4 ms·

US default now-or-later squabble certainly fueled bitcoin. It is becoming de-facto plan B for big players.

by gesman 13y ago

oscargrouch 13y ago
wow! that will have big implications.. but i wonder what would do vey rich people invest in bitcoins instead of gold wich is probably safer right now? Thats not my area, but i would like to know if BC could get more attractive than gold in a fallout economy scenario?
- jaekwon 13y ago
  Bitcoin is more useful than gold in a society that has the internet. If you want to prepare for a situation where we no longer have the internet, then gold might be a viable option. But I don't care to consider that possibility, for the same reason I don't care to prepare for a nuclear holocaust. I believe my expected utility/happiness is greater this way.
- gweinberg 13y ago
  It's not a question of one or the other. If you're a billionaire, it might make lots of sense to have a whole bunch of accounts in different countries with "just" a couple million, since that will still allow you to live reasonably comfortably for the rest of your life and yet is an insignificant fraction of your total wealth.
ajross 13y ago
Um, no. According to blockchain.info and this $200 price, there are less than $2.5 billion worth of bitcoins in circulation, total. The idea that this would somehow serve as a hedge against an economy a thousand times larger is laughable.
- jaekwon 13y ago
  Nobody is suggesting that Bitcoin will replace the USD (yet). For now, some people are going into Bitcoin because it cannot be confiscated. And govt default is correlated with crazy taxation measures. Take a look at what France is doing now.
  - Phlarp 13y ago
    >cannot be confiscated. Several internet drug lords would beg to differ.
    - jaekwon 13y ago
      Which ones? DPR's personal wallet is still intact.
      - Phlarp 13y ago
        That completely depends on how they were stored. If the FBI has his encrypted wallet file and DPR has the password to access those keys then the coins are effectively dead don't you think?
        jaekwon 13y ago
        Of course not. Only he can unlock his coins, and he can use them as a bargaining chip.
        narcissus 13y ago
        That's presuming that only DPR had the wallet in the first place. Even without the wallet he may have some trusted cohorts that can move the funds via a brain wallet or something similar. Now having said that, that hasn't yet happened and I presume over time it's less likely to happen. But still, there's nothing intrinsic to Bitcoin that says "Party A has the wallet and therefore only they can spend what's in it".
        Phlarp 13y ago
        >"Party A has the wallet and therefore only they can spend what's in it" When the private key is gone, the coins are gone. Might be forgetting a brain-wallet, might be forgetting the password or losing the keys to the encrypted drive the keys are in, or it could be as simple as losing or destroying the physical media the keys are on. We can quibble about the precise technical details of how DPR specifically might have those coins secured, but it's mostly moot at this point; that address likely won't be changed any time soon. Surely removing 1% of the current circulation must have a few effects.

US default now-or-later squabble certainly fueled bitcoin. It is becoming de-facto plan B for big players.

by gesman 13y ago

US default now-or-later squabble certainly fueled bitcoin. It is becoming de-facto plan B for big players.

wow! that will have big implications.. but i wonder what would do vey rich people invest in bitcoins instead of gold wich is probably safer right now? Thats not my area, but i would like to know if BC could get more attractive than gold in a fallout economy scenario?

jaekwon 13y ago
Bitcoin is more useful than gold in a society that has the internet. If you want to prepare for a situation where we no longer have the internet, then gold might be a viable option. But I don't care to consider that possibility, for the same reason I don't care to prepare for a nuclear holocaust. I believe my expected utility/happiness is greater this way.
gweinberg 13y ago
It's not a question of one or the other. If you're a billionaire, it might make lots of sense to have a whole bunch of accounts in different countries with "just" a couple million, since that will still allow you to live reasonably comfortably for the rest of your life and yet is an insignificant fraction of your total wealth.

ajross 13y ago

Um, no. According to blockchain.info and this $200 price, there are less than $2.5 billion worth of bitcoins in circulation, total. The idea that this would somehow serve as a hedge against an economy a thousand times larger is laughable.

jaekwon 13y ago
Nobody is suggesting that Bitcoin will replace the USD (yet). For now, some people are going into Bitcoin because it cannot be confiscated. And govt default is correlated with crazy taxation measures. Take a look at what France is doing now.
- Phlarp 13y ago
  >cannot be confiscated. Several internet drug lords would beg to differ.
  - jaekwon 13y ago
    Which ones? DPR's personal wallet is still intact.
    - Phlarp 13y ago
      That completely depends on how they were stored. If the FBI has his encrypted wallet file and DPR has the password to access those keys then the coins are effectively dead don't you think?
      - jaekwon 13y ago
        Of course not. Only he can unlock his coins, and he can use them as a bargaining chip.
      - narcissus 13y ago
        That's presuming that only DPR had the wallet in the first place. Even without the wallet he may have some trusted cohorts that can move the funds via a brain wallet or something similar. Now having said that, that hasn't yet happened and I presume over time it's less likely to happen. But still, there's nothing intrinsic to Bitcoin that says "Party A has the wallet and therefore only they can spend what's in it".
        Phlarp 13y ago
        >"Party A has the wallet and therefore only they can spend what's in it" When the private key is gone, the coins are gone. Might be forgetting a brain-wallet, might be forgetting the password or losing the keys to the encrypted drive the keys are in, or it could be as simple as losing or destroying the physical media the keys are on. We can quibble about the precise technical details of how DPR specifically might have those coins secured, but it's mostly moot at this point; that address likely won't be changed any time soon. Surely removing 1% of the current circulation must have a few effects.