5 ms·

Can Cryptocurrency Be Ethical?

7 points by jeffthechimp 5y ago

mgh2 5y ago
Anything that starts with a lie is fundamentally not ethical
tromp 5y ago
As bad for the environment as PoW is, a 100% premine is not that ethical either...
sparkie 5y ago
No, because "cryptocurrency" does not actually solve the very unethical state-of-affairs where some people can just print money and others have to work hard for it. Bitcoin, not "crypto" fixes the problem, because everyone must work for bitcoin, and nobody may "print" it without putting in the work. Anybody can create new "crypto" with little or no work.
- mgh2 5y ago
  Precisely, the big lie of the crypto pitch: The dollar is printed to help the economy and fuel growth, production must catch up to justify the supply. As long as this is backed up by people's production, real value is created. Whereas nothing really backs bitcoin except for cyber-crime, speculation, and daydreaming tech. It is the perfect leech society currency, fueled by social media hype and brainwashing, where machines instead of people "work hard" for it - no value is really created.
  - sparkie 5y ago
    Incorrect. The dollar is printed to benefit those who receive it first (who we will call Cantillionaires), at the expense of you and me who have dollar assets, property and (fixed) wages which we see decline in purchasing power as a result of the increase in the supply of money. It has been known for many centuries that increasing the money supply leads to a reduction in its purchasing power. If the dollar were to be an ethical currency, the newly created dollars would be evenly distributed among US citizens. Evidently, you and I receive none of the new dollars initially, but they trickle down the economy along with the price inflation which they cause. By the time we receive these new dollars, they are worth less than the old dollar before the time they were created. However, the people who got to spend the new money first got to do so at the old value of the dollar. This would certainly fit the description of "leech society currency." The value of bitcoin is precisely to end this unfair arrangement and to have a means of saving which cannot be deliberately debased by a privileged few. When new bitcoin are released into the economy, no new wealth is created, that's for sure. The releasing of new bitcoin is itself an expansion of the money supply and would, if demand were to stay the same or decrease, lead to a reduction in purchasing power of bitcoin until the time when no new bitcoin will be released. The reason we do not see a reduction in purchasing power with time is because there is a high demand for people to save money which cannot be deliberately debased. People will voluntarily choose a volatile, riskier option which might retain its purchasing power over the alternative option of holding an asset which is guaranteed to continue declining in purchasing power. So far, people who have made this bet and held onto it for a few years have all seen an increase in their purchasing power. "crypto" enthusiasts try to include Bitcoin under their umbrella because the name recognition helps them to sell their scams, which are just alternative digital versions of fiat money (by decree). But 100% of crypto projects were birthed in a world where a fair money (bitcoin) already existed, and they attempt to bring back the old, unfair version of money, where a privileged few get early access to the new money. Bitcoin is not "crypto." It is a unique invention which cannot be duplicated because duplication erases all of the characteristics which make it worth having. Primarily, that no privileged insiders get early access to the money. Satoshi did not grant himself any bitcoin before making it public. The bitcoin he mined in the first year or so when bootstrapping the network have never been spent. Miners are not privileged because they must put in the work and risk their own assets in attempt to gain rewards later. There is no guarantee of profit for them. Bitcoin does not leech of anything or anybody. People choose to transfer assets to it, either by hard work, exchange of goods, services and time, or by exchanging electricity in effort to update the ledger and obtain transaction fees plus a subsidy (a subsidy which declines and will eventually end). The only way to obtain bitcoin is to put in the work. That is not true for dollars, nor "crypto."
    - mgh2 5y ago
      That is the whole bitcoin spiel. However, the economy does not work or grow with a society of hoarders, or people expending electricity without producing any real (not virtual) work. Money is just a tool for value transaction and creation, bitcoin does not fill neither of those roles. It is theoretically useless for society. To give you an analogy, compare the stagnant (no inflation) Japan vs. USA economy (controlled inflation). This gives you an idea of how monetary policy is used; it has nothing to do with "intentionally devaluing currency to steal our work", it is about keeping up with population and economic growth. I get it, bitcoin's popularity coincides with a lot of millennials and generation Z who could not find work or were stalled professionally because of the 2009's crisis and now COVID. But a shortcut is not the answer. Young people will soon learn the value of real work, not quick and easy money. The last three crises were mostly fueled by greedy rich people selling lies: dotcom, mortgages, I hope crypto is not another one (but it fits the pattern).
      - sparkie 5y ago
        An economy grows by accumulating capital and then putting that capital towards productive uses. Merely holding bitcoin will not grow an economy, but by allowing people to accumulate capital more efficiently, without it being debased, people will have the ability to produce what they previously could not. Suggested reading: "How an economy grows (and why it doesn't)"[1] At present, due to rapid depreciation of the dollar and a growing demand in bitcoin, there are not many effective uses of the capital which would net the saver an increase in their purchasing power versus just holding onto bitcoin. This is likely to continue for some years to come, and bitcoin holders will be rewarded for their thrift. Eventually bitcoin holders must invest their capital or they will see their purchasing power stay the same or depreciate. In practice, bitcoiners will invest some of their capital into bitcoin-related projects, as this improves the likelihood of fast adoption of a more equitable form of money, and if this money does succeed in eclipsing fiat money, the companies developing these tools will be lucrative. Money is not merely a tool for transacting. It is a store of value, a means of exchange, and a unit of account. Bitcoin serves all 3 purposes well. Admittedly, there are some issues with scaling the means of exchange, but I'm very confident that these will be addressed by solutions which are in the works. (Disclaimer: I am a contributor to one such solution) Also disclaimer: I've been holding (and investing) bitcoin since 2011, before shitcoins were a thing, and for precisely the reason I've outlined here, because I immediately recognised it as a solution to the scam of fiat money, although I never actually expected it to take off at the time and it was more of a pipe-dream. What is surprising is how few of its proponents actually understand its reason for existing. Most are merely in it "for the gainz" and don't realize they're positively contributing towards replacing unethical fiat money with a superior tool. > Young people will soon learn the value of real work, not quick and easy money. The last three crises were mostly fueled by rich people selling lies: dotcom, mortgages, I hope crypto is not another one (but it fits the pattern). Incidentally, it was bitcoin that encouraged me to work harder, because the opportunity to acquire it NOW while it is cheap is too big to miss, since it will be more expensive later, I will acquire much less with the same amount of work. I work my ass off, am thrift and pile as much as I can into bitcoin. "crypto" is definitely a bubble. It is fueled by SV investors and scammers promising "the next bitcoin," but are all solutions in search of a problem. Bitcoin alone fixes the inflation problem. You can't fix inflation by creating more money, as is done by all "crypto." [1]:http://freedomschool.us/how-an-economy-grows.pdf http://freedomschool.us/how-an-economy-grows.pdf
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Ekaros 5y ago
Is wasting resources inherently unethical? If so I suppose many other things like gold is also unethical, as we are wasting resources to mine it even if we already have big stockpiles of stuff and recycling it is pretty simple in many use cases...
pg_1234 5y ago
No It's a branch of finance, which is intrinsically amoral, and outside of what lay people think of as ethics.

7 points by jeffthechimp 5y ago

mgh2 5y ago

Anything that starts with a lie is fundamentally not ethical

tromp 5y ago

As bad for the environment as PoW is, a 100% premine is not that ethical either...

sparkie 5y ago

No, because "cryptocurrency" does not actually solve the very unethical state-of-affairs where some people can just print money and others have to work hard for it. Bitcoin, not "crypto" fixes the problem, because everyone must work for bitcoin, and nobody may "print" it without putting in the work. Anybody can create new "crypto" with little or no work.

mgh2 5y ago
Precisely, the big lie of the crypto pitch: The dollar is printed to help the economy and fuel growth, production must catch up to justify the supply. As long as this is backed up by people's production, real value is created. Whereas nothing really backs bitcoin except for cyber-crime, speculation, and daydreaming tech. It is the perfect leech society currency, fueled by social media hype and brainwashing, where machines instead of people "work hard" for it - no value is really created.
- sparkie 5y ago
  Incorrect. The dollar is printed to benefit those who receive it first (who we will call Cantillionaires), at the expense of you and me who have dollar assets, property and (fixed) wages which we see decline in purchasing power as a result of the increase in the supply of money. It has been known for many centuries that increasing the money supply leads to a reduction in its purchasing power. If the dollar were to be an ethical currency, the newly created dollars would be evenly distributed among US citizens. Evidently, you and I receive none of the new dollars initially, but they trickle down the economy along with the price inflation which they cause. By the time we receive these new dollars, they are worth less than the old dollar before the time they were created. However, the people who got to spend the new money first got to do so at the old value of the dollar. This would certainly fit the description of "leech society currency." The value of bitcoin is precisely to end this unfair arrangement and to have a means of saving which cannot be deliberately debased by a privileged few. When new bitcoin are released into the economy, no new wealth is created, that's for sure. The releasing of new bitcoin is itself an expansion of the money supply and would, if demand were to stay the same or decrease, lead to a reduction in purchasing power of bitcoin until the time when no new bitcoin will be released. The reason we do not see a reduction in purchasing power with time is because there is a high demand for people to save money which cannot be deliberately debased. People will voluntarily choose a volatile, riskier option which might retain its purchasing power over the alternative option of holding an asset which is guaranteed to continue declining in purchasing power. So far, people who have made this bet and held onto it for a few years have all seen an increase in their purchasing power. "crypto" enthusiasts try to include Bitcoin under their umbrella because the name recognition helps them to sell their scams, which are just alternative digital versions of fiat money (by decree). But 100% of crypto projects were birthed in a world where a fair money (bitcoin) already existed, and they attempt to bring back the old, unfair version of money, where a privileged few get early access to the new money. Bitcoin is not "crypto." It is a unique invention which cannot be duplicated because duplication erases all of the characteristics which make it worth having. Primarily, that no privileged insiders get early access to the money. Satoshi did not grant himself any bitcoin before making it public. The bitcoin he mined in the first year or so when bootstrapping the network have never been spent. Miners are not privileged because they must put in the work and risk their own assets in attempt to gain rewards later. There is no guarantee of profit for them. Bitcoin does not leech of anything or anybody. People choose to transfer assets to it, either by hard work, exchange of goods, services and time, or by exchanging electricity in effort to update the ledger and obtain transaction fees plus a subsidy (a subsidy which declines and will eventually end). The only way to obtain bitcoin is to put in the work. That is not true for dollars, nor "crypto."
  - mgh2 5y ago
    That is the whole bitcoin spiel. However, the economy does not work or grow with a society of hoarders, or people expending electricity without producing any real (not virtual) work. Money is just a tool for value transaction and creation, bitcoin does not fill neither of those roles. It is theoretically useless for society. To give you an analogy, compare the stagnant (no inflation) Japan vs. USA economy (controlled inflation). This gives you an idea of how monetary policy is used; it has nothing to do with "intentionally devaluing currency to steal our work", it is about keeping up with population and economic growth. I get it, bitcoin's popularity coincides with a lot of millennials and generation Z who could not find work or were stalled professionally because of the 2009's crisis and now COVID. But a shortcut is not the answer. Young people will soon learn the value of real work, not quick and easy money. The last three crises were mostly fueled by greedy rich people selling lies: dotcom, mortgages, I hope crypto is not another one (but it fits the pattern).
    - sparkie 5y ago
      An economy grows by accumulating capital and then putting that capital towards productive uses. Merely holding bitcoin will not grow an economy, but by allowing people to accumulate capital more efficiently, without it being debased, people will have the ability to produce what they previously could not. Suggested reading: "How an economy grows (and why it doesn't)"[1] At present, due to rapid depreciation of the dollar and a growing demand in bitcoin, there are not many effective uses of the capital which would net the saver an increase in their purchasing power versus just holding onto bitcoin. This is likely to continue for some years to come, and bitcoin holders will be rewarded for their thrift. Eventually bitcoin holders must invest their capital or they will see their purchasing power stay the same or depreciate. In practice, bitcoiners will invest some of their capital into bitcoin-related projects, as this improves the likelihood of fast adoption of a more equitable form of money, and if this money does succeed in eclipsing fiat money, the companies developing these tools will be lucrative. Money is not merely a tool for transacting. It is a store of value, a means of exchange, and a unit of account. Bitcoin serves all 3 purposes well. Admittedly, there are some issues with scaling the means of exchange, but I'm very confident that these will be addressed by solutions which are in the works. (Disclaimer: I am a contributor to one such solution) Also disclaimer: I've been holding (and investing) bitcoin since 2011, before shitcoins were a thing, and for precisely the reason I've outlined here, because I immediately recognised it as a solution to the scam of fiat money, although I never actually expected it to take off at the time and it was more of a pipe-dream. What is surprising is how few of its proponents actually understand its reason for existing. Most are merely in it "for the gainz" and don't realize they're positively contributing towards replacing unethical fiat money with a superior tool. > Young people will soon learn the value of real work, not quick and easy money. The last three crises were mostly fueled by rich people selling lies: dotcom, mortgages, I hope crypto is not another one (but it fits the pattern). Incidentally, it was bitcoin that encouraged me to work harder, because the opportunity to acquire it NOW while it is cheap is too big to miss, since it will be more expensive later, I will acquire much less with the same amount of work. I work my ass off, am thrift and pile as much as I can into bitcoin. "crypto" is definitely a bubble. It is fueled by SV investors and scammers promising "the next bitcoin," but are all solutions in search of a problem. Bitcoin alone fixes the inflation problem. You can't fix inflation by creating more money, as is done by all "crypto." [1]:http://freedomschool.us/how-an-economy-grows.pdf http://freedomschool.us/how-an-economy-grows.pdf

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Ekaros 5y ago

Is wasting resources inherently unethical? If so I suppose many other things like gold is also unethical, as we are wasting resources to mine it even if we already have big stockpiles of stuff and recycling it is pretty simple in many use cases...

pg_1234 5y ago

No It's a branch of finance, which is intrinsically amoral, and outside of what lay people think of as ethics.