7 ms·

Based on the tone of the parent, I think we can probably agree his interest is more about deriding those who are involved in cryptocurrencies (whether they won

Based on the tone of the parent, I think we can probably agree his interest is more about deriding those who are involved in cryptocurrencies (whether they won or lost in the market) than offering a warning to protect newcomers. Like most, you have trivialized the use cases in places like Venezuela and Zimbabwe where the state backed financial system has failed. With the current state of technology, Bitcoin has no ability to replace the global payment network. Claiming that means it's a failure that hasn't lived up to anything is hyperbole. The system's very existence and self maintenance after over a decade is impressive enough to me. I also believe the financial utility of a new asset class with new properties is interesting and useful on its own, although I doubt the layman would agree.

arcticbull 6y ago
> ... Venezuela and Zimbabwe. Those are utterly irrelevant until you solve the initial distribution problem. Ready for it? - Those people don't have money. - The only way to purchase a meaningful quantity of BTC is through purchase on an exchange. After all, it's twice as hard to mine today as it was yesterday, and in Venezuela you'll just get your mining rig socialized (this has happened a few times). - If you exchange within the country, then you're just moving the poops around. It's zero sum. Steve has a bunch of Bolivars. He exchanges with Alice for BTC. Now Alice has a bunch of Bolivars, and Steve has BTC. The net worth of the system was preserved perfectly. BTC did nothing for the union of Alice and Bob -- except they lost a ~$0.50 transaction fee, which is a few days wages. - If you exchange outside the country, who on earth outside the country wants your Bolivars?! If you can exchange outside you may as well buy Gold or Dollars. Those haven't dropped 50% in the last 3 years. Even if you did buy BTC, it's still a zero net sum situation -- except they lost a ~$0.50 transaction fee, which is a few days wages. Bitcoin is meaningless for third-world countries in aggregate until the initial distribution problem is solved. The problem in Venezuela isn't a piss-poor currency, that's a symptom of a piss-poor government. No amount of magic beans will change that, until the people solve the problem.
- lend000 6y ago
  You seem to have completely missed the point that there have been severe currency exchange controls in Venezuela for over a decade. These Venezuelans aren't trading Bolivars outside the country; they are exporting BTC mined with a mismanaged electrical grid to get food, toiletries, etc. imported into the country. Yes, you can buy things with BTC. https://reason.com/2016/11/28/the-secret-dangerous-world-of/ https://reason.com/2016/11/28/the-secret-dangerous-world-of/ > that's a symptom of a piss-poor government. No amount of magic beans will change that, Did it solve their government problem? No. But it resulted in a little more food in the country then there would otherwise be by allowing citizens to subvert their government's financial controls. BTC provides a base level quality of money, that basically acts as an insurance system against the worst governments. Does it have a huge use case in a country with a healthy and functional financial system? No. But if things go to shit in a country, people can still use Bitcoin and safely transfer value online instead of reverting to trading gold coins in person. I know you want all things BTC to be bad. But try to keep it intellectual, not emotional. What about the technology -- do you think it's fascinating that a relatively simple and elegant protocol of incentives and cryptography can result in a self sustaining financial system still running a decade after its release?
  - arcticbull 6y ago
    Of course it can address the needs of a few by stealing power and avoid the government nationalizing a few rigs. That's utterly useless for the general population. > But if things go to shit in a country, people can still use Bitcoin and safely transfer value online instead of reverting to trading gold coins in person. For a small handful of people. That doesn't address the problem on a broad scale. The bar isn't "can Bitcoin address the needs of a small handful of people in Venezuela." Of course it can. > What about the technology -- do you think it's fascinating that a relatively simple and elegant protocol of incentives and cryptography can result in a self sustaining financial system still running a decade after its release? I think it's fascinating a single transaction expends 700kWh (enough to drive a Model S from SF to New York) and produces 87 grams of e-waste -- and yet somehow costs less than $0.50, which is due to the socialization of costs in the form of block rewards, aka inflation. Each BTC transaction actually costs about $70. I think it's fascinating a system brought in to free us from the tyranny of a single entity's ability to freely print currency has had it's pricing entirely subsumed by an entity with the ability to freely print a currency who's symbol is just one character off. Just because something's simple doesn't make it good.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  > If you exchange outside the country, who on earth outside the country wants your Bolivars?! Nobody. So you don't buy BTC with Bolivars, you sell art commissions or do some work on Mechanical Turk or grind for online game currency with a real market value, and arrange to receive payment in BTC. Then you buy stuff with BTC. Meanwhile if there isn't that much BTC in the country, that doesn't matter -- currencies can have a different value in different places when arbitrage is restricted. So maybe BTC is worth more there. Or maybe arbitrage isn't really that restricted in practice and if it started to be more expensive there somebody would make a profit by supplying BTC in exchange for exporting boatloads of oil or coffee beans or whatever people in those countries produce.
  - arcticbull 6y ago
    That's covered under my point though, that if you can exchange internationally then why on earth would you bother with Bitcoin? You may as well just hold dollars or gold, you know, things that don't fluctuate 10% in a day and 50% in a couple of years. If you're already doing business abroad then forget Bitcoin.
    - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
      It's because Bitcoin is digital. Neither your country's banks nor some other country's banks will give you an account denominated in dollars. You can only transact in dollars if it's physical cash. Then you can't use it to buy anything electronically.
      - arcticbull 6y ago
        The embargo is on all trade. If you can trade, then you can open accounts. If you cannot trade, then it didn't matter in the first place.
- mirimir 6y ago
  > Those haven't dropped 50% in the last 3 years. Huh? The Bitcoin price on 2017-05-12 was $1686. It did hit $19345 on 2017-12-16, however.
- GoblinSlayer 6y ago
  >If you exchange outside the country, who on earth outside the country wants your Bolivars?! If they have use for them, why not? Also money are indeed a zero sum tool designed solely for moving poops around, shouldn't be a problem, and yes, BTC is money.

arcticbull 6y ago

> ... Venezuela and Zimbabwe. Those are utterly irrelevant until you solve the initial distribution problem. Ready for it? - Those people don't have money. - The only way to purchase a meaningful quantity of BTC is through purchase on an exchange. After all, it's twice as hard to mine today as it was yesterday, and in Venezuela you'll just get your mining rig socialized (this has happened a few times). - If you exchange within the country, then you're just moving the poops around. It's zero sum. Steve has a bunch of Bolivars. He exchanges with Alice for BTC. Now Alice has a bunch of Bolivars, and Steve has BTC. The net worth of the system was preserved perfectly. BTC did nothing for the union of Alice and Bob -- except they lost a ~$0.50 transaction fee, which is a few days wages. - If you exchange outside the country, who on earth outside the country wants your Bolivars?! If you can exchange outside you may as well buy Gold or Dollars. Those haven't dropped 50% in the last 3 years. Even if you did buy BTC, it's still a zero net sum situation -- except they lost a ~$0.50 transaction fee, which is a few days wages. Bitcoin is meaningless for third-world countries in aggregate until the initial distribution problem is solved. The problem in Venezuela isn't a piss-poor currency, that's a symptom of a piss-poor government. No amount of magic beans will change that, until the people solve the problem.

lend000 6y ago
You seem to have completely missed the point that there have been severe currency exchange controls in Venezuela for over a decade. These Venezuelans aren't trading Bolivars outside the country; they are exporting BTC mined with a mismanaged electrical grid to get food, toiletries, etc. imported into the country. Yes, you can buy things with BTC. https://reason.com/2016/11/28/the-secret-dangerous-world-of/ https://reason.com/2016/11/28/the-secret-dangerous-world-of/ > that's a symptom of a piss-poor government. No amount of magic beans will change that, Did it solve their government problem? No. But it resulted in a little more food in the country then there would otherwise be by allowing citizens to subvert their government's financial controls. BTC provides a base level quality of money, that basically acts as an insurance system against the worst governments. Does it have a huge use case in a country with a healthy and functional financial system? No. But if things go to shit in a country, people can still use Bitcoin and safely transfer value online instead of reverting to trading gold coins in person. I know you want all things BTC to be bad. But try to keep it intellectual, not emotional. What about the technology -- do you think it's fascinating that a relatively simple and elegant protocol of incentives and cryptography can result in a self sustaining financial system still running a decade after its release?
- arcticbull 6y ago
  Of course it can address the needs of a few by stealing power and avoid the government nationalizing a few rigs. That's utterly useless for the general population. > But if things go to shit in a country, people can still use Bitcoin and safely transfer value online instead of reverting to trading gold coins in person. For a small handful of people. That doesn't address the problem on a broad scale. The bar isn't "can Bitcoin address the needs of a small handful of people in Venezuela." Of course it can. > What about the technology -- do you think it's fascinating that a relatively simple and elegant protocol of incentives and cryptography can result in a self sustaining financial system still running a decade after its release? I think it's fascinating a single transaction expends 700kWh (enough to drive a Model S from SF to New York) and produces 87 grams of e-waste -- and yet somehow costs less than $0.50, which is due to the socialization of costs in the form of block rewards, aka inflation. Each BTC transaction actually costs about $70. I think it's fascinating a system brought in to free us from the tyranny of a single entity's ability to freely print currency has had it's pricing entirely subsumed by an entity with the ability to freely print a currency who's symbol is just one character off. Just because something's simple doesn't make it good.
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
> If you exchange outside the country, who on earth outside the country wants your Bolivars?! Nobody. So you don't buy BTC with Bolivars, you sell art commissions or do some work on Mechanical Turk or grind for online game currency with a real market value, and arrange to receive payment in BTC. Then you buy stuff with BTC. Meanwhile if there isn't that much BTC in the country, that doesn't matter -- currencies can have a different value in different places when arbitrage is restricted. So maybe BTC is worth more there. Or maybe arbitrage isn't really that restricted in practice and if it started to be more expensive there somebody would make a profit by supplying BTC in exchange for exporting boatloads of oil or coffee beans or whatever people in those countries produce.
- arcticbull 6y ago
  That's covered under my point though, that if you can exchange internationally then why on earth would you bother with Bitcoin? You may as well just hold dollars or gold, you know, things that don't fluctuate 10% in a day and 50% in a couple of years. If you're already doing business abroad then forget Bitcoin.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    It's because Bitcoin is digital. Neither your country's banks nor some other country's banks will give you an account denominated in dollars. You can only transact in dollars if it's physical cash. Then you can't use it to buy anything electronically.
    - arcticbull 6y ago
      The embargo is on all trade. If you can trade, then you can open accounts. If you cannot trade, then it didn't matter in the first place.
mirimir 6y ago
> Those haven't dropped 50% in the last 3 years. Huh? The Bitcoin price on 2017-05-12 was $1686. It did hit $19345 on 2017-12-16, however.
GoblinSlayer 6y ago
>If you exchange outside the country, who on earth outside the country wants your Bolivars?! If they have use for them, why not? Also money are indeed a zero sum tool designed solely for moving poops around, shouldn't be a problem, and yes, BTC is money.