6 ms·

This country is tightly controlled by the government. The Internet is an example. The GFW (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Shield_Project http://en.wikiped

This country is tightly controlled by the government. The Internet is an example. The GFW (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Shield_Project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Shield_Project) surveillance all connections in China like NSA but since 10 years ago and people are used to it. Even large payment companies in China (like Alipay) could do litter about economic innovation, they have to obey the rules set by the government and bank. Any big company in China could challenge these rules by using a method which independent of any central authority in the future? I don't think so.

27182818284 13y ago
>This country is tightly controlled by the government. Strange, I always hear quite the opposite. That everything is simply too big at this point and although there is the appearance of a big controlling force, there really isn't one anymore.
- fennecfoxen 13y ago
  Above-the-counter currency-exchanges are still pretty heavily regulated by the Chinese government. See, the ongoing China scam works like this: * traditional Chinese culture would have the children care for their parents and grandparents in their old age * one-child policy means that each child has two parents and four grandparents to care for exclusively, so that's not going to work out so well, therefore: * everyone saves like crazy * the state-run banks pay negative real interest rates (less than inflation) * the state-run banks loan to big state-owned firms at negative real interest rates (and you can do amazing things when paying for capital at negative interest rates) * the people in charge of the state-owned firms live lavish lifestyles off the profits and provide political support for the regime * from time to time the government has to work to suppress riots over high food prices and other consequences of inflation This breaks down if the ordinary people can get hold of a currency that isn't full of inflation. So, capital controls limit how many dollars people can get a hold of. Of course, Bitcoin in the mix could be interesting. Or rendered illegal. Or both.
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    > one-child policy means that each child has two parents and four grandparents to care for exclusively, so that's not going to work out so well Some on-the-ground experience with China would indicate that the one-child policy has basically no effect on the number of children per couple. As would the international fertility stats. Most recently, I asked a group of chinese software developers about the policy. They went around the table admitting they weren't only children.
    - mikeash 13y ago
      My experience is the exact opposite. My wife and her brother are the only set of siblings among their cousins (of which there are money, because their grandparents had a massive quantity of children). The financial repercussions of disobeying the law are fairly severe, so people don't generally bypass it. I wonder what the explanation could be for our radically different experiences. Mine is all around Beijing, is yours perhaps out somewhere less urbanized?
      - thaumasiotes 13y ago
        I wouldn't say that. My experience is all Shanghai. Potentially it's an SES thing, but note that the fertility statistics show very low fertility for China, so a lot of only children isn't unusual overall. The conclusion that the one-child policy isn't having any effect comes from the fact that Japan and Korea have the same ultra-low fertility rate, but no one-child policy.
        mikeash 13y ago
        Japan and Korea seem like bad comparisons, since they're relatively rich. It's fairly well known (read: I don't feel like looking it up right now) that there's a strong negative correlation between wealth and birth rates. But I don't know what the right comparison would be (China is kind of incomparable) nor what the answer would be. Perhaps the best comparison would be India, and the disparity in birth rates there is stark, but there are massive other differences as well.
- meowface 13y ago
  Well, going by the firewall which is constantly updated and maintained, and arresting people for criticizing government officials, I would say the government at the least tries to control the country strictly.
  - jafaku 13y ago
    And which country doesn't do that kind of thing nowadays?
    - meowface 13y ago
      The United States. They're more into passive spying and subtle manipulation/influencing, instead of active restriction and arresting of dissidents.
      - jafaku 13y ago
        Ever heard of Snowden, Manning, or Assange? (names from the top of my head, but the full list is endless) Besides, if someone (a regular person) were to disappear for being a dissident, you would never find out. And it would fit perfectly the US behaviour in every other matter.
        meowface 13y ago
        I said "dissidents." All of the above three leaked classified secrets; countries like China will arrest you and subjugate you to inhumane conditions just for criticizing the government, or trying to start political change.
officialjunk 13y ago
The fact that baidu, a large company in china, is publicly accepting bitcoin is probably the beginning of the erosion of your argument.
dwaltrip 13y ago
While I don't think that large Chinese companies like Baidu will accept bitcoin in the near term, the exchanges in China are actually booming. Chinese traders on the bitcoin forum say that it is quite easy to get state currency on and off the exchanges (much better than the US), and apparently it is competitive enough for several exchanges to be running extended no-trading-fee promotions. You can see Chinese bitcoin trade volumes at this site: http://btckan.com/price http://btckan.com/price (Google translate, also don't forget the 0-fee promotions). I hear that a one or two of them have shady reputations, but the majority don't. Volume has been increasing, and is rivaling dollar trade volumes. So the government isn't too overbearing in this regard, it seems. The state media also ran a detailed bitcoin TV special several months back.

27182818284 13y ago

>This country is tightly controlled by the government. Strange, I always hear quite the opposite. That everything is simply too big at this point and although there is the appearance of a big controlling force, there really isn't one anymore.

fennecfoxen 13y ago
Above-the-counter currency-exchanges are still pretty heavily regulated by the Chinese government. See, the ongoing China scam works like this: * traditional Chinese culture would have the children care for their parents and grandparents in their old age * one-child policy means that each child has two parents and four grandparents to care for exclusively, so that's not going to work out so well, therefore: * everyone saves like crazy * the state-run banks pay negative real interest rates (less than inflation) * the state-run banks loan to big state-owned firms at negative real interest rates (and you can do amazing things when paying for capital at negative interest rates) * the people in charge of the state-owned firms live lavish lifestyles off the profits and provide political support for the regime * from time to time the government has to work to suppress riots over high food prices and other consequences of inflation This breaks down if the ordinary people can get hold of a currency that isn't full of inflation. So, capital controls limit how many dollars people can get a hold of. Of course, Bitcoin in the mix could be interesting. Or rendered illegal. Or both.
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  > one-child policy means that each child has two parents and four grandparents to care for exclusively, so that's not going to work out so well Some on-the-ground experience with China would indicate that the one-child policy has basically no effect on the number of children per couple. As would the international fertility stats. Most recently, I asked a group of chinese software developers about the policy. They went around the table admitting they weren't only children.
  - mikeash 13y ago
    My experience is the exact opposite. My wife and her brother are the only set of siblings among their cousins (of which there are money, because their grandparents had a massive quantity of children). The financial repercussions of disobeying the law are fairly severe, so people don't generally bypass it. I wonder what the explanation could be for our radically different experiences. Mine is all around Beijing, is yours perhaps out somewhere less urbanized?
    - thaumasiotes 13y ago
      I wouldn't say that. My experience is all Shanghai. Potentially it's an SES thing, but note that the fertility statistics show very low fertility for China, so a lot of only children isn't unusual overall. The conclusion that the one-child policy isn't having any effect comes from the fact that Japan and Korea have the same ultra-low fertility rate, but no one-child policy.
      - mikeash 13y ago
        Japan and Korea seem like bad comparisons, since they're relatively rich. It's fairly well known (read: I don't feel like looking it up right now) that there's a strong negative correlation between wealth and birth rates. But I don't know what the right comparison would be (China is kind of incomparable) nor what the answer would be. Perhaps the best comparison would be India, and the disparity in birth rates there is stark, but there are massive other differences as well.
meowface 13y ago
Well, going by the firewall which is constantly updated and maintained, and arresting people for criticizing government officials, I would say the government at the least tries to control the country strictly.
- jafaku 13y ago
  And which country doesn't do that kind of thing nowadays?
  - meowface 13y ago
    The United States. They're more into passive spying and subtle manipulation/influencing, instead of active restriction and arresting of dissidents.
    - jafaku 13y ago
      Ever heard of Snowden, Manning, or Assange? (names from the top of my head, but the full list is endless) Besides, if someone (a regular person) were to disappear for being a dissident, you would never find out. And it would fit perfectly the US behaviour in every other matter.
      - meowface 13y ago
        I said "dissidents." All of the above three leaked classified secrets; countries like China will arrest you and subjugate you to inhumane conditions just for criticizing the government, or trying to start political change.

officialjunk 13y ago

The fact that baidu, a large company in china, is publicly accepting bitcoin is probably the beginning of the erosion of your argument.

dwaltrip 13y ago

While I don't think that large Chinese companies like Baidu will accept bitcoin in the near term, the exchanges in China are actually booming. Chinese traders on the bitcoin forum say that it is quite easy to get state currency on and off the exchanges (much better than the US), and apparently it is competitive enough for several exchanges to be running extended no-trading-fee promotions. You can see Chinese bitcoin trade volumes at this site: http://btckan.com/price http://btckan.com/price (Google translate, also don't forget the 0-fee promotions). I hear that a one or two of them have shady reputations, but the majority don't. Volume has been increasing, and is rivaling dollar trade volumes. So the government isn't too overbearing in this regard, it seems. The state media also ran a detailed bitcoin TV special several months back.