7 ms·

Also, money works pretty well. Bitcoin is not 10x better. Maybe 0.1x. Bitcoin is not even useful for illicit transactions anymore.

by wycs 8y ago

keymone 8y ago
By money you mean what exactly? Anything in a bank account is not money but promise of money that can be taken away without your knowledge. Any specific currency is subject to whim of corresponding central bank. Sure, some are safer than others but still. Even the right to participate is not a given as you can be banned from opening a bank account. Bitcoin is orders of magnitude better money than anything else in every aspect except convenience, but it’s getting there.
- cortesoft 8y ago
  Yes, there are risks with banks, central banks, and government backed currencies. These risks are well known and commonly hedged against, which is why currency trading is a thing. Bitcoin also has risks; it could also collapse, have security vulnerabilities, you could lose access to your keys or if you choose to use an exchange it could be compromised or seized by authorities. Now, it is true that the risks are different than for other currencies, but you can’t just act like bitcoin doesn’t have risks or that they are a priori less risky than other currencies.
- Swizec 8y ago
  > in every aspect except convenience And yet convenience is the only aspect 99.9999% of consumers care about because they never have and never will experience any of the other problems you mention.
- ashelmire 8y ago
  >Bitcoin is orders of magnitude better money than anything else in every aspect except convenience, but it’s getting there. Firstly, if you think money exists for any reason other than convenience, you fundamentally misunderstand why money exists. Its whole purpose is convenience, to make trade easier. Secondly, the points above are more than just convenience. You have no recourse in cases of fraud or crime when it comes to bitcoin. It costs more to use. And it can be used in much fewer businesses. Those aren't just conveniences; those are fundamental issues of interest to consumers.
  - keymone 8y ago
    Convenience is a matter of development effort. Things like control over ownership, transparency, censorship and oppression resistance are not, they must be the fundamentals the system is built on. That Bitcoin is used for shady stuff and is harder to track is a red herring for all 10 years of its existence. Come back when Bitcoin’s usage for said stuff is within order of magnitude of USD’s market share.
    - dmoy 8y ago
      GP was not talking about using Bitcoin for crime, but rather the (extremely common) crime of having your money stolen via fraud or whatever. In USD you have recourse there to be made whole. In btc, you do not.
      - keymone 8y ago
        You have no recourse when your cash is stolen unless you’re insured against that. You have some recourse when stuff from your bank account is stolen because you’re paying the insurance in bank fees and taxes. Those are products you’re paying for. Similar products (and much more flexible/advanced) can be built for bitcoin.
  - mortdeus 8y ago
    Fiat currency is not convenient when it comes to international trade. And it is not convenient as a method of storing large masses of wealth. The fact is, if you were once super rich in Venezuela and you had all your wealth in stacks of Venezuelan money, now you are no longer rich. Which is why most rich people in other countries like to exchange their tangible money for other nation's currency. Because in the event that their country's economy goes belly up then at least not all of their money has become worthless. The problem is that not everybody might be willing to exchange your country's currency for theirs. Which is why the US dollar is the international standard for currency exchange. The big problem the designer of bitcoin saw is the fact that when one country has the ability to make money that everybody wants, we end up in a situation where that country has an unfair advantage to strong arm other nations into a mode of compliance. Like all the US has to do is say that nobody from the US is allowed to exchange their money for Venezuela's money, nor are they allowed to exchange their money for somebody else's money when said person has a history of exchanging currency with Venezuela. The fact that a few countries can get away with such behavior, means in the end that countries are placed into an economic ladder and nobody is allowed to take a step up if that comes at the expense of somebody higher up on the rung having to take a step down. In other words, the US has become a monopoly on all other countries when our dollar is in the middle of international trade. Bitcoin in theory is supposed to replace the dollar role in this sense where no one nation gains the ability to strong arm other nations into behaving in a way that might be contrary to their best interest.
- telaport 8y ago
  It's becoming clear that people who say what you just said sound more like the loons parroting Sovereign Citizen manifestos than rational individuals who actually understand international monetary policies. Instead of screaming about flags with yellow fringes, and "Am I being detained?", you will be screaming about how POW works and "Is BTC illegal?!". Whether you want to believe it or not, enough people are not having their money "stolen", "without their knowledge" in the real world that anything you said after that would make sense to them. In fact, you gloss over how the one thing everyone fears in crypto is - having their money taken away without their knowledge! I mean hot storage, cold storage, private keys, public keys... your online trading company being hacked... Do you honestly think that anything in crypto is safer or 10X better or easier than a regular bank that everyone in America or the modern western world, has access to?
  - keymone 8y ago
    you lost me at ad hominem.
  - salawat 8y ago
    His point is the fundamental principles of fractional reserve are flawed, and the system will alwayssuffer from the looming threat of a bank run. It's rather disingenuous to say that people having money stolen from them isn't a problem when you have a system that cyclically chucks out an Enron or Sub-Prime mortgage crisis every ten years or so that typically ends up getting resolved on the taxpayer's dime. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. If you're going to downvote someone, prove them wrong. Ad hominem let's you nowhere. Also, you are right on Bitcoin though. It has a higher chance of someone just taking your the ball and going home, something any nationally backed currency has measures in place to prevent.
    - Sangermaine 8y ago
      >His point is the fundamental principles of fractional reserve are flawed, and the system will alwayssuffer from the looming threat of a bank run. What? Are you posting from the 1930s? In the US at least this is not an issue for the average person because of the FDIC. There is no "looming threat of a bank run" anywhere in the developed world, precisely because governments and regulations prevent it. This is exactly the kind of lunacy the parent was talking about. It's near-religious ideological ranting.

Also, money works pretty well. Bitcoin is not 10x better. Maybe 0.1x. Bitcoin is not even useful for illicit transactions anymore.

by wycs 8y ago

Also, money works pretty well. Bitcoin is not 10x better. Maybe 0.1x. Bitcoin is not even useful for illicit transactions anymore.

keymone 8y ago

By money you mean what exactly? Anything in a bank account is not money but promise of money that can be taken away without your knowledge. Any specific currency is subject to whim of corresponding central bank. Sure, some are safer than others but still. Even the right to participate is not a given as you can be banned from opening a bank account. Bitcoin is orders of magnitude better money than anything else in every aspect except convenience, but it’s getting there.

cortesoft 8y ago
Yes, there are risks with banks, central banks, and government backed currencies. These risks are well known and commonly hedged against, which is why currency trading is a thing. Bitcoin also has risks; it could also collapse, have security vulnerabilities, you could lose access to your keys or if you choose to use an exchange it could be compromised or seized by authorities. Now, it is true that the risks are different than for other currencies, but you can’t just act like bitcoin doesn’t have risks or that they are a priori less risky than other currencies.
Swizec 8y ago
> in every aspect except convenience And yet convenience is the only aspect 99.9999% of consumers care about because they never have and never will experience any of the other problems you mention.
ashelmire 8y ago
>Bitcoin is orders of magnitude better money than anything else in every aspect except convenience, but it’s getting there. Firstly, if you think money exists for any reason other than convenience, you fundamentally misunderstand why money exists. Its whole purpose is convenience, to make trade easier. Secondly, the points above are more than just convenience. You have no recourse in cases of fraud or crime when it comes to bitcoin. It costs more to use. And it can be used in much fewer businesses. Those aren't just conveniences; those are fundamental issues of interest to consumers.
- keymone 8y ago
  Convenience is a matter of development effort. Things like control over ownership, transparency, censorship and oppression resistance are not, they must be the fundamentals the system is built on. That Bitcoin is used for shady stuff and is harder to track is a red herring for all 10 years of its existence. Come back when Bitcoin’s usage for said stuff is within order of magnitude of USD’s market share.
  - dmoy 8y ago
    GP was not talking about using Bitcoin for crime, but rather the (extremely common) crime of having your money stolen via fraud or whatever. In USD you have recourse there to be made whole. In btc, you do not.
    - keymone 8y ago
      You have no recourse when your cash is stolen unless you’re insured against that. You have some recourse when stuff from your bank account is stolen because you’re paying the insurance in bank fees and taxes. Those are products you’re paying for. Similar products (and much more flexible/advanced) can be built for bitcoin.
- mortdeus 8y ago
  Fiat currency is not convenient when it comes to international trade. And it is not convenient as a method of storing large masses of wealth. The fact is, if you were once super rich in Venezuela and you had all your wealth in stacks of Venezuelan money, now you are no longer rich. Which is why most rich people in other countries like to exchange their tangible money for other nation's currency. Because in the event that their country's economy goes belly up then at least not all of their money has become worthless. The problem is that not everybody might be willing to exchange your country's currency for theirs. Which is why the US dollar is the international standard for currency exchange. The big problem the designer of bitcoin saw is the fact that when one country has the ability to make money that everybody wants, we end up in a situation where that country has an unfair advantage to strong arm other nations into a mode of compliance. Like all the US has to do is say that nobody from the US is allowed to exchange their money for Venezuela's money, nor are they allowed to exchange their money for somebody else's money when said person has a history of exchanging currency with Venezuela. The fact that a few countries can get away with such behavior, means in the end that countries are placed into an economic ladder and nobody is allowed to take a step up if that comes at the expense of somebody higher up on the rung having to take a step down. In other words, the US has become a monopoly on all other countries when our dollar is in the middle of international trade. Bitcoin in theory is supposed to replace the dollar role in this sense where no one nation gains the ability to strong arm other nations into behaving in a way that might be contrary to their best interest.
telaport 8y ago
It's becoming clear that people who say what you just said sound more like the loons parroting Sovereign Citizen manifestos than rational individuals who actually understand international monetary policies. Instead of screaming about flags with yellow fringes, and "Am I being detained?", you will be screaming about how POW works and "Is BTC illegal?!". Whether you want to believe it or not, enough people are not having their money "stolen", "without their knowledge" in the real world that anything you said after that would make sense to them. In fact, you gloss over how the one thing everyone fears in crypto is - having their money taken away without their knowledge! I mean hot storage, cold storage, private keys, public keys... your online trading company being hacked... Do you honestly think that anything in crypto is safer or 10X better or easier than a regular bank that everyone in America or the modern western world, has access to?
- keymone 8y ago
  you lost me at ad hominem.
- salawat 8y ago
  His point is the fundamental principles of fractional reserve are flawed, and the system will alwayssuffer from the looming threat of a bank run. It's rather disingenuous to say that people having money stolen from them isn't a problem when you have a system that cyclically chucks out an Enron or Sub-Prime mortgage crisis every ten years or so that typically ends up getting resolved on the taxpayer's dime. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. If you're going to downvote someone, prove them wrong. Ad hominem let's you nowhere. Also, you are right on Bitcoin though. It has a higher chance of someone just taking your the ball and going home, something any nationally backed currency has measures in place to prevent.
  - Sangermaine 8y ago
    >His point is the fundamental principles of fractional reserve are flawed, and the system will alwayssuffer from the looming threat of a bank run. What? Are you posting from the 1930s? In the US at least this is not an issue for the average person because of the FDIC. There is no "looming threat of a bank run" anywhere in the developed world, precisely because governments and regulations prevent it. This is exactly the kind of lunacy the parent was talking about. It's near-religious ideological ranting.