automatic payment at the end of the month from my current account into the credit card account, so i end up never ever paying interest, it only costs me the €x per year in card fees.
- Shorel 11y ago
  The public attitude in Colombia towards credit cards is very similar.
- bkor 11y ago
  Credit card is more difficult to keep track of your finances. You don't notice your balance changing until the end of the month. Further, you're doing things on credit, where most Dutch mentality is to save, then spend. The insurance policy is there because of a lack of security. Plus you pay it back anyways. E.g. if you pay with your credit card abroad they make money on the currency conversion plus they charge the merchant significantly more. Hidden costs that you don't notice. The bank cards / Meastro system is way cheaper. If you stay within the EU you can just pay with your bank/debit card. Only if you travel outside of the EU you'd really need a credit card. Not too many people need that, so someone having a credit card is not that common (though IIRC Rabobank automatically gives you one). Plus the whole confusing difference between credit card and the bank cards. I'd highly prefer things to go out of my bank account immediately. My bank card doesn't have the credit card number and isn't accepted. I'd wish my bank provided a better (integrated) overview.

emodendroket 11y ago

Personally I wouldn't want to receive my salary in a currency whose value, relative to the money I have to use everywhere, fluctuates wildly all the time.

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
I think the intent was to show how easily one can transfer Bitcoin as a means of payment, then transfer the amount into a more preferred currency, which presumably, in a country with poor financial institutions/regulation, is easier than directly wiring USD

kanzure 11y ago

> I've read the early mailing list archives for Bitcoin to see if I could understand Saotoshi's intent in creating Bitcoin. Interestingly, he doesn't seem to discuss it much at all. It seems to be all about the tech. http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-source?xg_source=activity http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-sour...