7 ms·

Good. A precursor to banning crypto itself, I hope. The government SHOULD have a monopoly on certain things, like lethal force (armies), and issuance of currenc

Good. A precursor to banning crypto itself, I hope. The government SHOULD have a monopoly on certain things, like lethal force (armies), and issuance of currency, because total chaos and anarchy would happen otherwise.

folli 5y ago
I agree about the lethal force aspect, but can you elaborate on how issuing currency results in chaos and anarchy?
- Zenst 5y ago
  Anything that can impact a countries control upon their own currency has the potential to destabilise things. Now whilst cypto is another currency, it is one that is very volatile and as we have seen, anything that volatile in a currency is always never good for the majority. Also to have any impact, such crypto's would need to become more widespread and whilst in geek land we may view things as common usage, your average citizen probably at best only just aware of their existence. Indeed I'd hazard a guess that most people in any country have never held currency beyond their local offering (though the dollar sure does come close and that in some countries).
- ezekg 5y ago
  If a government has a monopoly on violence, then its citizens have no recourse to correct an evil or corrupt government. History shows time and time again that this is the case. In the case of the USA -- I don't think anybody here should want our government to have a monopoly on violence, given the USA's violent history. Trading such liberty for a sense of false security is unwise, in my opinion. The USA's founding fathers knew this.
Geee 5y ago
The idea of Bitcoin is that no one has the power to issue currency. Issuance is limited to 21 million units and all of them are created with energy. No one should have the power to issue currency.
- hhmc 5y ago
  Bitcoin has an annualized volatility of around 100% In what sense can it be a useful currency?
  - Geee 5y ago
    Volatility is not an inherent property of a currency or an asset, but the result of market actions. Volatility will decrease in the long term, when more uncorrelated markets are traded in bitcoin. Eventually, when everything is traded and priced in bitcoin, bitcoin becomes an objective unit of value. At that point bitcoin is the only thing that is not volatile, and volatility of everything else is measured against it.
    - thehappypm 5y ago
      So your argument is that right now, the value of 1 Bitcoin is volatile, when compared to things like dollars or apples. In the future, the perspective will flip, and 1 Bitcoin will be considered stable, and the value of apples will be what is considered volatile?
      - Geee 5y ago
        Yes. At that point, the volatility of bitcoin will be the average volatility of everything.
        thehappypm 5y ago
        This is one of the more bizarre/interesting predictions I've seen so far.
    - hhmc 5y ago
      > Volatility is not an inherent property of a currency or an asset Volatility is an an inherent property of an asset/currency/whatever(stddev of (log)returns), as long as you have a fixed and distinct numeraire. Sure, you can argue that bitcoin may _be_ the numeraire one day, but what's the path towards that when it's so useless as a currency presently?
colesantiago 5y ago
> A precursor to banning crypto itself... Is it? How would you go about banning crypto completely such that nobody uses it?
- analognoise 5y ago
  Well all the transactions are public. So I assume you freeze the assets of everyone involved in the exchanges. Then if they operate in a country beyond your reach, you embargo that country or apply other geopolitical pressure - you don't finance local development, or military assistance, or vote against whatever they want in NATO, whatever. Most countries have agreements in place for financial regulation and will gladly hand someone over who breaks a US banking law. Then whenever you trace it to one of your citizens, you throw them in jail. This would destroy the exchanges, and prevent most people from participating in it (even as a curio). It would be ultra easy to destroy crypto. If the US, Europe or China bans it for real, it will be worthless overnight. Nobody cares more about crypto than pissing off any of them. I think all major countries are gearing up for this and it will happen eventually.
  - madamelic 5y ago
    So... your dream is a one world government police state dystopia? Interesting.
    - analognoise 5y ago
      Not at all, it's just naive to think the USA, Europe, or China couldn't shut down crypto if they wanted. They have million man armies, jets, tanks, millions of bureaucrats, leading edge development programs, hypersonic missiles, nuclear weapons, atomic energy, etc - but they "couldn't stop crypto!", a ledger where all transactions are...explicitly public? Like come on. They have entire departments devoted tracing transactions for tax avoidance, but they're helpless against...a public list of transactions? No way.
      - madamelic 5y ago
majinuub 5y ago
This guy glows
gjs278 5y ago
I hope they use the lethal force on you

folli 5y ago

I agree about the lethal force aspect, but can you elaborate on how issuing currency results in chaos and anarchy?

Zenst 5y ago
Anything that can impact a countries control upon their own currency has the potential to destabilise things. Now whilst cypto is another currency, it is one that is very volatile and as we have seen, anything that volatile in a currency is always never good for the majority. Also to have any impact, such crypto's would need to become more widespread and whilst in geek land we may view things as common usage, your average citizen probably at best only just aware of their existence. Indeed I'd hazard a guess that most people in any country have never held currency beyond their local offering (though the dollar sure does come close and that in some countries).
ezekg 5y ago
If a government has a monopoly on violence, then its citizens have no recourse to correct an evil or corrupt government. History shows time and time again that this is the case. In the case of the USA -- I don't think anybody here should want our government to have a monopoly on violence, given the USA's violent history. Trading such liberty for a sense of false security is unwise, in my opinion. The USA's founding fathers knew this.

Geee 5y ago

The idea of Bitcoin is that no one has the power to issue currency. Issuance is limited to 21 million units and all of them are created with energy. No one should have the power to issue currency.

hhmc 5y ago
Bitcoin has an annualized volatility of around 100% In what sense can it be a useful currency?
- Geee 5y ago
  Volatility is not an inherent property of a currency or an asset, but the result of market actions. Volatility will decrease in the long term, when more uncorrelated markets are traded in bitcoin. Eventually, when everything is traded and priced in bitcoin, bitcoin becomes an objective unit of value. At that point bitcoin is the only thing that is not volatile, and volatility of everything else is measured against it.
  - thehappypm 5y ago
    So your argument is that right now, the value of 1 Bitcoin is volatile, when compared to things like dollars or apples. In the future, the perspective will flip, and 1 Bitcoin will be considered stable, and the value of apples will be what is considered volatile?
    - Geee 5y ago
      Yes. At that point, the volatility of bitcoin will be the average volatility of everything.
      - thehappypm 5y ago
        This is one of the more bizarre/interesting predictions I've seen so far.
  - hhmc 5y ago
    > Volatility is not an inherent property of a currency or an asset Volatility is an an inherent property of an asset/currency/whatever(stddev of (log)returns), as long as you have a fixed and distinct numeraire. Sure, you can argue that bitcoin may _be_ the numeraire one day, but what's the path towards that when it's so useless as a currency presently?

colesantiago 5y ago

> A precursor to banning crypto itself... Is it? How would you go about banning crypto completely such that nobody uses it?

analognoise 5y ago
Well all the transactions are public. So I assume you freeze the assets of everyone involved in the exchanges. Then if they operate in a country beyond your reach, you embargo that country or apply other geopolitical pressure - you don't finance local development, or military assistance, or vote against whatever they want in NATO, whatever. Most countries have agreements in place for financial regulation and will gladly hand someone over who breaks a US banking law. Then whenever you trace it to one of your citizens, you throw them in jail. This would destroy the exchanges, and prevent most people from participating in it (even as a curio). It would be ultra easy to destroy crypto. If the US, Europe or China bans it for real, it will be worthless overnight. Nobody cares more about crypto than pissing off any of them. I think all major countries are gearing up for this and it will happen eventually.
- madamelic 5y ago
  So... your dream is a one world government police state dystopia? Interesting.
  - analognoise 5y ago
    Not at all, it's just naive to think the USA, Europe, or China couldn't shut down crypto if they wanted. They have million man armies, jets, tanks, millions of bureaucrats, leading edge development programs, hypersonic missiles, nuclear weapons, atomic energy, etc - but they "couldn't stop crypto!", a ledger where all transactions are...explicitly public? Like come on. They have entire departments devoted tracing transactions for tax avoidance, but they're helpless against...a public list of transactions? No way.
    - madamelic 5y ago

majinuub 5y ago

This guy glows

gjs278 5y ago

I hope they use the lethal force on you