3 ms·

> I think there's value in reducing the politically privileged's means to dominate their power over the general populaced Cryptocurrency doesn't do this.

bitxbitxbitcoin 8y ago
Cryptocurrency hasn’t done this yet but it certainly has the potential to do exactly this.
- root_axis 8y ago
  How?
  - dnautics 8y ago
    Typically, states control the money supply, and typically in the direction of impoverishing laborers to fill the pockets of privileged interests. Diminishing this power alone could be transformative.
    - root_axis 8y ago
      Cryptocurrency doesn't cause a government to lose control of its money supply.
      - cdiddy2 8y ago
        It doesn't, but it does bring competition to the government controlled money monopoly. Competition is generally seen as a good thing for the majority of people
        root_axis 8y ago
        I guess it technically qualifies as competition because it exists, but in reality it isn't at all competitive. If it were, and the government cared to stop it, it could just make its use illegal. That wouldn't kill it, but most people wouldn't use it because there's nothing to gain using it and only to lose (unless you were doing something illegal already).
  - Sir_Substance 8y ago
    The simple fact that you ask this question tells me you don't live in india, where a few years ago the government straight up deleted quite a lot of personal wealth by declaring the two largest notes worthless with mere hours of warning: http://time.com/4567605/india-currency-change-queues-delhi/ http://time.com/4567605/india-currency-change-queues-delhi/ The original statement was: > I think there's value in reducing the politically privileged's means to dominate their power over the general populaced We can argue whether there's value in that. But if you're asking /how/ bitcoin et al can do that, the answer is that it removes direct control over the currency from nations and parliaments. They may still be able to wield indirect control through a variety of other means, but that /is/ less control than simply being able to declare 500 and 1000 rupee notes valueless.
    - semi-extrinsic 8y ago
      As long as you can't buy food or pay your electricity bill with any cryptocurrency, you haven't achieved any of these things. So the question becomes, why should the supermarket or the utility company accept crypto payments instead of dollars, when they know the former can lose 20%-99% of its value overnight, while the value of the latter is guaranteed to be kept stable by the government?
      - Sir_Substance 8y ago
        The key word in this discussion is potential.
        semi-extrinsic 8y ago
        Ah, but you don't need crypto to have that potential. Anyone could issue their own currency, and try to convince people to use it for actually buying and selling stuff. But that convincing part is really the key, and crypto very explicitly doesn't solve the problem that businesses will need to trust the issuing entity before they switch to using a new currency. People and companies want to have a central, stable issuing authority they can trust.

bitxbitxbitcoin 8y ago

Cryptocurrency hasn’t done this yet but it certainly has the potential to do exactly this.

root_axis 8y ago
How?
- dnautics 8y ago
  Typically, states control the money supply, and typically in the direction of impoverishing laborers to fill the pockets of privileged interests. Diminishing this power alone could be transformative.
  - root_axis 8y ago
    Cryptocurrency doesn't cause a government to lose control of its money supply.
    - cdiddy2 8y ago
      It doesn't, but it does bring competition to the government controlled money monopoly. Competition is generally seen as a good thing for the majority of people
      - root_axis 8y ago
        I guess it technically qualifies as competition because it exists, but in reality it isn't at all competitive. If it were, and the government cared to stop it, it could just make its use illegal. That wouldn't kill it, but most people wouldn't use it because there's nothing to gain using it and only to lose (unless you were doing something illegal already).
- Sir_Substance 8y ago
  The simple fact that you ask this question tells me you don't live in india, where a few years ago the government straight up deleted quite a lot of personal wealth by declaring the two largest notes worthless with mere hours of warning: http://time.com/4567605/india-currency-change-queues-delhi/ http://time.com/4567605/india-currency-change-queues-delhi/ The original statement was: > I think there's value in reducing the politically privileged's means to dominate their power over the general populaced We can argue whether there's value in that. But if you're asking /how/ bitcoin et al can do that, the answer is that it removes direct control over the currency from nations and parliaments. They may still be able to wield indirect control through a variety of other means, but that /is/ less control than simply being able to declare 500 and 1000 rupee notes valueless.
  - semi-extrinsic 8y ago
    As long as you can't buy food or pay your electricity bill with any cryptocurrency, you haven't achieved any of these things. So the question becomes, why should the supermarket or the utility company accept crypto payments instead of dollars, when they know the former can lose 20%-99% of its value overnight, while the value of the latter is guaranteed to be kept stable by the government?
    - Sir_Substance 8y ago
      The key word in this discussion is potential.
      - semi-extrinsic 8y ago
        Ah, but you don't need crypto to have that potential. Anyone could issue their own currency, and try to convince people to use it for actually buying and selling stuff. But that convincing part is really the key, and crypto very explicitly doesn't solve the problem that businesses will need to trust the issuing entity before they switch to using a new currency. People and companies want to have a central, stable issuing authority they can trust.