5 ms·

what "additional functions" are you referring to? I haven't set foot in a bank in a decade, I need someone to refresh my memory. How can you consider my point

what "additional functions" are you referring to? I haven't set foot in a bank in a decade, I need someone to refresh my memory. How can you consider my point "void" if it does provide some of the functions? I can't understand how you can acknowledge the "ecosystem around regular money" and ignore it in the very next sentence and resort to your narrative of "1000 times the cost of printing a dollar", lol! And you complain about hand-waving? italicizing "doesn't" isn't really a way to convince someone about what's missing.

perl4ever 7y ago
If a pair of roller skates provides some of the functions of a car, is that a justification for it costing 1,000 times as much as a car? I'm not saying "oh, this is idiotic" because when something seems extremely dumb, often it's just because of some missing context. But you'll have to explain more if I'm going to understand. And I don't understand what you don't understand about the factor of a thousand difference. Do you think that less than $100 in energy is dissipated in order to produce $100 worth of bitcoin, or do you think that the regular financial system costs more than a few pennies to produce and maintain $100? It's true that the cost of printing a $100 bill does not cover all of the functions of the banking system, but it's also true that dollars don't even have to be printed to be used, and those which exist only as ledger entries are far cheaper. So I think 0.1% is more like an upper bound than a lower one.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- fredfoobar 7y ago
  Look, if you really wanted to understand this, you'd be honest in your arguments and present a better understanding than just repeating that it costs pennies to print 100$ (and therefore USD is superior) If it was so easy and cheap to print a 100$, why isn't everyone doing it? Obviously, it's not easy or cheap to do, and it's also illegal. The US govt enforces the legality. So, you should factor in the cost of running the US govt and the cost of enforcing the law through the judicial system. Suppose the US military disappeared overnight, what do you think will happen to the value of the dollar? you most certainly should factor in the cost of running the US army as well. And then the banking ecosystem itself in the US, which is well over 10 trillion $ as of now. The bitcoin ecosystem rolls all of these features into a single concise, self-policed network. I'd much rather have a permission-less SoV that is not controlled/backed by a nation state or a set of corporations (like Libra). 'perl4ever' should've tipped me off, I never learn :(. I don't think I have anymore time to argue with you.
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    "'perl4ever' should've tipped me off, I never learn" I don't use perl any more - I discovered the joy of Visual Basic. :) Anyway, see my other comment about the Federal Reserve. It's not that there are no other costs to maintaining dollars as a currency besides printing the paper money, it's that I think the printing costs obviously dwarf the rest.

perl4ever 7y ago

If a pair of roller skates provides some of the functions of a car, is that a justification for it costing 1,000 times as much as a car? I'm not saying "oh, this is idiotic" because when something seems extremely dumb, often it's just because of some missing context. But you'll have to explain more if I'm going to understand. And I don't understand what you don't understand about the factor of a thousand difference. Do you think that less than $100 in energy is dissipated in order to produce $100 worth of bitcoin, or do you think that the regular financial system costs more than a few pennies to produce and maintain $100? It's true that the cost of printing a $100 bill does not cover all of the functions of the banking system, but it's also true that dollars don't even have to be printed to be used, and those which exist only as ledger entries are far cheaper. So I think 0.1% is more like an upper bound than a lower one.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
fredfoobar 7y ago
Look, if you really wanted to understand this, you'd be honest in your arguments and present a better understanding than just repeating that it costs pennies to print 100$ (and therefore USD is superior) If it was so easy and cheap to print a 100$, why isn't everyone doing it? Obviously, it's not easy or cheap to do, and it's also illegal. The US govt enforces the legality. So, you should factor in the cost of running the US govt and the cost of enforcing the law through the judicial system. Suppose the US military disappeared overnight, what do you think will happen to the value of the dollar? you most certainly should factor in the cost of running the US army as well. And then the banking ecosystem itself in the US, which is well over 10 trillion $ as of now. The bitcoin ecosystem rolls all of these features into a single concise, self-policed network. I'd much rather have a permission-less SoV that is not controlled/backed by a nation state or a set of corporations (like Libra). 'perl4ever' should've tipped me off, I never learn :(. I don't think I have anymore time to argue with you.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  "'perl4ever' should've tipped me off, I never learn" I don't use perl any more - I discovered the joy of Visual Basic. :) Anyway, see my other comment about the Federal Reserve. It's not that there are no other costs to maintaining dollars as a currency besides printing the paper money, it's that I think the printing costs obviously dwarf the rest.