6 ms·

I would describe the distinction like Gresham's law. Suppose we have two units of currency, each with identical face value: a real tulip bulb, and a certificat

I would describe the distinction like Gresham's law. Suppose we have two units of currency, each with identical face value: a real tulip bulb, and a certificate worth 1.0 tulip bulbs, or a silver coin marked $1 and an iron coin marked $1. In each case, the face value is identical but one of the units has an additional possible area of value, extrinsic to the marked face value. You can melt down the silver coin, eat the potato, plant the tulip. This puts a floor on the value of the item - it's worth min(facevalue, extrinsicvalue). Something worth min(facevalue,extrinsicvalue) should be worth more than something worth min(facevalue, 0). Bitcoin doesn't seem to be something that can be planted, eaten, etc. It doesn't have another area of value, other than being bitcoin.

valuearb 9y ago
Much of the world lives under repressive regimes that can confiscate your assets at the drop of a hat. There is nothing other than cryptocurrencies that can protect them. That's a super valuable utility.
- colordrops 9y ago
  agreed.
- foepys 9y ago
  > There is nothing other than cryptocurrencies that can protect them. That's a super valuable utility. Until the regime gets the private keys, which isn't unlikely. As soon as cryptocurrencies are widely adopted, regimes will learn about them and not only take the cash but also search for the keys.
  - saalweachter 9y ago
    There's also the question of whether you will be allowed access to the technology to make bitcoin transactions. Take away smartphones and it's "Have fun signing your transactions by hand and thumb-typing the transaction as a text on a flip phone!". When circumventing government, there's also always the question of "how likely is it I will be caught?" and "what happens if I do?". If the penalty is "you get shot in the back of the head" or even just "you spend a year or two in a comfy minimum-security prison" and the probability is "non-zero", most rational people aren't going to assign a high enough value to "not having some money confiscated" to choose circumvention.
    - valuearb 9y ago
      You really think a regime could survive banning personal computers and smartphones? Or even that it would be in their interests to do so? They still need an economy, even if it means they can't catch everyone hiding money.
      - saalweachter 9y ago
        The question is more about the relative value of Bitcoin against other actions you can take to avoid having all your money confiscated by an oppressive regime. Do you think your government can take the cash from your wallet, the gold from under your bed, and the potatoes buried in your fields, but not your smartphone or personal computer?
        valuearb 9y ago
        Not the potatoes but they can search and find gold and cash easily. They can't search your iphone unless you give them the code, and even then you don't have to store your BTC on your own device, you can easily store it in an encrypted server out of the country. Customs can easily catch you smuggling cash, gold and potatoes, but they have no idea you are leaving to cash out your bitcoin in another country.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    Hiding your private keys is hundreds of times easier than hiding cash or bullion.
    - colordrops 9y ago
      Absolutely. You could easily memorize a key seed, and it would be impossible for anyone to even know that you own Bitcoin.

valuearb 9y ago

Much of the world lives under repressive regimes that can confiscate your assets at the drop of a hat. There is nothing other than cryptocurrencies that can protect them. That's a super valuable utility.

colordrops 9y ago
agreed.
foepys 9y ago
> There is nothing other than cryptocurrencies that can protect them. That's a super valuable utility. Until the regime gets the private keys, which isn't unlikely. As soon as cryptocurrencies are widely adopted, regimes will learn about them and not only take the cash but also search for the keys.
- saalweachter 9y ago
  There's also the question of whether you will be allowed access to the technology to make bitcoin transactions. Take away smartphones and it's "Have fun signing your transactions by hand and thumb-typing the transaction as a text on a flip phone!". When circumventing government, there's also always the question of "how likely is it I will be caught?" and "what happens if I do?". If the penalty is "you get shot in the back of the head" or even just "you spend a year or two in a comfy minimum-security prison" and the probability is "non-zero", most rational people aren't going to assign a high enough value to "not having some money confiscated" to choose circumvention.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    You really think a regime could survive banning personal computers and smartphones? Or even that it would be in their interests to do so? They still need an economy, even if it means they can't catch everyone hiding money.
    - saalweachter 9y ago
      The question is more about the relative value of Bitcoin against other actions you can take to avoid having all your money confiscated by an oppressive regime. Do you think your government can take the cash from your wallet, the gold from under your bed, and the potatoes buried in your fields, but not your smartphone or personal computer?
      - valuearb 9y ago
        Not the potatoes but they can search and find gold and cash easily. They can't search your iphone unless you give them the code, and even then you don't have to store your BTC on your own device, you can easily store it in an encrypted server out of the country. Customs can easily catch you smuggling cash, gold and potatoes, but they have no idea you are leaving to cash out your bitcoin in another country.
- valuearb 9y ago
  Hiding your private keys is hundreds of times easier than hiding cash or bullion.
  - colordrops 9y ago
    Absolutely. You could easily memorize a key seed, and it would be impossible for anyone to even know that you own Bitcoin.