3 ms·

How well does that "money" hold its value?

notahacker 6y ago
Money is intended to transact with, not for speculation on it increasing purchasing power, which is great, because it can be spent on or invested in things which create value instead. And at a rate of more than 10 transactions per second worldwide!
- bingbong70 6y ago
  You are confusing "currency" with "money", there is a difference and it is not insignificant.
  - notahacker 6y ago
    Someone should tell all the people who've studied numismatics for their entire life! Even the etymology of the word "money" derives from the location of the mint in Rome.
    - bingbong70 6y ago
      Before the fiat system, national currencies could have been considered closer to "money" because they were actually backed by commodities. Now we have pure currency and all fiat currencies go to ~0 in less than 100 years. USD, GBP, CAD = currency Bitcoin, Gold, Silver = money
      - notahacker 6y ago
        You'll forgive me for sticking with the definition of money used by all academic experts in the field and the vast majority of colloquial use... Incidentally, Bitcoin is also not a commodity in the general sense of the word (as opposed to the CFTC thinks it should regulate it like other exotic financial instruments sense of the word)
        bingbong70 6y ago
        Sure, just one change... ”Currency is intended to transact with, not for speculation...” Bitcoin is forcing an expansion of the definition of money. A self-regulated financial network backed by tremendous amounts of hardware and electricity is "advanced money". We are at a transition point so I don't expect good labeling/categorization from the shortsighted/incumbents/fiat-boomers (directed at the gatekeepers, not you personally). Side note: What people complaining about electricity consumption don't get is, BTC transfers the uncounterfeitable properties of energy to a money.
        notahacker 6y ago
        Sorry, the English language is distributed consensus based, and so you don't get to torture it into redefining money as "digital tulip bulbs" or condescendingly dismiss people using the term correctly until you have the numbers to mount a 51% attack. :) Side note: what people don't get is that pretending tokens have more exchange value because more energy was expended than the printing of other tokens is just sunk cost fallacy.
        bingbong70 6y ago
        The distinction between money and currency is not up for debate, it is settled. >BTC transfers the uncounterfeitable properties of energy to a money. This statement has a lot more depth than you seem to appreciate. I believe this is from a lack of understanding of BTC's incentive structure. Perhaps a few years from now you will gain enough of an understanding...Almost every thinking-person was in the position you are in (skeptic) at some point before an extended education and eventual full BTC adoption. The sooner you get this education the better for your family, so I recommend diving deep sooner than later, even if you still end up as a "nocoiner". Final Note: I expect clean energy regulations and BTC's hunger for hashrate will create a larger (more direct) market for cleaner energy and faster processing, which is a win-win for humanity. "More Direct Market" clarification: Selling clean electricity to a power grid is much harder than selling it to the BTC network, especially in remote areas. The ability to easily monetize energy production on small/mid/large scales makes experimentation and innovation more likely. Example: Many facilities now mine Bitcoin with otherwise flared waste gas and the controlled burn actually leads to less negative environmental impact.

Money is intended to transact with, not for speculation on it increasing purchasing power, which is great, because it can be spent on or invested in things which create value instead. And at a rate of more than 10 transactions per second worldwide!

bingbong70 6y ago
You are confusing "currency" with "money", there is a difference and it is not insignificant.
- notahacker 6y ago
  Someone should tell all the people who've studied numismatics for their entire life! Even the etymology of the word "money" derives from the location of the mint in Rome.
  - bingbong70 6y ago
    Before the fiat system, national currencies could have been considered closer to "money" because they were actually backed by commodities. Now we have pure currency and all fiat currencies go to ~0 in less than 100 years. USD, GBP, CAD = currency Bitcoin, Gold, Silver = money
    - notahacker 6y ago
      You'll forgive me for sticking with the definition of money used by all academic experts in the field and the vast majority of colloquial use... Incidentally, Bitcoin is also not a commodity in the general sense of the word (as opposed to the CFTC thinks it should regulate it like other exotic financial instruments sense of the word)
      - bingbong70 6y ago
        Sure, just one change... ”Currency is intended to transact with, not for speculation...” Bitcoin is forcing an expansion of the definition of money. A self-regulated financial network backed by tremendous amounts of hardware and electricity is "advanced money". We are at a transition point so I don't expect good labeling/categorization from the shortsighted/incumbents/fiat-boomers (directed at the gatekeepers, not you personally). Side note: What people complaining about electricity consumption don't get is, BTC transfers the uncounterfeitable properties of energy to a money.
        notahacker 6y ago
        Sorry, the English language is distributed consensus based, and so you don't get to torture it into redefining money as "digital tulip bulbs" or condescendingly dismiss people using the term correctly until you have the numbers to mount a 51% attack. :) Side note: what people don't get is that pretending tokens have more exchange value because more energy was expended than the printing of other tokens is just sunk cost fallacy.
        bingbong70 6y ago
        The distinction between money and currency is not up for debate, it is settled. >BTC transfers the uncounterfeitable properties of energy to a money. This statement has a lot more depth than you seem to appreciate. I believe this is from a lack of understanding of BTC's incentive structure. Perhaps a few years from now you will gain enough of an understanding...Almost every thinking-person was in the position you are in (skeptic) at some point before an extended education and eventual full BTC adoption. The sooner you get this education the better for your family, so I recommend diving deep sooner than later, even if you still end up as a "nocoiner". Final Note: I expect clean energy regulations and BTC's hunger for hashrate will create a larger (more direct) market for cleaner energy and faster processing, which is a win-win for humanity. "More Direct Market" clarification: Selling clean electricity to a power grid is much harder than selling it to the BTC network, especially in remote areas. The ability to easily monetize energy production on small/mid/large scales makes experimentation and innovation more likely. Example: Many facilities now mine Bitcoin with otherwise flared waste gas and the controlled burn actually leads to less negative environmental impact.