Crypto Currency Thread
Discussion
Behemoth said:
DonkeyApple said:
The trade off being security. So absolutely fine for people who have nothing and for those who have lots but can’t risk putting it through a secure system due to issues with the source of funds.
Used peer to peer, as intended, there is no security trade off. It's extraordinarily secure, with no intermediary and zero chance of any payment reversal. The transaction appears on the blockchain and that's that. It's immutable and doesn't require a trusted third party.DonkeyApple said:
It simply isn’t. Neither the transaction nor the holding are underwritten. So if you are surrendering those rights you’re getting something in exchange in a sane environment except you aren’t, you’re buying in price instability and for zero material gain.
You've changed the subject from security to investment risk.Of course it's volatile. In the short to medium term, speculation concerns bitcoin's valuation against sterling, dollar etc. I'm not disputing that it's high risk. One look at the Sharpe ratio indicates an excellent asymmetric bet, take it or leave it.
My comments on security are about the protocol itself. It's unassailable. Abstract your viewpoint away from the day to day swings with sterling, instead pivot and think of bitcoin in terms of a base money that is on a long and slow, often bumpy trajectory. Any underwriting brings in trusted third parties which are defacto security risks potentially censoring transactions. This is precisely what bitcoin aims to avoid.
I’ve not changed anything. You’ve just taken one small part, a part that already exists in the real world and is in no need of a ‘solution’ in the grand scheme of things and tried to use it to justify a viability that does not exist.
In reality, for the part that you have highlighted to have any value you need to apply price stability and security. Ergo, you need to peg it to an item of intrinsic value such as a currency and regulate it. Obviously at that point it all breakers down a little and we are back to an insecure solution that’s only real value is to those with no wealth and those needing to process illegitimate wealth. Which funkily enough is exactly where we are today with an exciting layer of penny share punter lunacy and the tinfoil hattery of the Freeman of the Land and Ian Bone’s acolytes.
In reality, for the part that you have highlighted to have any value you need to apply price stability and security. Ergo, you need to peg it to an item of intrinsic value such as a currency and regulate it. Obviously at that point it all breakers down a little and we are back to an insecure solution that’s only real value is to those with no wealth and those needing to process illegitimate wealth. Which funkily enough is exactly where we are today with an exciting layer of penny share punter lunacy and the tinfoil hattery of the Freeman of the Land and Ian Bone’s acolytes.
DonkeyApple said:
I’ve not changed anything. You’ve just taken one small part, a part that already exists in the real world and is in no need of a ‘solution’ in the grand scheme of things and tried to use it to justify a viability that does not exist.
In reality, for the part that you have highlighted to have any value you need to apply price stability and security. Ergo, you need to peg it to an item of intrinsic value such as a currency and regulate it. Obviously at that point it all breakers down a little and we are back to an insecure solution that’s only real value is to those with no wealth and those needing to process illegitimate wealth.
Currency has no intrinsic value, only the value assigned to it by society. Bitcoin is a secure solution because nobody can roll back a transaction. It's also a robust long term proposition because it is provably scarce, unlike any other currency in use. No government can helicopter in more of it, however they may try. Long term, that's why society may very well come to see it as having value.In reality, for the part that you have highlighted to have any value you need to apply price stability and security. Ergo, you need to peg it to an item of intrinsic value such as a currency and regulate it. Obviously at that point it all breakers down a little and we are back to an insecure solution that’s only real value is to those with no wealth and those needing to process illegitimate wealth.
Behemoth said:
Currency has no intrinsic value, only the value assigned to it by society.
The US dollar has value because for a lot of people the US government can lock them up if they don’t give it a specific number of US dollars. They don’t demand payment of taxes in physical gold, they demand it in US dollars. Even if everyone decided the US dollar was worthless, there would still be demand for it to satisfy the taxing power of the the US. NickCQ said:
The US dollar has value because for a lot of people the US government can lock them up if they don’t give it a specific number of US dollars. They don’t demand payment of taxes in physical gold, they demand it in US dollars. Even if everyone decided the US dollar was worthless, there would still be demand for it to satisfy the taxing power of the the US.
If everyone decided the dollar was worthless then very obviously, US government would collect tax in something holding value instead.All assets have price fluctuations. Gold, silver, houses, Amedeo Modigliani paintings. The 'underlying value' is no guarantee that the price can not drop below that level (and stay below it for some time). Nor that the price can't get massively above the underlying value (and stay above it for some time).
When it comes to using some measure of underlying value to support any claims to a fair price / fair value....
I don't know if the actual cost of processing a BTC transaction, or mining another BTC is a measure of value that can ever be comparable to, for example, the actual cost of producing a certified authentic piece of good delivery gold
Nor do I know if the scarcity = value argument will apply to BTC. There are plenty of things that are scarce that aren't worth a blow on a rag man's trumpet.
For now the BTC price is pretty much all driven by speculation. Whether it makes it past that stage without vanishing into the annals of financial history remains to be seen. I think the chance of it doing so is sufficiently high that I bought some. I think there is a place for a bit of bitcoin in any well planned portfolio. But I am quite content that many other people think it is to be wholly avoided. That doesn't trouble me one bit. Nor would I expect my view to have any influence on anyone else deciding how to allocate their pot. It should not and I am sure it does not.
If you don't want to buy any, you don't have to! It isn't backed by the pentagon and it isn't mandated to conclude any essential transaction. If you think it is a scam, a fraud, a ponzi and only suitable for illegal use, then you don't even need to look at the price, or read the white paper, or think about where to keep your private keys.
When it comes to using some measure of underlying value to support any claims to a fair price / fair value....
I don't know if the actual cost of processing a BTC transaction, or mining another BTC is a measure of value that can ever be comparable to, for example, the actual cost of producing a certified authentic piece of good delivery gold
Nor do I know if the scarcity = value argument will apply to BTC. There are plenty of things that are scarce that aren't worth a blow on a rag man's trumpet.
For now the BTC price is pretty much all driven by speculation. Whether it makes it past that stage without vanishing into the annals of financial history remains to be seen. I think the chance of it doing so is sufficiently high that I bought some. I think there is a place for a bit of bitcoin in any well planned portfolio. But I am quite content that many other people think it is to be wholly avoided. That doesn't trouble me one bit. Nor would I expect my view to have any influence on anyone else deciding how to allocate their pot. It should not and I am sure it does not.
If you don't want to buy any, you don't have to! It isn't backed by the pentagon and it isn't mandated to conclude any essential transaction. If you think it is a scam, a fraud, a ponzi and only suitable for illegal use, then you don't even need to look at the price, or read the white paper, or think about where to keep your private keys.
JPJPJP said:
I don't know if the actual cost of processing a BTC transaction, or mining another BTC is a measure of value that can ever be comparable to, for example, the actual cost of producing a certified authentic piece of good delivery gold
Nor do I know if the scarcity = value argument will apply to BTC. There are plenty of things that are scarce that aren't worth a blow on a rag man's trumpet.
This is where Proof of Work comes in. The work is extrinsic to bitcoin. The work that goes into mining gold and its scarcity has been compared to bitcoin by various researchers and the literature on it is already pretty good. Look up stock to flow for starters.Nor do I know if the scarcity = value argument will apply to BTC. There are plenty of things that are scarce that aren't worth a blow on a rag man's trumpet.
Scarce things that aren't valued much tend not to have taken much effort to produce (not universally true, just a rule of thumb).
The benefits of bitcoin over gold are numerous, but include easy assay by an individual, far superior divisibility & of course ease of transport.
I have done enough research to convince myself to take a position. For now, I am happy with that position and my continuing research doesn't cause me to i) be alarmed or ii) want to increase the size of that position
I'm familiar with the concepts you mention
And familiar with the counter arguments!
I'm familiar with the concepts you mention
And familiar with the counter arguments!
JPJPJP said:
I have done enough research to convince myself to take a position. For now, I am happy with that position and my continuing research doesn't cause me to i) be alarmed or ii) want to increase the size of that position
I'm familiar with the concepts you mention
And familiar with the counter arguments!
This is great to hear. It's absolutely true that there are plenty of counter-arguments, and while I try to listen impartially they mostly focus on politics/compliance/regulation which are all things that have been layered on top of the current financial system because of its inherent issues.I'm familiar with the concepts you mention
And familiar with the counter arguments!
I love how simple and effective bitcoin is. It never ceases to impress when I consider that the double spend problem is fixed by proof of work which in turn produces a distributed permanent ledger. It's just so beautiful.
Yes there are lots of adoption and adaptation issues but I simply can't see why any of them should be deal breakers. But then who knows what will happen the world is a crazy place.
Behemoth said:
NickCQ said:
The US dollar has value because for a lot of people the US government can lock them up if they don’t give it a specific number of US dollars. They don’t demand payment of taxes in physical gold, they demand it in US dollars. Even if everyone decided the US dollar was worthless, there would still be demand for it to satisfy the taxing power of the the US.
If everyone decided the dollar was worthless then very obviously, US government would collect tax in something holding value instead.I think the idea that the US national debt (or indeed that of many other countries) is actually going to ever be repaid (rather than rolled over) has long since left the building
I don't how big the debt number for a country like the US can get - either as an absolute number, or as a percentage of GDP, or whatever - before something other than just paying the interest and rolling maturing debt forwards has to happen
Or what something other might be
I don't how big the debt number for a country like the US can get - either as an absolute number, or as a percentage of GDP, or whatever - before something other than just paying the interest and rolling maturing debt forwards has to happen
Or what something other might be
JPJPJP said:
Or what something other might be
Inflation. The figures stay the same but their value/cost reduces.It's always the answer in global state finance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJh0pDMnL8M
Behemoth said:
DonkeyApple said:
The trade off being security. So absolutely fine for people who have nothing and for those who have lots but can’t risk putting it through a secure system due to issues with the source of funds.
Used peer to peer, as intended, there is no security trade off. It's extraordinarily secure, with no intermediary and zero chance of any payment reversal. The transaction appears on the blockchain and that's that. It's immutable and doesn't require a trusted third party.https://twitter.com/jack/status/119977479291792998...
Sad to be leaving the continent…for now. Africa will define the future (especially the bitcoin one!). Not sure where yet, but I’ll be living here for 3-6 months mid 2020. Grateful I was able to experience a small part. 🌍
Sad to be leaving the continent…for now. Africa will define the future (especially the bitcoin one!). Not sure where yet, but I’ll be living here for 3-6 months mid 2020. Grateful I was able to experience a small part. 🌍
Here is "Plan B" a bitcoin enthusiast with a few slides used recently to "pitch bitcoin to institutional investors"
Make of it what you will.
https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/12014771...
It doesn't move my needle
Make of it what you will.
https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/12014771...
It doesn't move my needle
JPJPJP said:
Seeing a lot on twitter etc about the fact that binance made it’s first $1bn in profits in it’s 2 years of operations
Compared to google that took 5 years and Facebook that took 6
Guess it's easy when you don't have to be regulated, work in an opaque market, and can set your own bid/offer prices! Compared to google that took 5 years and Facebook that took 6
Condi said:
JPJPJP said:
Seeing a lot on twitter etc about the fact that binance made it’s first $1bn in profits in it’s 2 years of operations
Compared to google that took 5 years and Facebook that took 6
Guess it's easy when you don't have to be regulated, work in an opaque market, and can set your own bid/offer prices! Compared to google that took 5 years and Facebook that took 6
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff