5 ms·

Right now, I like anything that helps normalize the white-hot hype of cryptocurrencies. There's some real utility in this technology, and we won't get to see it

by wyc 9y ago

Right now, I like anything that helps normalize the white-hot hype of cryptocurrencies. There's some real utility in this technology, and we won't get to see it until companies are forced to make sustainable business cases and serve real customers. However, > A website set up by the Chinese central bank warned that cryptocurrencies are "increasingly used as a tool in criminal activities such as money laundering, drug trafficking, smuggling, and illegal fundraising". That sounds a bit like lip service...are they really just protecting investors and citizens, or is it because the assets are much harder to seize? Recently, there has been a large crackdown on foreign real estate purchases[0]. What other incentives does the party have for this policy? [0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellensheng/2017/07/31/chinese-overseas-real-estate-buying-spree-slows-delayed-by-tightened-capital-controls/#1dd5a37514f7 https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellensheng/2017/07/31/chinese-o...

baldfat 9y ago
I think all governments hate the crypto part of the currencies. You can't tax what you can't track. You can't manipulate what you don't have. I personally fall a little to the left of currencies. I think these monetary systems are far right Libertarian's dream seeds. I do realize I am probably wrong but this is how they make me feel.
- wyc 9y ago
  That's a good point about taxes. I wonder how the tax structures of the future will evolve if cryptocurrencies reach full swing. It could be reasonable to expect elaborate tariff systems that skim off the channels bridging wet and dry worlds[0]. With what we have today, there is already slightly less to tax[1], and with the ideas of today, there could be even less. You can't siphon tax if it's not in the contract code. [0] https://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2006/11/wet-code-and-dry.html https://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2006/11/wet-code-and-dry.h... [1] http://fortune.com/2017/03/19/irs-bitcoin-lawsuit/ http://fortune.com/2017/03/19/irs-bitcoin-lawsuit/
- lojack 9y ago
  > You can't tax what you can't track. Most cryptocurrencies are actually quite trackable. Significantly more trackable than fiat currencies. There are notable exceptions like Monero and currencies specifically meant to protect privacy, but the vast majority are quite public.
  - baddox 9y ago
    I'd say they're only more easily tracked than cash. It doesn't get much easier to track than a bank or credit card account. And of course cash has its own problems (namely, it's difficult or even illegal to get and transport in large quantities while maintaining some anonymity).
    - vasilipupkin 9y ago
      At some point, you want to buy something with your money. The minute you do, tax authorities in your country can detect the discrepancy between your stated income and your lifestyle.
snitko 9y ago
The sustainable business case is permissionless nature of Bitcoin. Everything else comes down to it. This talk of blockchain technology being somewhat of a new wonderful invention that's supposed to magically make companies more profitable...? Not so. The reason why Bitcoin exists is because governments want control over money. Bitcoin gives people freedom. Period. Everything else is noise.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  > governments want control over money Of course. And for a good reason. People utter this line as if governments wanting control over money was somehow bad. Money, within all human societies that exist or existed, is pretty much synonymous with power. It is the tool that allows an individual to incent, compel and coordinate other people to do what said individual wants. With $1 you can make someone cook you a hot dog. With $1K you can get someone to give you pretty advanced tech. With $1M you literally make other people build you a house. State by its design is supposed to have monopoly on ultimate power. Since money is synonymous with power, the state needs to control money in order to fulfill its function (and to secure its ability to fulfill that function). So it's obvious that the state may not be happy about technologies that prevent them from controlling the money. It's threatening the state's ability to enforce rules. And despite the popular dystopian rhetoric, state being able to enforce rules is almost always a good thing for the society.
  - snitko 9y ago
    You think it's for good reason. Many people think it's for bad reason. Those people invented and developed Bitcoin. Now the people who think state has no business messing with money and private lives of people have an actual tool upon their hands.
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      I will say those people are wrong, and they're only able to think that because they live in stable societies under rule of law, and have time to criticize somewhat abstract issues like this. Now don't get me wrong - I'm not saying the present balance of power between individual and the state is perfectly placed. But thinking about ditching states altogether is, presently, a pretty dumb idea, that only signals a lack of awareness of how the society works.
jaxytee 9y ago
Over the past couple of years, China has lost around a trillion dollars in foreign reserves (a 4 trillion dollar cash pile earned from exporting all those made in china goods) to capital flight. Whenever a Chinese citizen or business takes yuan and exchanges them for a foreign asset, China's fx cash pile is diminished. If china's "savings account" is bled dry, it would have to choice but to devalue and print its currency to handled some of it local fiscal issues. To prevent "rocking the boat" with a currency devaluation before the Communist Party Meeting this fall, China has locked down it's capital account by blocking foreign company acquisitions, repatriation by multinational corporations (think blocking Apple's yuan accounts from withdrawals to USD), Toronto real estate purchases, etc. Bitcoin was an unregulated and popular means of capital flight. It was just a matter of time before they cracked down on it as well.
baddox 9y ago
That strikes me as an odd opinion. It sounds like you're saying that you appreciate an artificial decrease in cryptocurrencies' value or hype because you think there are other things artificially increasing it.

by wyc 9y ago

baldfat 9y ago

I think all governments hate the crypto part of the currencies. You can't tax what you can't track. You can't manipulate what you don't have. I personally fall a little to the left of currencies. I think these monetary systems are far right Libertarian's dream seeds. I do realize I am probably wrong but this is how they make me feel.

wyc 9y ago
That's a good point about taxes. I wonder how the tax structures of the future will evolve if cryptocurrencies reach full swing. It could be reasonable to expect elaborate tariff systems that skim off the channels bridging wet and dry worlds[0]. With what we have today, there is already slightly less to tax[1], and with the ideas of today, there could be even less. You can't siphon tax if it's not in the contract code. [0] https://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2006/11/wet-code-and-dry.html https://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2006/11/wet-code-and-dry.h... [1] http://fortune.com/2017/03/19/irs-bitcoin-lawsuit/ http://fortune.com/2017/03/19/irs-bitcoin-lawsuit/
lojack 9y ago
> You can't tax what you can't track. Most cryptocurrencies are actually quite trackable. Significantly more trackable than fiat currencies. There are notable exceptions like Monero and currencies specifically meant to protect privacy, but the vast majority are quite public.
- baddox 9y ago
  I'd say they're only more easily tracked than cash. It doesn't get much easier to track than a bank or credit card account. And of course cash has its own problems (namely, it's difficult or even illegal to get and transport in large quantities while maintaining some anonymity).
  - vasilipupkin 9y ago
    At some point, you want to buy something with your money. The minute you do, tax authorities in your country can detect the discrepancy between your stated income and your lifestyle.

snitko 9y ago

The sustainable business case is permissionless nature of Bitcoin. Everything else comes down to it. This talk of blockchain technology being somewhat of a new wonderful invention that's supposed to magically make companies more profitable...? Not so. The reason why Bitcoin exists is because governments want control over money. Bitcoin gives people freedom. Period. Everything else is noise.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
> governments want control over money Of course. And for a good reason. People utter this line as if governments wanting control over money was somehow bad. Money, within all human societies that exist or existed, is pretty much synonymous with power. It is the tool that allows an individual to incent, compel and coordinate other people to do what said individual wants. With $1 you can make someone cook you a hot dog. With $1K you can get someone to give you pretty advanced tech. With $1M you literally make other people build you a house. State by its design is supposed to have monopoly on ultimate power. Since money is synonymous with power, the state needs to control money in order to fulfill its function (and to secure its ability to fulfill that function). So it's obvious that the state may not be happy about technologies that prevent them from controlling the money. It's threatening the state's ability to enforce rules. And despite the popular dystopian rhetoric, state being able to enforce rules is almost always a good thing for the society.
- snitko 9y ago
  You think it's for good reason. Many people think it's for bad reason. Those people invented and developed Bitcoin. Now the people who think state has no business messing with money and private lives of people have an actual tool upon their hands.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    I will say those people are wrong, and they're only able to think that because they live in stable societies under rule of law, and have time to criticize somewhat abstract issues like this. Now don't get me wrong - I'm not saying the present balance of power between individual and the state is perfectly placed. But thinking about ditching states altogether is, presently, a pretty dumb idea, that only signals a lack of awareness of how the society works.

jaxytee 9y ago

Over the past couple of years, China has lost around a trillion dollars in foreign reserves (a 4 trillion dollar cash pile earned from exporting all those made in china goods) to capital flight. Whenever a Chinese citizen or business takes yuan and exchanges them for a foreign asset, China's fx cash pile is diminished. If china's "savings account" is bled dry, it would have to choice but to devalue and print its currency to handled some of it local fiscal issues. To prevent "rocking the boat" with a currency devaluation before the Communist Party Meeting this fall, China has locked down it's capital account by blocking foreign company acquisitions, repatriation by multinational corporations (think blocking Apple's yuan accounts from withdrawals to USD), Toronto real estate purchases, etc. Bitcoin was an unregulated and popular means of capital flight. It was just a matter of time before they cracked down on it as well.

baddox 9y ago

That strikes me as an odd opinion. It sounds like you're saying that you appreciate an artificial decrease in cryptocurrencies' value or hype because you think there are other things artificially increasing it.