5 ms·

Bitcoins (and others) aren't backed by a government. One of the major exchanges used to trade Magic the Gathering cards (You know, for kids!). Bills also have s

by alayne 13y ago

Bitcoins (and others) aren't backed by a government. One of the major exchanges used to trade Magic the Gathering cards (You know, for kids!). Bills also have serial numbers that provide some amount of traceability, at least between Federal Reserve branches and banks.

clavalle 13y ago
Bitcoins are made, literally, of nothing but tracability.
- alayne 13y ago
  I'm disputing the article's statement that "cash is a 100% anonymous and untraceable payments technology"
  - kbenson 13y ago
    True, it's not always 100% untraceable, but it is in the very high nines. From the serial we know where it was printed, and it may occasionally be tagged as it goes through various systems (if ATMs don't scan for serial and track incoming and outgoing bills, I imagine it's just a matter of time), but there's still many methods of getting cash that do not link a serial number to you directly (and in most cases not indirectly either). Getting cash from a human bank teller, change from a high cash-flow business, etc.
shiftpgdn 13y ago
A. MtGox never traded magic the gathering cards, this is a myth. The domain might have been bought for that but it was never a trading platform for magic cards. B. Magic the Gathering isn't just for kids! It's actually quite fun.
- kbenson 13y ago
  B. Magic the Gathering isn't just for kids! It's actually quite fun. I'm pretty sure the "You know, for kids!" is a Hudsucker Proxy reference.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- Loughla 13y ago
  But that one sentence proves how quickly you have to go on the defensive with bitcoin. That is fascinating from a marketing perspective. Also, what do you think anyone in the popular media will focus on with something like MtGox? The fact that they never actually traded magic cards, or that their name implies (and therefore proves) that they do or did at one time? The fact that magic takes skill and strategy, or that it is loosely associated with other weird groups like my little pony and that evil hacker syndicate 4chan?
- gwern 13y ago
  A. Actually, I have been investigating that (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mt.Gox#Possible_citogenesis_concerning_whether_MtGox_ever_hosted_an_MtG_trading_site https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mt.Gox#Possible_citogenes...) and McCaleb has told me that the domain was used briefly for such a service - but interestingly, it wasn't physical cards, but rather, their equivalents in the _Magic: The Gathering Online_ service.
kordless 13y ago
The term "backing" indicates adding strength or support to something. Unlike the USD centralized pool of control backing, Bitcoin is backed by a distributed networked compute and store mechanism. That mechanism's infrastructure is provided by people who believe in the technology, including miners, full node wallet users, and exchanges. Making ad hominem arguments against Bitcoin by discrediting Mt. Gox is flawed because they are only one part of the Bitcoin network. Mt. Gox can continue burning to the ground tomorrow but Bitcoin will keep on keeping on regardless because the general approach to Bitcoin is high distribution of every element of the network. Mt. Gox's problems have had a short term effect on the price of Bitcoin, but that simply will not continue because other exchanges will take its place. There are plans in the works to build distributed exchanges. Technology takes time to build correctly. Bitcoin is no different in this regard.
gnaritas 13y ago
> Bitcoins (and others) aren't backed by a government. No, they're backed by confidence in math, something much more reliable than confidence in government.
- josephlord 13y ago
  That only assures their scarcity and verifiability, not their value or liquidity.
  - icebraining 13y ago
    Neither do governments. The 20th century has plenty of examples of hyperinflation in countries with central banks. Go ask the Germans or the Brazilians how assured was the value of their cash.
    - josephlord 13y ago
      I didn't say that they did although at least on liquidity they do. Having said that I still don't see any good reason for bit coins to have any substantial value at all. (Arguably the same could be said of national currencies since the Gold standard was dropped but there is more history there). My main point was that the maths doesn't actual support (nor does it contradict) the properties of interest to use of bit coin as a value store.
      - gnaritas 13y ago
        Bitcoin is a peer to peer payment network; the value is in the network and the new abilities it brings with it. If you don't see value in a superior replacement for credit cards on the Internet and international money transfers, I don't think you're looking hard enough.
        josephlord 13y ago
        That a system such as Bitcoin has value does not intrinsically make a bitcoin have any value. The question is whether it is any worse than traditional/national currencies in this regard. At the moment the speculative /bubble behaviour is dominating and volatility is too high compared with any national currency except those undergoing a massive crisis[1] (which is not most of them most of the time). [1] I'm torn about this argument as it feels unfair to exclude currencies in crisis but on the other hand if the argument for Bitcoin is that it is as stable as a currency regarded as failing isn't an impressive claim to make.
adventured 13y ago
Shall we dig up all the folly of the past 200 years related to fiat? Do you suppose that discussion would be worth a continental? And would that conversation inflate as fast as Venezuela or Argentina's currencies? Would we need calculators during that conversation as though we were trying to purchase bread for 37 trillion ZWD like in Zimbabwe (and should we buy our high-powered presses from Germany's Giesecke & Devrient)?

by alayne 13y ago

clavalle 13y ago

Bitcoins are made, literally, of nothing but tracability.

alayne 13y ago
I'm disputing the article's statement that "cash is a 100% anonymous and untraceable payments technology"
- kbenson 13y ago
  True, it's not always 100% untraceable, but it is in the very high nines. From the serial we know where it was printed, and it may occasionally be tagged as it goes through various systems (if ATMs don't scan for serial and track incoming and outgoing bills, I imagine it's just a matter of time), but there's still many methods of getting cash that do not link a serial number to you directly (and in most cases not indirectly either). Getting cash from a human bank teller, change from a high cash-flow business, etc.

shiftpgdn 13y ago

A. MtGox never traded magic the gathering cards, this is a myth. The domain might have been bought for that but it was never a trading platform for magic cards. B. Magic the Gathering isn't just for kids! It's actually quite fun.

kbenson 13y ago
B. Magic the Gathering isn't just for kids! It's actually quite fun. I'm pretty sure the "You know, for kids!" is a Hudsucker Proxy reference.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
Loughla 13y ago
But that one sentence proves how quickly you have to go on the defensive with bitcoin. That is fascinating from a marketing perspective. Also, what do you think anyone in the popular media will focus on with something like MtGox? The fact that they never actually traded magic cards, or that their name implies (and therefore proves) that they do or did at one time? The fact that magic takes skill and strategy, or that it is loosely associated with other weird groups like my little pony and that evil hacker syndicate 4chan?
gwern 13y ago
A. Actually, I have been investigating that (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mt.Gox#Possible_citogenesis_concerning_whether_MtGox_ever_hosted_an_MtG_trading_site https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mt.Gox#Possible_citogenes...) and McCaleb has told me that the domain was used briefly for such a service - but interestingly, it wasn't physical cards, but rather, their equivalents in the _Magic: The Gathering Online_ service.

kordless 13y ago

The term "backing" indicates adding strength or support to something. Unlike the USD centralized pool of control backing, Bitcoin is backed by a distributed networked compute and store mechanism. That mechanism's infrastructure is provided by people who believe in the technology, including miners, full node wallet users, and exchanges. Making ad hominem arguments against Bitcoin by discrediting Mt. Gox is flawed because they are only one part of the Bitcoin network. Mt. Gox can continue burning to the ground tomorrow but Bitcoin will keep on keeping on regardless because the general approach to Bitcoin is high distribution of every element of the network. Mt. Gox's problems have had a short term effect on the price of Bitcoin, but that simply will not continue because other exchanges will take its place. There are plans in the works to build distributed exchanges. Technology takes time to build correctly. Bitcoin is no different in this regard.

gnaritas 13y ago

> Bitcoins (and others) aren't backed by a government. No, they're backed by confidence in math, something much more reliable than confidence in government.

josephlord 13y ago
That only assures their scarcity and verifiability, not their value or liquidity.
- icebraining 13y ago
  Neither do governments. The 20th century has plenty of examples of hyperinflation in countries with central banks. Go ask the Germans or the Brazilians how assured was the value of their cash.
  - josephlord 13y ago
    I didn't say that they did although at least on liquidity they do. Having said that I still don't see any good reason for bit coins to have any substantial value at all. (Arguably the same could be said of national currencies since the Gold standard was dropped but there is more history there). My main point was that the maths doesn't actual support (nor does it contradict) the properties of interest to use of bit coin as a value store.
    - gnaritas 13y ago
      Bitcoin is a peer to peer payment network; the value is in the network and the new abilities it brings with it. If you don't see value in a superior replacement for credit cards on the Internet and international money transfers, I don't think you're looking hard enough.
      - josephlord 13y ago
        That a system such as Bitcoin has value does not intrinsically make a bitcoin have any value. The question is whether it is any worse than traditional/national currencies in this regard. At the moment the speculative /bubble behaviour is dominating and volatility is too high compared with any national currency except those undergoing a massive crisis[1] (which is not most of them most of the time). [1] I'm torn about this argument as it feels unfair to exclude currencies in crisis but on the other hand if the argument for Bitcoin is that it is as stable as a currency regarded as failing isn't an impressive claim to make.

adventured 13y ago

Shall we dig up all the folly of the past 200 years related to fiat? Do you suppose that discussion would be worth a continental? And would that conversation inflate as fast as Venezuela or Argentina's currencies? Would we need calculators during that conversation as though we were trying to purchase bread for 37 trillion ZWD like in Zimbabwe (and should we buy our high-powered presses from Germany's Giesecke & Devrient)?