7 ms·

You're not really transferring Bitcoin though, you're just adjusting a ledger of who owns what. There's nothing stopping you from doing the same thing with some

You're not really transferring Bitcoin though, you're just adjusting a ledger of who owns what. There's nothing stopping you from doing the same thing with some gold, you could probably even create a setup where it is done at lower transaction costs.

DennisP 9y ago
Yes but with a gold ledger you'd have counterparty risk, because the ledger would refer to something outside itself. With Bitcoin the ledger is the currency.
CyberDildonics 9y ago
> you're just adjusting a ledger of who owns what That's what bitcoin is.
quantdev 9y ago
If marking the blockchain (ledger) is not the same thing as transferring bitcoin, then there is no such thing as transferring bitcoin, because there are no actual 'coins' stored anywhere (digital or otherwise).
jstanley 9y ago
> You're not really transferring Bitcoin though, you're just adjusting a ledger of who owns what. If not this, what do you think a Bitcoin transfer looks like? > There's nothing stopping you from doing the same thing with some gold The custodian of the gold would be able to steal it from me at any time. I wouldn't actually be in possession of the gold, whereas I would be in possession of my Bitcoin keys.
- s73ver 9y ago
  Mt. Gox has proven that the custodian of your BTC can also steal it from you at any time.
  - jtms 9y ago
    Do not leave your coins on an exchange. Use a hardware or paper wallet that is physically secured.
    - sillysaurus3 9y ago
      Including Coinbase. (See stories of people having their coins stolen by subverting 2FA systems.)
- drabiega 9y ago
  The point is that physically sending the gold is not the equivalent sense of the word transfer in this case. There will of course be some differences, but the gold ledger is the best gold analog of a bitcoin transaction.
  - andrewla 9y ago
    The question is a matter of trust in the correctness of any such ledger. Bitcoin only exists as entries in a trustless ledger. The trustless ledger of gold is physical possession of that gold -- that's the only way that you can verify possession (or spend freely) without a mutually trusted third party.
    - drabiega 9y ago
      Sure, that's a valid issue, but it's unrelated to my comment on the ease of changing ownership of an asset.
Obi_Juan_Kenobi 9y ago
This greatly confuses the concept of ownership. If I physically control gold, then I have some guarantees about that ownership. Someone can physically take it from me, but I can, at least, make that difficult. If I own gold credits, then I must trust the holder of the physical gold, both to honor my credits and secure the gold. If I own Bitcoin, it means I posses the private key that enables their spending. I have to trust the collective actions and incentives of the Bitcoin network, not a single party. I think it's very clear that these are wildly different notions of ownership, and that they may be valued differently. Equating the transfer of gold credits to Bitcoins fails to account for these differences.

DennisP 9y ago

Yes but with a gold ledger you'd have counterparty risk, because the ledger would refer to something outside itself. With Bitcoin the ledger is the currency.

CyberDildonics 9y ago

> you're just adjusting a ledger of who owns what That's what bitcoin is.

quantdev 9y ago

If marking the blockchain (ledger) is not the same thing as transferring bitcoin, then there is no such thing as transferring bitcoin, because there are no actual 'coins' stored anywhere (digital or otherwise).

jstanley 9y ago

> You're not really transferring Bitcoin though, you're just adjusting a ledger of who owns what. If not this, what do you think a Bitcoin transfer looks like? > There's nothing stopping you from doing the same thing with some gold The custodian of the gold would be able to steal it from me at any time. I wouldn't actually be in possession of the gold, whereas I would be in possession of my Bitcoin keys.

s73ver 9y ago
Mt. Gox has proven that the custodian of your BTC can also steal it from you at any time.
- jtms 9y ago
  Do not leave your coins on an exchange. Use a hardware or paper wallet that is physically secured.
  - sillysaurus3 9y ago
    Including Coinbase. (See stories of people having their coins stolen by subverting 2FA systems.)
drabiega 9y ago
The point is that physically sending the gold is not the equivalent sense of the word transfer in this case. There will of course be some differences, but the gold ledger is the best gold analog of a bitcoin transaction.
- andrewla 9y ago
  The question is a matter of trust in the correctness of any such ledger. Bitcoin only exists as entries in a trustless ledger. The trustless ledger of gold is physical possession of that gold -- that's the only way that you can verify possession (or spend freely) without a mutually trusted third party.
  - drabiega 9y ago
    Sure, that's a valid issue, but it's unrelated to my comment on the ease of changing ownership of an asset.

Obi_Juan_Kenobi 9y ago

This greatly confuses the concept of ownership. If I physically control gold, then I have some guarantees about that ownership. Someone can physically take it from me, but I can, at least, make that difficult. If I own gold credits, then I must trust the holder of the physical gold, both to honor my credits and secure the gold. If I own Bitcoin, it means I posses the private key that enables their spending. I have to trust the collective actions and incentives of the Bitcoin network, not a single party. I think it's very clear that these are wildly different notions of ownership, and that they may be valued differently. Equating the transfer of gold credits to Bitcoins fails to account for these differences.