4 ms·

> What justifies Bitcoin being valued at 30k vs 20k? That it's a safeguard (not hedge) against tyrannical money. This will play out over the next few years as

> What justifies Bitcoin being valued at 30k vs 20k? That it's a safeguard (not hedge) against tyrannical money. This will play out over the next few years as governments will introduce digital currencies (CBDCs) to replace their own failing currencies (simultaneously robbing citizens of their savings). The bait-and-switch of this is that they will give out free money (it costs them nothing to do so) to entice people but not tell them that their money can expire, have its purchases limited to "approved" vendors, and be taken from them instantly without recourse. Bitcoin is a safeguard against this if you hold it in your custody. This is its ultimate value: it cannot be manipulated or stolen by the state. Something that's never existed in the history of humanity. There's a reason the genesis block contained this: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/File:Jonny1000thetimes.png https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/File:Jonny1000thetimes.png

robbiep 4y ago
How many, or what percentage, of crypto owners/holders actually have their crypto in their own custody? I would hazard to say somewhere south of 1%. So what benefit is it? Everyone has only traded one form of vendor lock in to another (that is deserving of vastly less trust, as evidended by the Wild West of scams, rug pulls and outright frauds)
- rglover 4y ago
  That's not a fault of the technology. Many people want to pin the flaw of human behavior on Bitcoin but there's nothing inherent in the technology that forces people to do that. The literal "quickstart" of Bitcoin is to hold it in your own custody (running the Bitcoin software on your computer gives you a wallet you 100% control).
  - robbiep 4y ago
    I know how it works, and I’d argue it is a flaw of the technology. Money works because I can hand $10 to a 5 or a 95 year old and they know what to do with it. Very few people do anything other than speculate in crypto, and even fewer hold it in their own wallets as opposed to on exchanges. If the friction of getting started in the future of money requires IT support, then it isn’t going to work
    - rglover 4y ago
      It doesn't require IT support, it requires reading (a limited amount depending on how much you want to know).
      - chrlac 4y ago
        This perspective is far from universal. Obviously, HN readers are a super-technical strata of society, and people here have little trouble understanding the concept and usage of cryptocurrency. The vast majority of the general population is nowhere near this level of technical proficiency. Just downloading and installing a software is firmly out of grasp for lots of people, probably more than half of them if I had to guess.
        rglover 4y ago
        > This perspective is far from universal. It doesn't need to be universal. The need for personal computers wasn't universal when Steve Jobs was running around Silicon Valley selling the Apple I in the 70s. They didn't even understand email in the 90s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlJku_CSyNg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlJku_CSyNg. Look at us now. > The vast majority of the general population is nowhere near this level of technical proficiency. Right. Just like all technology, that's our responsibility as "the nerds." We take something that's complex and distill it down into something that's easily digested by people with limited or no technical aptitude. --- I find it deeply alarming that the supposed technical elite that wander this site are so averse to something that can liberate and help so many people, worldwide. Even if they have the capacity to understand it, it's clear that many here haven't done their homework and are relying on second or third-hand knowledge (or at best, outdated information) to form their opinions. Despite their hubris and narcissism, they're no better than "the general population" on understanding this.
  - 8organicbits 4y ago
    If your tech exhibits bad results due to "flawed human behavior" that's a usability concern, which is absolutely a fault of the technology. Tech doesn't exist in a bubble without humans.
    - rglover 4y ago
      The tech doesn't exhibit anything. Bitcoin has continued to run, as intended, since 2009. The market for Bitcoin however exhibits exactly what I've suggested above: human behavior.
- oreilles 4y ago
  Just because you support an alternative money system doesn't mean you have to be against the concept of a bank altogether. Bank exists because people suck at protecting their money. You don't keep cash in your house because you get breaked in. And same goes for crypto. You could get your key stolen. You could forget your passphrase. You could get hacked. And so on. Bank aren't invulnerable, but they sucks much less than average people at protecting their assets, and this is why people uses them.
  - robbiep 4y ago
    Right. No argument from me, except that isn’t the post I’m replying to, there the poster has said that a key safeguard is having custody of it. And without this magic piece, which as op points out is quite revolutionary, you’re literally at the mercy of opaque organisations that are able to screw you over with none of the protections of the current financial system (not to say people don’t get mercilessly screwed today, but default or bank run protection is a pretty sweet deal)
time_to_smile 4y ago
> That it's a safeguard (not hedge) against tyrannical money. Then why isn't BTC and other cryptocurrencies skyrocketing right now and seeing widespread adoption by Russian oligarchs looking to move around their money? After all, if you're on the losing end of it sanctions are "tyrannical money". There's also an argument to be made that it is precisely the tyranny behind fiat currency to ultimately gives it its value. The United States has a vast array of coercive means (from locking you in prison for forgery to trade weapons that can destroy your economy) to ensure that the USD has value. There is never a technical solution to realpolitik. We'll increasingly see this in the coming months with crypto as powerful people will get their piece of the pie from the crypto boom, while most average players will be left with nothing.
- rglover 4y ago
  > Then why isn't BTC and other cryptocurrencies skyrocketing right now and seeing widespread adoption by Russian oligarchs looking to move around their money? Because people are and have always been foolish and ego/pride driven. > The United States has a vast array of coercive means (from locking you in prison for forgery to trade weapons that can destroy your economy) to ensure that the USD has value. Do you view that as a positive? I sure don't. That's a really depressing reality when you have something like Bitcoin which doesn't necessitate any of that. > We'll increasingly see this in the coming months with crypto as powerful people will get their piece of the pie from the crypto boom, while most average players will be left with nothing. "Crypto" isn't Bitcoin. The conflation of the two is, in part, why the market fluctuates as violently as it does.
  - nradov 4y ago
    Maintaining the value of fiat currency through a state monopoly on violence is absolutely a positive. It works out better overall than anything else we've ever tried, including cryptocurrency.
    - rglover 4y ago
      If by "working out better" you mean obliterating the value of it and effectively enslaving your own citizenry because your greed incentivizes you to do so, then sure.
emptyfile 4y ago
I wonder if even 1 in 100 current Bitcoin owners would articulate an opinion such as this.
- rglover 4y ago
  Most likely not, but they should.
  - robbiep 4y ago
    But don’t you see that if that number can’t be lifted, crypto will never be capable of doing what it’s theoretically capable of? It’s like being the first to market with some revolutionary product, totally screwing the implementation and adoption and then leaving the population so jaded with the technology that it’s going to have a hard time recovering
    - rglover 4y ago
      I'm not preoccupied by the number (and neither should anyone else). If the number goes down, I'll just acquire more of it (I'm actively doing this as we speak). The point is the ability to transact without worrying about coercion. The implementation works fine, the people are flawed (and this will always be true).
rchaud 4y ago
> it cannot be manipulated or stolen by the state. How's that different from the paper notes in a Monopoly game box? The Fed can't steal it or debase its value either. I still need a large group of people that also hold monopoly money and are willing to transact goods and services for it, with the understanding that the monopoly notes have zero fiat cash value.
- rglover 4y ago
  > The Fed can't steal it or debase its value either. This is literally what money printing does. -- If you view it as Monopoly money, then don't use it. I don't know what to tell you; Bitcoin's transaction volume clearly shows that people use it. I've been paid with it and I've paid others with it. > the monopoly notes have zero fiat cash value Bitcoin is currently trading at $23,678. That's quite a bit of fiat cash value. Like I've said elsewhere in this thread, if that number goes down, I'll just acquire more of it because the properties I care about remain intact irrespective of USD price. Your opinion of what I do or do not view as money is, frankly, irrelevant.
lkrubner 4y ago
"tyrannical money" The USA has an elected legislature, independent courts, multiple levels of appeals in the judicial system, a strong system of civil rights, the right to trial for anyone accused of a crime, the right to an attorney, an independent press, and an active civil society made up of tens of thousands of organizations; all of which shapes the political environment which in turn shapes monetary policy. In what sense is the USD tyrannical?
- rglover 4y ago
  You didn't read what I wrote. I'm not concerned about what's currently true, I'm concerned about where we're headed. As Bitcoin has a supply limited to 21M, it's prudent to acquire as much as you can (while you can) before the system I described is implemented. When that happens, you will have no other options save for covert means. Edit: this is a more long-form articulation of what I'm getting at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtX6AKEO8ok https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtX6AKEO8ok
ddalex 4y ago
I'm sorry, but this doesn't make any sense to me.... What I am missing ? > as governments will introduce digital currencies Governments generally don't create money, central banks do. Famously, some central banks are actually private entities, not government (public ones) > own failing currencies What exactly currency is failing, and which are the indicators ? USD and EUR are roaring successes in facilitating value exchanges on a global scale. > simultaneously robbing citizens of their savings If that's the intention, banks can do that right now by printing money. Oh wait, they do. > will give out free money (it costs them nothing to do so) Yes, printing money has a small marginal cost. > not tell them that their money can expire Why somebody would expire money when they try to prop the economy on which they base their own support ? > have its purchases limited to "approved" vendors Again, why anybody would shoot themselves in the foot by killing the economy that keeps them alive ? > it cannot be manipulated or stolen by the state I'm sorry all your post reads some like crypto-prepper thing. If you feel that the state is out to steal you, you'd better start arming too, because if the state is out to get you, they'll not do it via obscure economic means, they will send the state-sponsored-thugs to violence it out - see Russia. > Something that's never existed in the history of humanity. Gold?
- rglover 4y ago
  > What exactly currency is failing, and which are the indicators ? The USD's value has declined 90+% over the last 100 years. As Charlie Munger suggests, "My [the] working thesis is that the currency goes to zero." > If that's the intention, banks can do that right now by printing money. Oh wait, they do. Correct. That's a bad thing. They can't do that on a Bitcoin standard. > Why somebody would expire money when they try to prop the economy on which they base their own support ? Because it forces participation in the economy. If it's going to expire, you're forced to spend it, thus boosting the economy. Also, you're guaranteed to keep working because you can't save your money and exit the system so you can repeat this cycle ad nausea. > Again, why anybody would shoot themselves in the foot by killing the economy that keeps them alive ? Because the goal is to limit the number of people "kept alive." As for an individual case: fear of the sword. https://twitter.com/PezntJournalist/status/1509544499013373962 https://twitter.com/PezntJournalist/status/15095444990133739... > I'm sorry all your post reads some like crypto-prepper thing. If you feel that the state is out to steal you, you'd better start arming too The floor of my bedroom closet is a small arsenal and yes, I've mentally prepared to die in a shoot out (if it comes to that) with the powers that be. Being prepared does not mean being ignorant/stupid/foolish. I lose nothing by thinking ahead while those who foolishly buy into what they're told—despite persistent evidence to the contrary—potentially lose everything. > Gold? That can be confiscated.

robbiep 4y ago

How many, or what percentage, of crypto owners/holders actually have their crypto in their own custody? I would hazard to say somewhere south of 1%. So what benefit is it? Everyone has only traded one form of vendor lock in to another (that is deserving of vastly less trust, as evidended by the Wild West of scams, rug pulls and outright frauds)

rglover 4y ago
That's not a fault of the technology. Many people want to pin the flaw of human behavior on Bitcoin but there's nothing inherent in the technology that forces people to do that. The literal "quickstart" of Bitcoin is to hold it in your own custody (running the Bitcoin software on your computer gives you a wallet you 100% control).
- robbiep 4y ago
  I know how it works, and I’d argue it is a flaw of the technology. Money works because I can hand $10 to a 5 or a 95 year old and they know what to do with it. Very few people do anything other than speculate in crypto, and even fewer hold it in their own wallets as opposed to on exchanges. If the friction of getting started in the future of money requires IT support, then it isn’t going to work
  - rglover 4y ago
    It doesn't require IT support, it requires reading (a limited amount depending on how much you want to know).
    - chrlac 4y ago
      This perspective is far from universal. Obviously, HN readers are a super-technical strata of society, and people here have little trouble understanding the concept and usage of cryptocurrency. The vast majority of the general population is nowhere near this level of technical proficiency. Just downloading and installing a software is firmly out of grasp for lots of people, probably more than half of them if I had to guess.
      - rglover 4y ago
        > This perspective is far from universal. It doesn't need to be universal. The need for personal computers wasn't universal when Steve Jobs was running around Silicon Valley selling the Apple I in the 70s. They didn't even understand email in the 90s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlJku_CSyNg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlJku_CSyNg. Look at us now. > The vast majority of the general population is nowhere near this level of technical proficiency. Right. Just like all technology, that's our responsibility as "the nerds." We take something that's complex and distill it down into something that's easily digested by people with limited or no technical aptitude. --- I find it deeply alarming that the supposed technical elite that wander this site are so averse to something that can liberate and help so many people, worldwide. Even if they have the capacity to understand it, it's clear that many here haven't done their homework and are relying on second or third-hand knowledge (or at best, outdated information) to form their opinions. Despite their hubris and narcissism, they're no better than "the general population" on understanding this.
- 8organicbits 4y ago
  If your tech exhibits bad results due to "flawed human behavior" that's a usability concern, which is absolutely a fault of the technology. Tech doesn't exist in a bubble without humans.
  - rglover 4y ago
    The tech doesn't exhibit anything. Bitcoin has continued to run, as intended, since 2009. The market for Bitcoin however exhibits exactly what I've suggested above: human behavior.
oreilles 4y ago
Just because you support an alternative money system doesn't mean you have to be against the concept of a bank altogether. Bank exists because people suck at protecting their money. You don't keep cash in your house because you get breaked in. And same goes for crypto. You could get your key stolen. You could forget your passphrase. You could get hacked. And so on. Bank aren't invulnerable, but they sucks much less than average people at protecting their assets, and this is why people uses them.
- robbiep 4y ago
  Right. No argument from me, except that isn’t the post I’m replying to, there the poster has said that a key safeguard is having custody of it. And without this magic piece, which as op points out is quite revolutionary, you’re literally at the mercy of opaque organisations that are able to screw you over with none of the protections of the current financial system (not to say people don’t get mercilessly screwed today, but default or bank run protection is a pretty sweet deal)

time_to_smile 4y ago

> That it's a safeguard (not hedge) against tyrannical money. Then why isn't BTC and other cryptocurrencies skyrocketing right now and seeing widespread adoption by Russian oligarchs looking to move around their money? After all, if you're on the losing end of it sanctions are "tyrannical money". There's also an argument to be made that it is precisely the tyranny behind fiat currency to ultimately gives it its value. The United States has a vast array of coercive means (from locking you in prison for forgery to trade weapons that can destroy your economy) to ensure that the USD has value. There is never a technical solution to realpolitik. We'll increasingly see this in the coming months with crypto as powerful people will get their piece of the pie from the crypto boom, while most average players will be left with nothing.

rglover 4y ago
> Then why isn't BTC and other cryptocurrencies skyrocketing right now and seeing widespread adoption by Russian oligarchs looking to move around their money? Because people are and have always been foolish and ego/pride driven. > The United States has a vast array of coercive means (from locking you in prison for forgery to trade weapons that can destroy your economy) to ensure that the USD has value. Do you view that as a positive? I sure don't. That's a really depressing reality when you have something like Bitcoin which doesn't necessitate any of that. > We'll increasingly see this in the coming months with crypto as powerful people will get their piece of the pie from the crypto boom, while most average players will be left with nothing. "Crypto" isn't Bitcoin. The conflation of the two is, in part, why the market fluctuates as violently as it does.
- nradov 4y ago
  Maintaining the value of fiat currency through a state monopoly on violence is absolutely a positive. It works out better overall than anything else we've ever tried, including cryptocurrency.
  - rglover 4y ago
    If by "working out better" you mean obliterating the value of it and effectively enslaving your own citizenry because your greed incentivizes you to do so, then sure.

emptyfile 4y ago

I wonder if even 1 in 100 current Bitcoin owners would articulate an opinion such as this.

rglover 4y ago
Most likely not, but they should.
- robbiep 4y ago
  But don’t you see that if that number can’t be lifted, crypto will never be capable of doing what it’s theoretically capable of? It’s like being the first to market with some revolutionary product, totally screwing the implementation and adoption and then leaving the population so jaded with the technology that it’s going to have a hard time recovering
  - rglover 4y ago
    I'm not preoccupied by the number (and neither should anyone else). If the number goes down, I'll just acquire more of it (I'm actively doing this as we speak). The point is the ability to transact without worrying about coercion. The implementation works fine, the people are flawed (and this will always be true).

rchaud 4y ago

> it cannot be manipulated or stolen by the state. How's that different from the paper notes in a Monopoly game box? The Fed can't steal it or debase its value either. I still need a large group of people that also hold monopoly money and are willing to transact goods and services for it, with the understanding that the monopoly notes have zero fiat cash value.

rglover 4y ago
> The Fed can't steal it or debase its value either. This is literally what money printing does. -- If you view it as Monopoly money, then don't use it. I don't know what to tell you; Bitcoin's transaction volume clearly shows that people use it. I've been paid with it and I've paid others with it. > the monopoly notes have zero fiat cash value Bitcoin is currently trading at $23,678. That's quite a bit of fiat cash value. Like I've said elsewhere in this thread, if that number goes down, I'll just acquire more of it because the properties I care about remain intact irrespective of USD price. Your opinion of what I do or do not view as money is, frankly, irrelevant.

lkrubner 4y ago

"tyrannical money" The USA has an elected legislature, independent courts, multiple levels of appeals in the judicial system, a strong system of civil rights, the right to trial for anyone accused of a crime, the right to an attorney, an independent press, and an active civil society made up of tens of thousands of organizations; all of which shapes the political environment which in turn shapes monetary policy. In what sense is the USD tyrannical?

rglover 4y ago
You didn't read what I wrote. I'm not concerned about what's currently true, I'm concerned about where we're headed. As Bitcoin has a supply limited to 21M, it's prudent to acquire as much as you can (while you can) before the system I described is implemented. When that happens, you will have no other options save for covert means. Edit: this is a more long-form articulation of what I'm getting at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtX6AKEO8ok https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtX6AKEO8ok

ddalex 4y ago

I'm sorry, but this doesn't make any sense to me.... What I am missing ? > as governments will introduce digital currencies Governments generally don't create money, central banks do. Famously, some central banks are actually private entities, not government (public ones) > own failing currencies What exactly currency is failing, and which are the indicators ? USD and EUR are roaring successes in facilitating value exchanges on a global scale. > simultaneously robbing citizens of their savings If that's the intention, banks can do that right now by printing money. Oh wait, they do. > will give out free money (it costs them nothing to do so) Yes, printing money has a small marginal cost. > not tell them that their money can expire Why somebody would expire money when they try to prop the economy on which they base their own support ? > have its purchases limited to "approved" vendors Again, why anybody would shoot themselves in the foot by killing the economy that keeps them alive ? > it cannot be manipulated or stolen by the state I'm sorry all your post reads some like crypto-prepper thing. If you feel that the state is out to steal you, you'd better start arming too, because if the state is out to get you, they'll not do it via obscure economic means, they will send the state-sponsored-thugs to violence it out - see Russia. > Something that's never existed in the history of humanity. Gold?

rglover 4y ago
> What exactly currency is failing, and which are the indicators ? The USD's value has declined 90+% over the last 100 years. As Charlie Munger suggests, "My [the] working thesis is that the currency goes to zero." > If that's the intention, banks can do that right now by printing money. Oh wait, they do. Correct. That's a bad thing. They can't do that on a Bitcoin standard. > Why somebody would expire money when they try to prop the economy on which they base their own support ? Because it forces participation in the economy. If it's going to expire, you're forced to spend it, thus boosting the economy. Also, you're guaranteed to keep working because you can't save your money and exit the system so you can repeat this cycle ad nausea. > Again, why anybody would shoot themselves in the foot by killing the economy that keeps them alive ? Because the goal is to limit the number of people "kept alive." As for an individual case: fear of the sword. https://twitter.com/PezntJournalist/status/1509544499013373962 https://twitter.com/PezntJournalist/status/15095444990133739... > I'm sorry all your post reads some like crypto-prepper thing. If you feel that the state is out to steal you, you'd better start arming too The floor of my bedroom closet is a small arsenal and yes, I've mentally prepared to die in a shoot out (if it comes to that) with the powers that be. Being prepared does not mean being ignorant/stupid/foolish. I lose nothing by thinking ahead while those who foolishly buy into what they're told—despite persistent evidence to the contrary—potentially lose everything. > Gold? That can be confiscated.