6 ms·

It’s also a system that is built on centralized systems. Is this really ideal? Do you really trust governments to handle the monetary system? No currency in the

It’s also a system that is built on centralized systems. Is this really ideal? Do you really trust governments to handle the monetary system? No currency in the history of the world has survived in the long run. The number of transactions has nothing to do with the energy spent on mining. Besides, the LN can already handle millions, if not billions, of transactions per second. You’re parrot

multjoy 5y ago
>Do you really trust governments to handle the monetary system? Where do you think the monetary system actually came from?
- kevinak 5y ago
  Does it matter? Not sure I follow, can you elaborate?
- emteycz 5y ago
  Banks.
  - KptMarchewa 5y ago
    Currencies have been existing literally thousands of years more than banks.
    - emteycz 5y ago
      Yes indeed - currencies (not monetary systems) based on precious metals, such as the Groschen or Thaler. That doesn't have much in common with the "gold standard" monetary system as it was in the USA. That emerged from a monetary system of private banks that issued their own banknotes. And it has practically nothing in common with the modern quantitative easing monetary system that is orchestrated by public and private banks.
cedilla 5y ago
Some currencies have survived for centuries. But that's hardly a concern. When currencies fail, it's usually just another symptom of a deeper problem. Imagine Germany in the late 1920s with Bitcoin. There would still be mass unemployment, there would still be riots on the street, the Rheinland was still occupied, the government would still have to pay reparations, US companies would still be unwilling to continue investments in Germany. Almost none of the problems were caused by monetary policies. And if a government destroys their monetary system with monetary policies alone, they can just introduce a new currency. That's not a apocalyptic measure.
- vintermann 5y ago
  > Almost none of the problems were caused by monetary policies. Exactly. In that case, hyperinflation was a willed policy to get at anything of value, regardless of how destructive it would be in the long term, so that it could be shipped abroad (in this case, as war reparations). Making people dip into safe assets, trade them for rapidly worthless currency just to get by, is the whole point of hyperinflation. Maybe an asset-rich person could get by for a while trading directly in his assets, but sooner or later they, or who they traded with, would have to deal someone who was forced to use government currency. At which point they would have to trade something valuable for something (rapidly) worthless: mission accomplished as far as foreign creditors are concerned.
  - cedilla 5y ago
    I'm sorry but I can only answer that by saying that it's complete nonsense. It's not even wrong because all its assumptions are historically incorrect.
    - vintermann 5y ago
      I think you should explain what historical assumptions are wrong then? because I have been looking for counterexamples for a while. Can you give me an instance of hyper (say, > 100% monthly) inflation where the government wasn't desperately paying off foreign creditors, or were otherwise desperate to ship value abroad?
Shamii 5y ago
Yes I do. I trust our proof of stake 100% more than arbitrary Bitcoin miners who mine bitcoins somewhere. At least our normal currency has real stake like people saving money to afford a car, people working and paying of the house they life in, salaries etc We already have a very well functional proof of stake system.
- pjc50 5y ago
  Indeed. The bitcoin maximalists, like the goldbugs, dream of somehow surviving a collapse in which all that breaks down and they are the sole escapees, rather than seriously engaging with the problems and their fellow citizens. Getting their skin out of the game. In some cases it's trauma-informed; they are, or know, people who really have experienced that kind of social collapse. It happens a lot in South America. People who grew up behind the Iron Curtain legitimately don't trust their governments either.
TheGigaChad 5y ago
usrbinbash 5y ago
> Do you really trust governments to handle the monetary system? Yes I do. Why? Because they handled it for hundreds of years, and it works all day everyday. > No currency in the history of the world has survived in the long run. Yes, so? > The number of transactions has nothing to do with the energy spent on mining. The number of transactions is a measurement of efficiency. > Besides, the LN can already handle millions, if not billions, of transactions per second. Only between 2 parties, after opening a channel between them, which requires: A transaction. And neither party can use any of the funds transmitted via the payment-channel in the wider network until the channel gets closed, which requires: Another transaction. The banking system imposes no such limitations: A transfer can be initiated at any time to any IBAN in the world, with no prior agreement, the energy cost is miniscule, and the moment the transfer is completed, the funds are available to the other party for transactions to whatever other IBAN they want.
- danlugo92 5y ago
  Hello, I'm Venezuelan, I have clients in the United States (I'm a software development). Show me how to open a bank account using this monetary system that you love so much, so I can receive payments from those clients and feed my family. With Bitcoin I can open an account from my bedroom, for free.
  - agubelu 5y ago
    And I assume you then exchange your Bitcoin to USD or VEF, and proceed to use the standard monetary system. Or do you pay for your groceries with BTC?
    - CogitoCogito 5y ago
      > And I assume you then exchange your Bitcoin to USD or VEF, and proceed to use the standard monetary system. Or do you pay for your groceries with BTC? /u/danlugo92 wouldn't necessarily need to open a bank account. There's always the black market. Maybe bitcoin to cash is the best approach?
    - 5y ago
pjc50 5y ago
> No currency in the history of the world has survived in the long run. The pound sterling has been running since 1489. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/pound-sterling-gbp/ https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/fi...
- bitxbitxbitcoin 5y ago
  And is it still redeemable for a pound of sterling silver? I don’t think 600 years counts as long run when it comes to world history.
  - mbg721 5y ago
    I don't know what a reasonable expectation is for the longevity of a currency; I mean, in dog-years, I'm dead.
  - throwaway946513 5y ago
    Computers have existed for nearly 70 years. Bitcoin has existed for what... 13 years? While the GBP value has changed over the course of 600 years, (of course it would, peoples and governments change in that same timeframe) hasn't a BTC as well? If I sell an item worth $60,000 USD for 1 BTC, the next day the 1 BTC could be worth $40 or $50,0000 USD. Surely such volatility cannot be useful for a common currency. "Stable coins exist" - and yes, they do - but if a stable coin is pegged to a currency, why do you not just use said currency?
vintermann 5y ago
> Do you really trust governments to handle the monetary system? I have no choice; my wages are paid in their currency, and they demand taxes in the same. So I take on very little additional risk in using their money for everyday things. Buying cryptocurrency, on the other hand, would expose me to a ton of new risks I'm not currently exposed to: to get remotely robbed with no recourse, that it should collapse in value by the time I would want to spend it. It would not alleviate the risk from government at all: I can try keeping it secret from them, not declare it (which is illegal, risky, and gives additional headaches at the point I would want to spend it). Or I could let them know, which would leave me just as exposed to their old shenanigans.

multjoy 5y ago

>Do you really trust governments to handle the monetary system? Where do you think the monetary system actually came from?

kevinak 5y ago
Does it matter? Not sure I follow, can you elaborate?
emteycz 5y ago
Banks.
- KptMarchewa 5y ago
  Currencies have been existing literally thousands of years more than banks.
  - emteycz 5y ago
    Yes indeed - currencies (not monetary systems) based on precious metals, such as the Groschen or Thaler. That doesn't have much in common with the "gold standard" monetary system as it was in the USA. That emerged from a monetary system of private banks that issued their own banknotes. And it has practically nothing in common with the modern quantitative easing monetary system that is orchestrated by public and private banks.

cedilla 5y ago

Some currencies have survived for centuries. But that's hardly a concern. When currencies fail, it's usually just another symptom of a deeper problem. Imagine Germany in the late 1920s with Bitcoin. There would still be mass unemployment, there would still be riots on the street, the Rheinland was still occupied, the government would still have to pay reparations, US companies would still be unwilling to continue investments in Germany. Almost none of the problems were caused by monetary policies. And if a government destroys their monetary system with monetary policies alone, they can just introduce a new currency. That's not a apocalyptic measure.

vintermann 5y ago
> Almost none of the problems were caused by monetary policies. Exactly. In that case, hyperinflation was a willed policy to get at anything of value, regardless of how destructive it would be in the long term, so that it could be shipped abroad (in this case, as war reparations). Making people dip into safe assets, trade them for rapidly worthless currency just to get by, is the whole point of hyperinflation. Maybe an asset-rich person could get by for a while trading directly in his assets, but sooner or later they, or who they traded with, would have to deal someone who was forced to use government currency. At which point they would have to trade something valuable for something (rapidly) worthless: mission accomplished as far as foreign creditors are concerned.
- cedilla 5y ago
  I'm sorry but I can only answer that by saying that it's complete nonsense. It's not even wrong because all its assumptions are historically incorrect.
  - vintermann 5y ago
    I think you should explain what historical assumptions are wrong then? because I have been looking for counterexamples for a while. Can you give me an instance of hyper (say, > 100% monthly) inflation where the government wasn't desperately paying off foreign creditors, or were otherwise desperate to ship value abroad?

Shamii 5y ago

Yes I do. I trust our proof of stake 100% more than arbitrary Bitcoin miners who mine bitcoins somewhere. At least our normal currency has real stake like people saving money to afford a car, people working and paying of the house they life in, salaries etc We already have a very well functional proof of stake system.

pjc50 5y ago
Indeed. The bitcoin maximalists, like the goldbugs, dream of somehow surviving a collapse in which all that breaks down and they are the sole escapees, rather than seriously engaging with the problems and their fellow citizens. Getting their skin out of the game. In some cases it's trauma-informed; they are, or know, people who really have experienced that kind of social collapse. It happens a lot in South America. People who grew up behind the Iron Curtain legitimately don't trust their governments either.

TheGigaChad 5y ago

usrbinbash 5y ago

> Do you really trust governments to handle the monetary system? Yes I do. Why? Because they handled it for hundreds of years, and it works all day everyday. > No currency in the history of the world has survived in the long run. Yes, so? > The number of transactions has nothing to do with the energy spent on mining. The number of transactions is a measurement of efficiency. > Besides, the LN can already handle millions, if not billions, of transactions per second. Only between 2 parties, after opening a channel between them, which requires: A transaction. And neither party can use any of the funds transmitted via the payment-channel in the wider network until the channel gets closed, which requires: Another transaction. The banking system imposes no such limitations: A transfer can be initiated at any time to any IBAN in the world, with no prior agreement, the energy cost is miniscule, and the moment the transfer is completed, the funds are available to the other party for transactions to whatever other IBAN they want.

danlugo92 5y ago
Hello, I'm Venezuelan, I have clients in the United States (I'm a software development). Show me how to open a bank account using this monetary system that you love so much, so I can receive payments from those clients and feed my family. With Bitcoin I can open an account from my bedroom, for free.
- agubelu 5y ago
  And I assume you then exchange your Bitcoin to USD or VEF, and proceed to use the standard monetary system. Or do you pay for your groceries with BTC?
  - CogitoCogito 5y ago
    > And I assume you then exchange your Bitcoin to USD or VEF, and proceed to use the standard monetary system. Or do you pay for your groceries with BTC? /u/danlugo92 wouldn't necessarily need to open a bank account. There's always the black market. Maybe bitcoin to cash is the best approach?
  - 5y ago

pjc50 5y ago

> No currency in the history of the world has survived in the long run. The pound sterling has been running since 1489. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/pound-sterling-gbp/ https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/fi...

bitxbitxbitcoin 5y ago
And is it still redeemable for a pound of sterling silver? I don’t think 600 years counts as long run when it comes to world history.
- mbg721 5y ago
  I don't know what a reasonable expectation is for the longevity of a currency; I mean, in dog-years, I'm dead.
- throwaway946513 5y ago
  Computers have existed for nearly 70 years. Bitcoin has existed for what... 13 years? While the GBP value has changed over the course of 600 years, (of course it would, peoples and governments change in that same timeframe) hasn't a BTC as well? If I sell an item worth $60,000 USD for 1 BTC, the next day the 1 BTC could be worth $40 or $50,0000 USD. Surely such volatility cannot be useful for a common currency. "Stable coins exist" - and yes, they do - but if a stable coin is pegged to a currency, why do you not just use said currency?

vintermann 5y ago

> Do you really trust governments to handle the monetary system? I have no choice; my wages are paid in their currency, and they demand taxes in the same. So I take on very little additional risk in using their money for everyday things. Buying cryptocurrency, on the other hand, would expose me to a ton of new risks I'm not currently exposed to: to get remotely robbed with no recourse, that it should collapse in value by the time I would want to spend it. It would not alleviate the risk from government at all: I can try keeping it secret from them, not declare it (which is illegal, risky, and gives additional headaches at the point I would want to spend it). Or I could let them know, which would leave me just as exposed to their old shenanigans.