4 ms·

>> or a company like Bitwage builds some other part of the ecosystem, bitcoin becomes a little more useful. >I suppose this is all great if you want to use bit

>> or a company like Bitwage builds some other part of the ecosystem, bitcoin becomes a little more useful. >I suppose this is all great if you want to use bitcoin because of your political persuasion. I expect so. It's also great if you believe that the legacy financial system is inefficient and may improve if it is threatened by external competition. From your comments here, you do believe that, I think? As you've said, casting this as a discussion of politics or monetary policy distracts from the practical issues. So let's avoid that. Your comment, which I cited above, seems to be assuming that my interest in this is political or ideological. It's not. In fact, based on that comment, you appear to be assuming that anyone who 'supports' Bitcoin does so purely for political reasons. Is that really how you feel? I think that is far from the truth, anyway. To be honest, I know very little about Bitwage. I replied to you because I think you've made some very broad assumptions about cryptocurrencies, which differ from reality somewhat. As I have used cryptocurrencies extensively, I've tried to explain how I think reality is more nuanced than these assumptions.

nmrm 12y ago
> From your comments here, you do believe that, I think? I think bitcoin-as-exchange-medium is reasonable. I think bitcoin-as-a-currency or bitcoin-as-money per se is not workable, or at the very least is a solution in search of a problem. > Is that really how you feel? If it were, I simply wouldn't read bitcoin stories. > I think you've made some very broad assumptions about cryptocurrencies, which differ from reality somewhat. What are the material advantages to using bitcoin for anything other than as an exchange mechanism? All of the pain points of the modern banking system you and others have proposed are mostly about currency conversion and sending money across international borders, and my original post addresses what I believe the likely outcome for this use case is (although, see the thread with baddox as well). I didn't claim you cannot use bitcoin in other capacities. I just stated the extra intermediate currency doesn't make any sense because there's no competitive advantage to existing (safer) mechanisms. Maybe I'm missing something? > I've tried to explain how I think reality is more nuanced than these assumptions. What would really convince me to let go of this assumption is a compelling reason to use bitcoin as money.
- FatalLogic 12y ago
  >> Is that really how you feel? >If it were, I simply wouldn't read bitcoin stories. Then your statement, 'I suppose this is all great if you want to use bitcoin because of your political persuasion', doesn't fully represent your actual point of view about the topic you were referring to (the growth of the bitcoin ecosystem)? This one of several issues that I'm finding quite confusing. You've said you personally would love to see bitcoin have some limited growth because that might force improvements in the existing financial system[1], but then you've dismissed all other people's possible pleasure at bitcoin's growth as being purely politically motivated[2]. These two positions seem to contradict each other. >What are the material advantages to using bitcoin for anything other than as an exchange mechanism? I could give a trivial example, but do you mean the material advantages for you, or for some other person? I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to insist that bitcoin must be good for you personally. It's quite possible that it's worse than useless for you in its current form. [1] "I'd love to see BC companies do well and then die off" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8079622 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8079622 [2] "I suppose this is all great if you want to use bitcoin because of your political persuasion." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8081114 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8081114
  - nmrm 12y ago
    > I could give a trivial example Please do, because this thread is hard-to-read deep and the only examples you've given were discussed at length in other subthreads before you even posted them. > but do you mean the material advantages for you, or for some other person? I would prefer "here is a problem" and then "here why bitcoin is the best available solution to the problem". Rather than the more common "here is a problem" and "here's a way that bitcoin could solve the problem", and then completely ignoring hundreds of other less-complicated, safer and some-times even already well-established solutions. Or solutions that are actually just ways to circumvent regulation, and probably aren't legally sustainable or financially scalable (see post #1). > I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to insist that bitcoin must be good for you personally. If you re-read my original post, my reasoning is explicitly selfish. The reasoning goes "I want X to happen because that's best for me." > but then you've dismissed all other people's possible pleasure at bitcoin's growth as being purely politically motivated[2] Um, yeah. In the post I'm responding to, you started with the assumption that bitcoin is good, and then reasoned from that assumption that we should use bitcoin in specific circumstances while ignoring arguments that it's not the best technology for addressing those specific problems. But this reasoning is really silly. Because then every time I point out there's a better technology for solving problem X, you say "yeah, but Bitcoin solves lots of problems! So if we use it as the solution for X, then there's more adoption and we solve all these other problems." But of course the only "other problems" you've mentioned all have better alternatives. And if even a significant portion problems have much better alternatives, then your argument falls apart and becomes "use bitcoin for X because bitcoin is inherently good", which is a political judgement and not a pragmatic judgement.

nmrm 12y ago

> From your comments here, you do believe that, I think? I think bitcoin-as-exchange-medium is reasonable. I think bitcoin-as-a-currency or bitcoin-as-money per se is not workable, or at the very least is a solution in search of a problem. > Is that really how you feel? If it were, I simply wouldn't read bitcoin stories. > I think you've made some very broad assumptions about cryptocurrencies, which differ from reality somewhat. What are the material advantages to using bitcoin for anything other than as an exchange mechanism? All of the pain points of the modern banking system you and others have proposed are mostly about currency conversion and sending money across international borders, and my original post addresses what I believe the likely outcome for this use case is (although, see the thread with baddox as well). I didn't claim you cannot use bitcoin in other capacities. I just stated the extra intermediate currency doesn't make any sense because there's no competitive advantage to existing (safer) mechanisms. Maybe I'm missing something? > I've tried to explain how I think reality is more nuanced than these assumptions. What would really convince me to let go of this assumption is a compelling reason to use bitcoin as money.

FatalLogic 12y ago
>> Is that really how you feel? >If it were, I simply wouldn't read bitcoin stories. Then your statement, 'I suppose this is all great if you want to use bitcoin because of your political persuasion', doesn't fully represent your actual point of view about the topic you were referring to (the growth of the bitcoin ecosystem)? This one of several issues that I'm finding quite confusing. You've said you personally would love to see bitcoin have some limited growth because that might force improvements in the existing financial system[1], but then you've dismissed all other people's possible pleasure at bitcoin's growth as being purely politically motivated[2]. These two positions seem to contradict each other. >What are the material advantages to using bitcoin for anything other than as an exchange mechanism? I could give a trivial example, but do you mean the material advantages for you, or for some other person? I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to insist that bitcoin must be good for you personally. It's quite possible that it's worse than useless for you in its current form. [1] "I'd love to see BC companies do well and then die off" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8079622 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8079622 [2] "I suppose this is all great if you want to use bitcoin because of your political persuasion." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8081114 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8081114
- nmrm 12y ago
  > I could give a trivial example Please do, because this thread is hard-to-read deep and the only examples you've given were discussed at length in other subthreads before you even posted them. > but do you mean the material advantages for you, or for some other person? I would prefer "here is a problem" and then "here why bitcoin is the best available solution to the problem". Rather than the more common "here is a problem" and "here's a way that bitcoin could solve the problem", and then completely ignoring hundreds of other less-complicated, safer and some-times even already well-established solutions. Or solutions that are actually just ways to circumvent regulation, and probably aren't legally sustainable or financially scalable (see post #1). > I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to insist that bitcoin must be good for you personally. If you re-read my original post, my reasoning is explicitly selfish. The reasoning goes "I want X to happen because that's best for me." > but then you've dismissed all other people's possible pleasure at bitcoin's growth as being purely politically motivated[2] Um, yeah. In the post I'm responding to, you started with the assumption that bitcoin is good, and then reasoned from that assumption that we should use bitcoin in specific circumstances while ignoring arguments that it's not the best technology for addressing those specific problems. But this reasoning is really silly. Because then every time I point out there's a better technology for solving problem X, you say "yeah, but Bitcoin solves lots of problems! So if we use it as the solution for X, then there's more adoption and we solve all these other problems." But of course the only "other problems" you've mentioned all have better alternatives. And if even a significant portion problems have much better alternatives, then your argument falls apart and becomes "use bitcoin for X because bitcoin is inherently good", which is a political judgement and not a pragmatic judgement.