8 ms·

Bitcoin is just a soap opera that keeps on giving... it's fantastic how much credibility something can keep loosing and loosing.

spiderfarmer 10y ago
Nowadays it's hard to trust any monetary system with all the hacking, skimming and fraud that takes place.
- jbmorgado 10y ago
  Well, you can be pretty well sure that unless western civilization fails and your money is worthless anyway, that you can trust having your money in USD/EUR in a bank up to a certain amount (100K in the EU, not sure how much in the USA), even if they get hacked, skim and commit fraud. Same can't be said for Bitcoin and we keep being reminded of it.
  - ianpurton 10y ago
    The 100K is against bank default. If your account is hacked from your side, you might have trouble getting the bank to pay you. It would be on you to prove you were hacked.
    - s_q_b 10y ago
      In the US at least, the semi-governmental FDIC automatically publicly insures accounts, not banks, up to $250,000. In addition most banks are privately insured against fraud. I've dealt with an 8k fraudulent charge on my card before. The bank investigated, sent over a sworn affidavit to sign, and they refunded my money in less than 24 hours.
      - raddad 10y ago
        >refunded my money in less than 24 hours. I had a $20 error charge on my card and it took a month for the refund. This is with the vendor stating in writing it was their error. I no longer bank there.
    - danielweber 10y ago
      This is factually incorrect. If you didn't authorize the transfer, the bank is legally required to make you whole. This only applies to personal accounts, not business accounts. There is a reason why scammers work so hard to find someone to "cash checks" or "withdraw funds" or do that kind of nonsense. Electronically stealing funds is easy. Keeping those funds is hard.
  - mtgx 10y ago
    > Well, you can be pretty well sure that unless western civilization fails and your money is worthless anyway, that you can trust having your money in USD/EUR in a bank up to a certain amount (100K in the EU, not sure how much in the USA), Eh. Tell that to the Greeks. And it happened for much less than "civilization failing".
    - pjc50 10y ago
      Greeks didn't lose money in the bank. There were temporary losses of ATM availability due to bank runs, but the account protection was maintained. Even in Cyprus the "bail-in" applied to over €150k only.
    - oneloop 10y ago
      Maybe you meant Cyprus?
    - oneloop 10y ago
      Maybe you meant Cyprus?
- Lazare 10y ago
  Really? I don't find it particularly hard. > all the hacking, skimming and fraud Sure, I was impacted by that. A while back, I noticed some movie tickets charged to my card in Australia. I called my bank, disputed the charges, they reversed them and sent me a new credit card. Took...maybe 20 minutes of my time? Max? And from this I'm meant to learn I can't trust the current system? Honest question: Why?
VMG 10y ago
The people who lose credibility here are * The Economist * BBC * Gavin Andresen (unless he was hacked)
- jbmorgado 10y ago
  Well, Gavin Andresen is a bitcoin core dev that according to this very news just got hacked. It's logical to think that when a core dev of something as sensible as bitcoin get's hacked and you can't trust the code anymore, it takes a really big chunk of credibility from bitcoin.
  - VMG 10y ago
    It's not clear if Gavin's Blog, Twitter or commit-access machine was hacked, if at all. Gavin is one of many core devs, and Bitcoin good enough security procedures to survive a dev's machine being hacked.
  - sspiff 10y ago
    I think you mean to say sensitive, not sensible. Sensible means "makes sense".
    - jakub_g 10y ago
      That's a common mistake, and BTW, in Spanish and French "sensible" is the word for "sensitive" (I infer from the name the parent could be of Spanish-speaking origin)
    - wolfgke 10y ago
      This is a typical German-English false friend: sensible (en) - vernünftig (de) sensitive (en) - sensibel (de)
      - thevibesman 10y ago
        Also in French: sensible (en) - raisonnable (fr) sensitive (en) - sensible (fr)
the_mitsuhiko 10y ago
Why is this thing so popular? An our or two ago there were 7 stories about bitcoin on the frontpage :-/
- skocznymroczny 10y ago
  Lots of people who spent a lot of cash on bitcoins and now need to bring more people in to raise its value so that they can cash out.
  - mvanvoorden 10y ago
    That explains why Steam now accepts bitcoins. Because nobody uses it to actually buy stuff... /s In The Netherlands, you can order takeaway food at practically any restaurant with bitcoin. Overnight, this was the biggest expansion in the acceptance of Bitcoin to date. Whatever your opinion is about bitcoin, it absolutely does not reflect the current reality, where Bitcoin is seen more and more as a serious alternative for payments.
- ethanbond 10y ago
  Because a) it's a seriously fascinating system from a technical standpoint, b) it has immense potential to solve a lot of problems — especially for those in areas with underdeveloped financial systems, and c) a lot of people are heavily invested in its success. Regardless of whether or not you think it's overhyped, it's a really really cool experiment in economics and cryptography.
  - unlinker 10y ago
    In my case I have always liked and followed the Bitcoin scene because everybody in his right mind knew it would turn into a shitshow. I mean you have the combination of an open source community, libertarians, and a shitload of money. The outcome is pretty obvious.
    - smokeyj 10y ago
      I like to imagine Krugman and co pacing around their offices wondering why Bitcoin hasn't completely crashed - with the occasional murmur of "deflationary" and "libertarians" and "no it can't be".
wcummings 10y ago
They'd probably be more upset about losing credibility.
orblivion 10y ago
Why laugh at someone's failure? They're trying to pull off a very different power structure. It has political issues they clearly haven't worked out, but how much time in the grand scheme have they had to do so compared to the standard ones?
- danielweber 10y ago
  It's always harder to do something than to sit around watching the people doing it. So I give you that. This is hard. However, every time someone has interacted with the Bitcoin community and dealt with the assholes telling them "you just don't get it! this is the new economy!", it makes that someone smile a little bit each time there's bad news.
  - orblivion 10y ago
    Yeah I'll give you that.
- Frondo 10y ago
  Well, because, frankly speaking, they're trying to pull off a very different power structure without getting buy-in from everyone involved. Green U.S. money? At least, at the end of the election cycle, I can cast a vote for someone who will appoint a Fed chair I like. There's some tenuous link from the decision-makers back to me, an American voter. The bitcoin people? They just said "here it is, oh and also we call all the shots, kthxbye". What if there's some feature of the new power structure I don't like? Where can I seek redress? Ask a bitcoin advocate, and what you get is crickets. A new power structure should be more inclusive of people's voices, not less. So, in this case, I welcome the failure.
  - aianus 10y ago
    > At least, at the end of the election cycle, I can cast a vote for someone who will appoint a Fed chair I like. With Bitcoin, you can "cast your vote" for what software the network is running too; you buy a miner and contribute to a mining pool that agrees with your philosophies. Of course, unlike a federal election (or maybe not...), more capital => more votes. The core developers really don't have any power beyond that given to them by individual miners and mining investors.
ok_craig 10y ago
Wouldn't you agree that a multi-billion dollar market cap, millions of daily tx volume, and a pretty decent price of $400, all of which keep growing in the face of so much "credibility losing", counter it rather nicely? Humans are folly but the technology speaks for itself.
wyager 10y ago
How does the antics of some developers influence the credibility of a system they are one of many contributors to? You can claim that Bitcoin is going down the toilet all you like, but by all metrics relevant to its purpose (namely value and popularity) it's doing extremely well. Perhaps your mistake is that you only notice when something that could be construed as negative happens around Bitcoin. Such things are usually more entertaining than the relatively mundane improvements and victories that occur on a regular basis.

spiderfarmer 10y ago

Nowadays it's hard to trust any monetary system with all the hacking, skimming and fraud that takes place.

jbmorgado 10y ago
Well, you can be pretty well sure that unless western civilization fails and your money is worthless anyway, that you can trust having your money in USD/EUR in a bank up to a certain amount (100K in the EU, not sure how much in the USA), even if they get hacked, skim and commit fraud. Same can't be said for Bitcoin and we keep being reminded of it.
- ianpurton 10y ago
  The 100K is against bank default. If your account is hacked from your side, you might have trouble getting the bank to pay you. It would be on you to prove you were hacked.
  - s_q_b 10y ago
    In the US at least, the semi-governmental FDIC automatically publicly insures accounts, not banks, up to $250,000. In addition most banks are privately insured against fraud. I've dealt with an 8k fraudulent charge on my card before. The bank investigated, sent over a sworn affidavit to sign, and they refunded my money in less than 24 hours.
    - raddad 10y ago
      >refunded my money in less than 24 hours. I had a $20 error charge on my card and it took a month for the refund. This is with the vendor stating in writing it was their error. I no longer bank there.
  - danielweber 10y ago
    This is factually incorrect. If you didn't authorize the transfer, the bank is legally required to make you whole. This only applies to personal accounts, not business accounts. There is a reason why scammers work so hard to find someone to "cash checks" or "withdraw funds" or do that kind of nonsense. Electronically stealing funds is easy. Keeping those funds is hard.
- mtgx 10y ago
  > Well, you can be pretty well sure that unless western civilization fails and your money is worthless anyway, that you can trust having your money in USD/EUR in a bank up to a certain amount (100K in the EU, not sure how much in the USA), Eh. Tell that to the Greeks. And it happened for much less than "civilization failing".
  - pjc50 10y ago
    Greeks didn't lose money in the bank. There were temporary losses of ATM availability due to bank runs, but the account protection was maintained. Even in Cyprus the "bail-in" applied to over €150k only.
  - oneloop 10y ago
    Maybe you meant Cyprus?
  - oneloop 10y ago
    Maybe you meant Cyprus?
Lazare 10y ago
Really? I don't find it particularly hard. > all the hacking, skimming and fraud Sure, I was impacted by that. A while back, I noticed some movie tickets charged to my card in Australia. I called my bank, disputed the charges, they reversed them and sent me a new credit card. Took...maybe 20 minutes of my time? Max? And from this I'm meant to learn I can't trust the current system? Honest question: Why?

VMG 10y ago

The people who lose credibility here are * The Economist * BBC * Gavin Andresen (unless he was hacked)

jbmorgado 10y ago
Well, Gavin Andresen is a bitcoin core dev that according to this very news just got hacked. It's logical to think that when a core dev of something as sensible as bitcoin get's hacked and you can't trust the code anymore, it takes a really big chunk of credibility from bitcoin.
- VMG 10y ago
  It's not clear if Gavin's Blog, Twitter or commit-access machine was hacked, if at all. Gavin is one of many core devs, and Bitcoin good enough security procedures to survive a dev's machine being hacked.
- sspiff 10y ago
  I think you mean to say sensitive, not sensible. Sensible means "makes sense".
  - jakub_g 10y ago
    That's a common mistake, and BTW, in Spanish and French "sensible" is the word for "sensitive" (I infer from the name the parent could be of Spanish-speaking origin)
  - wolfgke 10y ago
    This is a typical German-English false friend: sensible (en) - vernünftig (de) sensitive (en) - sensibel (de)
    - thevibesman 10y ago
      Also in French: sensible (en) - raisonnable (fr) sensitive (en) - sensible (fr)

the_mitsuhiko 10y ago

Why is this thing so popular? An our or two ago there were 7 stories about bitcoin on the frontpage :-/

skocznymroczny 10y ago
Lots of people who spent a lot of cash on bitcoins and now need to bring more people in to raise its value so that they can cash out.
- mvanvoorden 10y ago
  That explains why Steam now accepts bitcoins. Because nobody uses it to actually buy stuff... /s In The Netherlands, you can order takeaway food at practically any restaurant with bitcoin. Overnight, this was the biggest expansion in the acceptance of Bitcoin to date. Whatever your opinion is about bitcoin, it absolutely does not reflect the current reality, where Bitcoin is seen more and more as a serious alternative for payments.
ethanbond 10y ago
Because a) it's a seriously fascinating system from a technical standpoint, b) it has immense potential to solve a lot of problems — especially for those in areas with underdeveloped financial systems, and c) a lot of people are heavily invested in its success. Regardless of whether or not you think it's overhyped, it's a really really cool experiment in economics and cryptography.
- unlinker 10y ago
  In my case I have always liked and followed the Bitcoin scene because everybody in his right mind knew it would turn into a shitshow. I mean you have the combination of an open source community, libertarians, and a shitload of money. The outcome is pretty obvious.
  - smokeyj 10y ago
    I like to imagine Krugman and co pacing around their offices wondering why Bitcoin hasn't completely crashed - with the occasional murmur of "deflationary" and "libertarians" and "no it can't be".

wcummings 10y ago

They'd probably be more upset about losing credibility.

orblivion 10y ago

Why laugh at someone's failure? They're trying to pull off a very different power structure. It has political issues they clearly haven't worked out, but how much time in the grand scheme have they had to do so compared to the standard ones?

danielweber 10y ago
It's always harder to do something than to sit around watching the people doing it. So I give you that. This is hard. However, every time someone has interacted with the Bitcoin community and dealt with the assholes telling them "you just don't get it! this is the new economy!", it makes that someone smile a little bit each time there's bad news.
- orblivion 10y ago
  Yeah I'll give you that.
Frondo 10y ago
Well, because, frankly speaking, they're trying to pull off a very different power structure without getting buy-in from everyone involved. Green U.S. money? At least, at the end of the election cycle, I can cast a vote for someone who will appoint a Fed chair I like. There's some tenuous link from the decision-makers back to me, an American voter. The bitcoin people? They just said "here it is, oh and also we call all the shots, kthxbye". What if there's some feature of the new power structure I don't like? Where can I seek redress? Ask a bitcoin advocate, and what you get is crickets. A new power structure should be more inclusive of people's voices, not less. So, in this case, I welcome the failure.
- aianus 10y ago
  > At least, at the end of the election cycle, I can cast a vote for someone who will appoint a Fed chair I like. With Bitcoin, you can "cast your vote" for what software the network is running too; you buy a miner and contribute to a mining pool that agrees with your philosophies. Of course, unlike a federal election (or maybe not...), more capital => more votes. The core developers really don't have any power beyond that given to them by individual miners and mining investors.

ok_craig 10y ago

Wouldn't you agree that a multi-billion dollar market cap, millions of daily tx volume, and a pretty decent price of $400, all of which keep growing in the face of so much "credibility losing", counter it rather nicely? Humans are folly but the technology speaks for itself.

wyager 10y ago

How does the antics of some developers influence the credibility of a system they are one of many contributors to? You can claim that Bitcoin is going down the toilet all you like, but by all metrics relevant to its purpose (namely value and popularity) it's doing extremely well. Perhaps your mistake is that you only notice when something that could be construed as negative happens around Bitcoin. Such things are usually more entertaining than the relatively mundane improvements and victories that occur on a regular basis.