Crypto Currency Thread
Discussion
Condi said:
It is traceable around the network, but there is no way of knowing who owns the wallets the money is in. If it was so easy to regulate and trace, it wouldnt have been used so much on SilkRoad to buy drugs.
The difficulty is getting coins that have been used for nefarious purposes back into the ‘legal’ market, as they will be permanently tainted. NickCQ said:
Fine, but to flip it around how long do you think it will be before somebody finds a way to use bitcoin that is genuinely better than alternatives (for reasons other than evading law enforcement)?
The bitcoin protocol takes control of money away from the state and gives it to the individual. This has no relevance to our daily lives in the UK unless you comprehend the potential it has elsewhere and therefore the value that might accrue to it.Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Turkey, Iran & Argentina are undergoing or on the brink of hyperinflation, with hundreds of millions affected. Over the past 100 years around 60 hyperinflation events meant citizen's wealth has been destroyed, with billions of individuals affected. I experienced one directly.
Hyperinflation will keep happening in badly run economies. When the wrong people take control of government finances, Bitcoin offers a clear way out.
NickCQ said:
The difficulty is getting coins that have been used for nefarious purposes back into the ‘legal’ market, as they will be permanently tainted.
Spot on. Fungibility is very important. A high percentage of $100 bills & £20 notes have cocaine traces on them but they are still acceptable. There is definitely an unresolved tension between Bitcoin's privacy and therefore fungibility & its ledger transparency. You can argue both are needed but they contradict.Behemoth said:
When the wrong people take control of government finances, Bitcoin offers a clear way out.
Might be worth expanding that argument a little. I've not spent much time considering it, but intuitively I'm not sure that would be the case. If as an individual you have wealth, maybe stored as Bitcoin, it could offer you as an individual a way out. Any maybe in the midst of a financial meltdown it could allow some transactions to be completed which otherwise might not be possible. And maybe the value of your money could be isolated to some extent from the effect of local inflation.
But any government needs a way of raising taxes from its citizens, and the decentralised nature of Bitcoin makes this hard. So I'm wondering if the point at which Bitcoin became the go-to solution, there might not be much of a society left.
Behemoth said:
Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Turkey, Iran & Argentina are undergoing or on the brink of hyperinflation, with hundreds of millions affected. Over the past 100 years around 60 hyperinflation events meant citizen's wealth has been destroyed, with billions of individuals affected.
USD serves just as well in these situations though?
k material for computer geeks? Its become increasingly complicated and totally irrelevant to the outside world, yet at the same time lots of data is being analysed for some unknown purpose. EddieSteadyGo said:
Might be worth expanding that argument a little. I've not spent much time considering it, but intuitively I'm not sure that would be the case.
If as an individual you have wealth, maybe stored as Bitcoin, it could offer you as an individual a way out. Any maybe in the midst of a financial meltdown it could allow some transactions to be completed which otherwise might not be possible. And maybe the value of your money could be isolated to some extent from the effect of local inflation.
But any government needs a way of raising taxes from its citizens, and the decentralised nature of Bitcoin makes this hard. So I'm wondering if the point at which Bitcoin became the go-to solution, there might not be much of a society left.
Society flourished and was taxed for a very long time before the (quite recent) innovation of fiat money. No doubt tax collection methods would evolve, but a transparent ledger & chain analysis are very able tools for HMRC to chase down their investigations. Moreover, you might try and hide coins but you can't easily hide Lambos. Obvious signs of wealth still exist.If as an individual you have wealth, maybe stored as Bitcoin, it could offer you as an individual a way out. Any maybe in the midst of a financial meltdown it could allow some transactions to be completed which otherwise might not be possible. And maybe the value of your money could be isolated to some extent from the effect of local inflation.
But any government needs a way of raising taxes from its citizens, and the decentralised nature of Bitcoin makes this hard. So I'm wondering if the point at which Bitcoin became the go-to solution, there might not be much of a society left.
Behemoth said:
Society flourished and was taxed for a very long time before the (quite recent) innovation of fiat money. No doubt tax collection methods would evolve, but a transparent ledger & chain analysis are very able tools for HMRC to chase down their investigations. Moreover, you might try and hide coins but you can't easily hide Lambos. Obvious signs of wealth still exist.
If your still I love how something,a value, can still be seen as successful yet lose 25% of its value in one day.
It is ok for the people that got in early but seriously, this is people's money being spunked up the drain.
The validity of it to normal people becomes worse everyday. It is a failure 10 years down the line it has not achieved what it set out to.
It is ok for the people that got in early but seriously, this is people's money being spunked up the drain.
The validity of it to normal people becomes worse everyday. It is a failure 10 years down the line it has not achieved what it set out to.
Behemoth said:
NickCQ said:
USD serves just as well in these situations though?
Yes, dollarisation is a common result (as is gold hoarding), but I think Bitcoin's qualities give it the potential to be far superior.rockin said:
I don't recall private individuals investing or speculating in "Internets"
There was a massive 'dotcom bubble' 1995-2000 with people investing in any company that added a .com to the end of their name or associated themselves with the "internets".Most notable was pets.com, raising millions of dollars in an IPO with no substance behind it, to be liquidated months later...
Cryptocurrencies primarily are the future for the 3rd world, it's easy for us to write them off. We don't have to pay 10 percent or more to send our money home to our poverty stricken family. There are billions of people without access to first world banking, that can open themselves up to the world with a £10 Android smartphone.
DanGPR said:
There was a massive 'dotcom bubble' 1995-2000 with people investing in any company that added a .com to the end of their name or associated themselves with the "internets".
Most notable was pets.com, raising millions of dollars in an IPO with no substance behind it, to be liquidated months later...
Cryptocurrencies primarily are the future for the 3rd world, it's easy for us to write them off. We don't have to pay 10 percent or more to send our money home to our poverty stricken family. There are billions of people without access to first world banking, that can open themselves up to the world with a £10 Android smartphone.
10 quid for a smartphone? In rural bangladesh? Running 4g?Most notable was pets.com, raising millions of dollars in an IPO with no substance behind it, to be liquidated months later...
Cryptocurrencies primarily are the future for the 3rd world, it's easy for us to write them off. We don't have to pay 10 percent or more to send our money home to our poverty stricken family. There are billions of people without access to first world banking, that can open themselves up to the world with a £10 Android smartphone.
Aye sounds plausible.
Behemoth said:
The bitcoin protocol takes control of money away from the state and gives it to the individual. This has no relevance to our daily lives in the UK unless you comprehend the potential it has elsewhere and therefore the value that might accrue to it.
Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Turkey, Iran & Argentina are undergoing or on the brink of hyperinflation, with hundreds of millions affected. Over the past 100 years around 60 hyperinflation events meant citizen's wealth has been destroyed, with billions of individuals affected. I experienced one directly.
Hyperinflation will keep happening in badly run economies. When the wrong people take control of government finances, Bitcoin offers a clear way out.
Sorry? A crypto offers a solution to unstable local currency? I must be looking at the wrong charts. Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Turkey, Iran & Argentina are undergoing or on the brink of hyperinflation, with hundreds of millions affected. Over the past 100 years around 60 hyperinflation events meant citizen's wealth has been destroyed, with billions of individuals affected. I experienced one directly.
Hyperinflation will keep happening in badly run economies. When the wrong people take control of government finances, Bitcoin offers a clear way out.
Stability is the one thing they do not offer because just like their world currencies that have not been pegged to a stable currency they are illiquid, vulnerable to attack and politically unstable.
Cryptos are nowhere near being considered currencies. They are wildly unstable punting stocks in a market easily manipulated. It is afterall why every professional financial scammer around the world has latched into them to peddle their toxic crap to idiots.
If the tech behind cryptos ends up amount to anything it will only be through the use of a currency that has proven stability and that means a crypto that is both backed and pegged and delivered in a way that the current working solution for turd currency, which is the USD in paper form is surpassed.
DanGPR said:
There was a massive 'dotcom bubble' 1995-2000 with people investing in any company that added a .com to the end of their name or associated themselves with the "internets".
Most notable was pets.com, raising millions of dollars in an IPO with no substance behind it, to be liquidated months later...
Cryptocurrencies primarily are the future for the 3rd world, it's easy for us to write them off. We don't have to pay 10 percent or more to send our money home to our poverty stricken family. There are billions of people without access to first world banking, that can open themselves up to the world with a £10 Android smartphone.
But once you actually understand why that costs 10% or more how can you suggest that the use of a crypto is better? Or even how the use of a single crypto currency between two neighbouring third world economies would work?Most notable was pets.com, raising millions of dollars in an IPO with no substance behind it, to be liquidated months later...
Cryptocurrencies primarily are the future for the 3rd world, it's easy for us to write them off. We don't have to pay 10 percent or more to send our money home to our poverty stricken family. There are billions of people without access to first world banking, that can open themselves up to the world with a £10 Android smartphone.
There is an enormous amount of wonderful idealism swirling around the crypto world but not an awful lot of true comprehension as to how payment systems whether a local currency, a global currency or goats actually work between borders.
Forget about cheap phones in Africa for the moment.
There is a post fork hash war going on at BCH at the moment, costing both sides a reported $200k a day in electricity costs to try and win the battle
It's an existential risk to the currency, with the possibility of the resulting fork BCHSV being run by 'bad agents'
If this can happen to a currency with one of the largest hashrates in all of crypto, then what hope do any of the rest of CryptoCurrencies have in being utilised for anything serious, let alone an actual currency? None of them can be trusted. This marks a watershed moment IMO - people are waking up to the reality.
Then you have the whole Bitfinex/Tether issue. If that implodes, then the whole space will crater.
There is a post fork hash war going on at BCH at the moment, costing both sides a reported $200k a day in electricity costs to try and win the battle
It's an existential risk to the currency, with the possibility of the resulting fork BCHSV being run by 'bad agents'
If this can happen to a currency with one of the largest hashrates in all of crypto, then what hope do any of the rest of CryptoCurrencies have in being utilised for anything serious, let alone an actual currency? None of them can be trusted. This marks a watershed moment IMO - people are waking up to the reality.
Then you have the whole Bitfinex/Tether issue. If that implodes, then the whole space will crater.
Mousem40 said:
Forget about cheap phones in Africa for the moment.
There is a post fork hash war going on at BCH at the moment, costing both sides a reported $200k a day in electricity costs to try and win the battle
It's an existential risk to the currency, with the possibility of the resulting fork BCHSV being run by 'bad agents'
If this can happen to a currency with one of the largest hashrates in all of crypto, then what hope do any of the rest of CryptoCurrencies have in being utilised for anything serious, let alone an actual currency? None of them can be trusted. This marks a watershed moment IMO - people are waking up to the reality.
Then you have the whole Bitfinex/Tether issue. If that implodes, then the whole space will crater.
BCH hash has always been extremely centralised, hence the high likelihood of a 51% attack coming up in this fork. It's a sideshow, albeit a fascinating one for those understanding the game theory being played out.There is a post fork hash war going on at BCH at the moment, costing both sides a reported $200k a day in electricity costs to try and win the battle
It's an existential risk to the currency, with the possibility of the resulting fork BCHSV being run by 'bad agents'
If this can happen to a currency with one of the largest hashrates in all of crypto, then what hope do any of the rest of CryptoCurrencies have in being utilised for anything serious, let alone an actual currency? None of them can be trusted. This marks a watershed moment IMO - people are waking up to the reality.
Then you have the whole Bitfinex/Tether issue. If that implodes, then the whole space will crater.
Behemoth said:
BCH hash has always been extremely centralised, hence the high likelihood of a 51% attack coming up in this fork. It's a sideshow, albeit a fascinating one for those understanding the game theory being played out.
The point is, Satoshi/game theory always suggested that miners wouldn't act as bad agents because it was in their (economic) self interest to mine at a profit. We can see here that that is not the case. Miners are willing to mine at a huge loss for other reasons. These mining pools are so powerful that if they wished, they could divert their hashpower to any Crypto they wanted - for non economic reasons. Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff