What are your thoughts on BitCoin?
- Thread starter aimeeandbeatles
- Start date
I have no idea what you're referring to.
Symphony D.
Deity
What a shock.
For your benefit: the BitCoin system is objectively horribly designed for widespread adoption and virtually everything that makes it unique would have to be scrapped, refit, or reworked for it to achieve any measure of notable success; the most obvious solutions would bring it largely if not wholly in line with existing currencies and services, thus nullifying the need for its existence. I have cited several sources to this effect already in my opening statements.
That is to say: BitCoin is stupid.
If you would like to refute that point in a coherent fashion as opposed to doing the textual equivalent of jamming your fingers in your ears and humming as loudly as you can, feel free. If not, please do continue with what seems to be your established pattern of discourse.
For your benefit: the BitCoin system is objectively horribly designed for widespread adoption and virtually everything that makes it unique would have to be scrapped, refit, or reworked for it to achieve any measure of notable success; the most obvious solutions would bring it largely if not wholly in line with existing currencies and services, thus nullifying the need for its existence. I have cited several sources to this effect already in my opening statements.
That is to say: BitCoin is stupid.
If you would like to refute that point in a coherent fashion as opposed to doing the textual equivalent of jamming your fingers in your ears and humming as loudly as you can, feel free. If not, please do continue with what seems to be your established pattern of discourse.
This is pretty much in line with how Dachs' stereotypical proponent of bitcoins argues.
Otherwise, you haven't really said anything to refute anything I've posted in this thread. I suspect you're going to disagree since you don't realize what any of my actual point are.
Hah, buddy of mine cashed out nearly $200k this morning.
useless
Social Justice Rogue
Link to video.
This video is relevant and will always be so to bitcoin.
Just a side-note, bitcoin is basically the internet's equivilent of the tulip bubble.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
The most common reason why BitCoins receive hate is because they are associated with Libertarians. If you could pay your tuition fees in BitCoins and some economist of the likes of Paul Krugman or Joseph Stiglitz would support it, I bet 80% of CFC would be sympathetic towards BitCoins.
Likewise, many Libertarians support BitCoins because it seems such a perfectly Libertarian thing to do. You might as well try to associate it with Neo-Nazis or NOI followers who try to get rid "Zionist bankster money" so that most Libertarians withdraw their support as well.
I'm not really taking a side in the BitCoin debate, other than that I perceive that most arguments about BitCoins are in the end not as much based on rational considerations as they are of group identity.
Likewise, many Libertarians support BitCoins because it seems such a perfectly Libertarian thing to do. You might as well try to associate it with Neo-Nazis or NOI followers who try to get rid "Zionist bankster money" so that most Libertarians withdraw their support as well.
I'm not really taking a side in the BitCoin debate, other than that I perceive that most arguments about BitCoins are in the end not as much based on rational considerations as they are of group identity.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
Uh. What? I'd say the most common reasons BitCoins receive hate is that they're a technologically advanced method of destroying wealth.
Of course. Never make any actual arguments, nor ever allude to them except in the vaguest possible terms, and then when anybody says anything say "Heh, try responding to my actual points - if you can even read them, neanderthal.
This is, for those of you following along at home, Textbook Zelig.
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
Should that not be transferring wealth? Just because some people loose their wealth, does not mean it was destroyed.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
No, destroyed. When Bitcoins are gone, they're gone.
Of course. Never make any actual arguments, nor ever allude to them except in the vaguest possible terms, and then when anybody says anything say "Heh, try responding to my actual points - if you can even read them, neanderthal."
I made arguments, I felt they were pretty clear, as did #fiftychat:
1. For nearly any given individual, bitcoins are going to have more utility than almost any other currency on the planet.
2. On aggregate, more people will find bitcoins useful than almost any other currency on the planet.
3. Most of the arguments leveled against bitcoins are applicable to almost any other currency on the planet.
I don't own any bitcoins, I've got better things for my investments to be in. I just like pointing out how most of the anti-bitcoin arguments are flawed.
So... pretty much like cash that gets destroyed from any other currency?
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
Asinine point: those currencies are relatively worthless for any given individual anyway, and the existence of a slightly less worthless currency does not offer a convincing case to supplant the primary currency.
Technically correct, but specious for two reasons: as mentioned, not a case for adoption in itself, but additionally the currency of Bitcoin is also uniquely handicapped in being particularly worthless given its various technical limitations which have been elucidated in detail throughout this thread.
A generalization that I don't feel is true, a single counter-argument: permanent unavoidable deflation. Which you hand-waved away.
Wrong. The total number of bitcoins is hard-limited. More USD can always be printed (or the flow of money supply can be freely manipulated through other tricks), but a bitcoin's a bitcoin, and when lost it is irreplaceable.
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
USD can be re-printed, Bitcoins, can't.
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
I see now that may have been his point, but that is not the way it was phrased. USD is not re-printed. And the Fed, could just as easily destroy wealth the same way by not issuing money if that was his point.
Strawman, I've never alluded to that.
It's not though. We were just looking at bank fees on #fiftychat, to transfer money from individuals to/from Euroland/Canada, it's almost universally cheaper to do it with bitcoins than with government currency.
I said most.
I hand-waved away because it's really not important: deflation isn't particularly relevant if you're just talking about a unit of exchange and not a store of value, particularly given that Bitcoins are essentially arbitrarily divisible.
Nobody whines about how gold is stupid because of permanent deflation.
Those things aren't at all related.
Your point was that Bob (or whoever) smashes a hard drive with $7 million USD worth of bitcoin that wealth is destroyed.
Bob is just as screwed if he burns $7 million USD in cash, the ability of the government to print more cash is completely irrelevant, unless the government is willing to reprint money that people destroy or lose.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
And why is that? I admit you have a point if you only want to use Bitcoins to transfer money and not to hold wealth, but I sense that the reason it's cheaper to transfer money with bitcoins is because of governmental commerce restrictions you must circumvent in the process! But I admit I do not know for sure, which is why I am asking.
No banks to take a cut, nothing to do with government.
Even transferring CAD to another person in Canada is mostly not free - unless you're with the same bank, the only way to transfer money for free (other than locally via cash) is via mailed cheque. (Which still isn't really free, it costs postage, and most banks charge for cheques.)
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
I see. I understand.
So um, people profiting from buying and selling these... are they reporting the gains? I mean, that's a sort of capital gain, yes? So taxable? Surely the government needs to get involved at that point to ensure tax evasion is not taking place. I really cannot see how this thing can be legally bought and sold without government oversight and control.
Similar threads
