Bitcoin & the crypto-currency revolution. (get some here).

[Skepticus]

A couple of questions...

Say a bunch of people get into bitcoin, start trading and conducting commerce etc. Then another competitor to bitcoin booms. Then another one. Wouldn't the value of our original bitcoins go down for purchasing real world services and items? This is sort of my second question too: How (or is it possible) to convert bitcoin to dollars?

Ah. Well firstly there are already quite a number of alternative crypto-currencies in existence. Most have different properties than bitcoin because they try to address a particular need. Most bitcoiners are perfectly fine with that and believe that competition in currency is healthy and fair. Bitcoin however has the first mover advantage and probably 90% of the infrastructure and innovation is built around bitcoin. Any serious shortcomings demonstrated by a competitor currency are also adaptable by incoporating them into the bitcoin protocol if they were so undeniably obvious. If bitcoin could not be adapted then whatever new cryptocurrency became popular would still almost certainly have most of the same fundemental properties as bitcoin Ie. It would be peer to peer, It would be open source and it would be deflationary. In that case it would compete on but build the existing strengths of bitcoin. No problems. I would probably spend my bitcoin into the currency if it had many more benefits and I could see the change was very likely. But honestly there would have to be significant benifit for any alternative to out gun bitcoin. But yes, I think the value of bitcoin would have to be sacrificed somewhat.

I think the best place to findout about exchanges or OTC is the wiki: Selling Bitcoins. I use Local Bitcoin also.

As an aside, I'm reminded of some interesting ideas that have floated around for years concerning "local" currencies. That is, currencies that only retain value if they are spent in a local area. That way money stays within the particular communities

Yeah. I used to be in LETS (local exchange trading system) many moons ago. It was a great alternative to allow barter. Would be nice to have a local cyrpto-currency but honestly, the world is opening up to free global markets. I think a product or service should compete without restriction over it's widest competitive range.

[Collector1337]

The big problem with this model, of course, is the requirement for never ending growth. It's debatable whether that is even possible. It's highly unlikely it will be possible.

You actually think this is "debatable?"



It's not even remotely debatable. It's an obvious and overwhelming no.

We live on a finite planet with finite resources. You can't have a system where you just create money out of thin air, which you correctly point out, must have never ending growth, to be sustained.

It will be our doom.

It's simple really. The faster the population grows, the sooner the demise of the human race.

I'm not usually into having more laws, but charging interest should be illegal. I mean shit, they just create the money out of fucking thin air. Charge interest on freshly created air money? WTF?

[pErvinalia]

The big problem with this model, of course, is the requirement for never ending growth. It's debatable whether that is even possible. It's highly unlikely it will be possible.

You actually think this is "debatable?"



It's not even remotely debatable. It's an obvious and overwhelming no.

The issue is that not all growth is linked to physical resources. Even more so now with our service (including financial) economies. The whole thing seems like a hoodoo scheme to me, but I admit that I only know the broad issues in economics. But anyway, even when we are still using more resources, that can be overcome to a degree by recycling. It's going to depend on how good recycling can get. The main bottleneck to recycling everything (if the technology existed) is energy. But energy is effectively infinite (i.e. solar, and therefore wind and tidal etc). I think we can't go on growing for ever, but I think the point where we hit a wall is going to be a lot further down the line than the doom sayers predict.

We live on a finite planet with finite resources. You can't have a system where you just create money out of thin air, which you correctly point out, must have never ending growth, to be sustained.

It will be our doom.

It's simple really. The faster the population grows, the sooner the demise of the human race.

The primary problem for us now is pollution (i.e. linked to material resources) and ecosystem destruction. CO2 and other pollutants are going to fuck us over before "never ending" growth hits a wall.

I'm not usually into having more laws, but charging interest should be illegal. I mean shit, they just create the money out of fucking thin air. Charge interest on freshly created air money? WTF?

There has to be a price on new money. Otherwise governments would just print it non-stop. It's probably far from a perfect system, but I don't know what else could work.

[Audley Strange]

Whuffie

[colubridae]

To ALL

My intention in starting this thread was to offer help and advice to anybody interested in using bitcoin or wanting to learn more. I am not interested in having protracted debates about the efficacy or viability of bitcoin. Those who dont wish to use it or learn about it, may choose to do so (or not do so) without derailing this thread with uninformed and futile criticisms of bitcoin. I'm a bitcoin enthusiast and this is a PRO bitcoin thread. If you want to debate about the viability or legality of bitcoin etc. that's fine but if you wouldn't mind, please start another thread elsewhere.

Thanks Skep.

To skepticus.

Not a chance, this is ratz,. People say what they like, where they like, when they like (within FUA. (which are "more of a guideline - G. Rush")) That's why they're here.

So good luck and keep trying, the entertainment value is worth a couple of bitcoins. Just mind the bubble.

[Tyrannical]

I just don't see bit coins as anything more than a pyramid scheme designed to make it's early adopters rich while they flog the benefits like Amway salesmen.

Bitcoins were cheap and easier to produce at the beginning, and the built in scarcity of the model increases the resources required to mine a bit coin over time. When early adopters get rich, and their continued richness depends on new investors buying in and NOT from creating a product you got a scam going on.

[MrFungus420]

Why would he care? He wants money that he can spend.

A) What's wrong with spending bitcoin? I've spent plenty of it. More than I wish I had as a mater of fact.

Where? He can't use it to put gas in his tank, pay rent, buy groceries, pay bills or get an oil change.

Because those are what a driver must spend his money on

B) How do you know he only wants money to spend. He might want to save some. In which case bitcoin is great due to it's deflationary nature.

Because our delivery driver, like waiters, waitresses and bartenders, doesn't just live paycheck-to-paycheck, but one night's tips to the next. "Saving" means setting most of your tips aside until your next bill is due.

Speaking of paycheck-to-paycheck living, this pretty much applies to anybody making $15/hr or less (US)...that's about 25% of the work force...if it can't be used to put gas in the car, pay rent, buy groceries or pay bills, then it's not money because it's useless as money.

That is why the delivery guy is not going to be interested. He's not going to care about the app, it's just going to be another "wallet" app. He's going to be just as interested in the promise of a future large tip as if you made the same offer with a Pay-Pal app (i.e. not at all).

Now, that you presented the scenario you did for trying to get the delivery driver's interest peaked indicates a naive optimism when talking about this subject. That, combined with the fact that I was not quite entirely...sober, does mean that for the rest of my post, the accusation of...



...is not entirely unwarranted.

[MrFungus420]

To ALL

My intention in starting this thread was to offer help and advice to anybody interested in using bitcoin or wanting to learn more. I am not interested in having protracted debates about the efficacy or viability of bitcoin. Those who dont wish to use it or learn about it, may choose to do so (or not do so) without derailing this thread with uninformed and futile criticisms of bitcoin. I'm a bitcoin enthusiast and this is a PRO bitcoin thread. If you want to debate about the viability or legality of bitcoin etc. that's fine but if you wouldn't mind, please start another thread elsewhere.

Thanks Skep.

You don't get to dictate the conversation.

If you want a purely PRO bitcoin thread, then I suggest going to a purely PRO bitcoin forum.

[Skepticus]

I just don't see bit coins as anything more than a pyramid scheme designed to make it's early adopters rich while they flog the benefits like Amway salesmen.

Alright, I've already pointed out why it's more than a pyramid scheme. As for flogging the benefits well as I've said numerous times now, in if you don't like bitcoin, nobody is forcing you to use it. The sentence above starts "I dont see..." What you perhaps should say it 'I wont see' It's a bit hard to educate anybody who's attitude to being shown the benefits is to criticize the person who offers help and education. How can you expect to learn what you admittedly "dont see," when you clearly oppose being shown? If you don't know and don't care then WTF are you doing here? If you're looking for the trolls convention I think it's down the hall.

Bitcoins were cheap and easier to produce at the beginning, and the built in scarcity of the model increases the resources required to mine a bit coin over time.

I've already dealt with this. BTW you didn't respond to my previous post in reply to you, specifically with respect to this resource issue. If you want to ask a question about something by all means please do, but when instead you post ill-informed assertions, to which I politely respond in detail, you might have the courtesy of replying to that, instead of ignoring it and simply repeating those ill-informed assertions again. THANKS.

When early adopters get rich, and their continued richness depends on new investors buying in and NOT from creating a product you got a scam going on.

Wealth is created by scarcity and demand exactly as it should be. There's not a stock or commodity out there on the exchanges, that doesn't work the same way. Early adopters were rewarded for investing time, effort, machine resources and/or money into bicoin and nobody was or is stopping anybody else from doing so, then or now. Early adopters had risks proportional to the value of the currency. When you complain about the costs of mining resources, you are arguing the counter argument to early adoption. At any point, it costs money or resources to get some bitcoin. You don't expect to invest in something for free and earn dividends for no cost do you? When bitcoin were cheap so was the cost of producing them (not free but cheap). Demand was the only thing that drove the price up. Pure free-market economics. More people invested in hardware at their own risk that bitcoin would continue to rise in value. That groundswell of producers, increased competition (between each other) for the limited supply of bitcoin. It was just like the gold rush except people didn't get lucky they got smart. Gold miners didn't rush to the gold fields to get free money, they had to sacrifice their time, take risks and make trade offs. They had no guarantee that the price of gold would continue to rise, other than the fact that it was a limited commodity, so they took their risks and made what they deserved. The mining of bitcoin is no different. Equipment to mine bitcoin doesn't just fall from the sky. People have had to work and save, to build nice little mining rigs that cost money. They then are subject to competition with each other for stakes in a limited resource. The difficulty goes up as more miners join the network and as the equipment is improved. The equipment you buy doesn't continue to mine at the same rate through time. It's BECAUSE the window of investment is limited (and open to all) that it is fair. Nobody thinks they would or should be able to pack up a swag and just go down to the river with a couple of pans and strike it rich panning for gold. Those days are over. Do you resent gold miners who made healthy gains this way? I don't. Gold was worth a minuscule fraction of the current price back then. The risks were low and so was the return. Panning might have funded a sleuth, and then the licence for a claim and digging equiptment etc.etc... Same with bitcoin in the early adoption. Nobody became wealthy simply because they had mined a few hundred bitcoin when it was easy. There had to be some market infrastructure built up by entreprenurial types and some oppertunities to spend it. Miners who let go of their bitcoin, could no longer count those bitcoin in their stockpile. The bitcoin (14 BTC) I paid in my first year, for VPN network services is no longer mine to count as profit. I traded it when bitcoin was worth less than $2 All up it cost me about $25 worth of bitcoin. It would now be worth over $1820, but you can't have your cake and eat it too. Early adopters also SPENT bitcoin into the market for things they wanted and so that others could profit.

The value of gold depended on people willing to buy it from the miners, or barter it for other things. If all the gold miners simply stockpiled their gold, they would have nothing more than big piles of worthless gold. Unless gold was traded into circulation, it could never have appreciated. Early miners (of both gold and bitcoin) wanted to trade the returns on their investments along the way and most had to, to recycle their profit. Those who did stock pile bitcoins or gold, were exposing themselves to greater risks that the market value would continue to increase (no different to those who were buyers). Bitcoin is purely a free market commodity. You can't complain about the market price of bitcoin at any given time, as you are free to trade in or out as you see fit. The price IS what the price IS. If you think the ROI goes against mining in the next 6 - 12 months, you might choose to buy bitcoin directly. If you think mining will be more lucrative than speculating, you are free to do that. Others will choose to earn bitcoin by trading goods and services, to the extent they see it as a lucrative option. If you think bitcoin will loose value to the dollar you would be better to not buy in at all and/or sell any bitcoin reserves you have. It's a free world. If you think anybody is getting a free lunch, then you either don't understand bitcoin, don't understand basic economics, or both.

Not understanding economics is no unpardonable sin BTW. You're in good company. Most people have very little understanding of that stuff. I'm amazed at how little I understood economics myself prior to discovering bitcoin and the libertarian movement, (who tend to abide by the Austrian school of economics). This basic lack of economic education, is why we are using as money, promises to pay the future earnings of our own working lives, of the next generation and beyond. This may well be the peril and ultimate demise of our civilization, which permits our exploitation by government and banksters to continue their plunder and pillage. Debasing money (the opposite of what bitcoin does), played a huge part in the downfall of Rome. If you think bitcoin is unfairly rewarding early adopters, then you should see what fiat money is doing for banksters and the elite. Again. Did you watch the video I posted (Money As Debt)?

Bitcoin is a currency OF the people and FOR the people. It's not a corporation like Amway or the Federal reserve bank. People using bitcoin are independent investors; free market players. They only get out of it, what they put in, what they are willing to risk, and what they rightfully deserve. Cheers

[Skepticus]

You don't get to dictate the conversation.

Right because simply asking nicely...

...that's fine but if you wouldn't mind, please start another thread elsewhere.

...is dictating.

[Skepticus]

The big problem with this model, of course, is the requirement for never ending growth. It's debatable whether that is even possible. It's highly unlikely it will be possible.

You actually think this is "debatable?"



It's not even remotely debatable. It's an obvious and overwhelming no.

We live on a finite planet with finite resources. You can't have a system where you just create money out of thin air, which you correctly point out, must have never ending growth, to be sustained.

It will be our doom.

It's simple really. The faster the population grows, the sooner the demise of the human race.

People simply don't won't understand the exponential function. It's one minute to 12:00 in the day of human civilization. We have almost run out of time.

[PsychoSerenity]

If you think anybody is getting a free lunch, then you either don't understand bitcoin, don't understand basic economics, or both.

Or you do understand the possibilities of speculative trading in an entirely unregulated and unprotected market.

[Skepticus]

The big problem with this model, of course, is the requirement for never ending growth. It's debatable whether that is even possible. It's highly unlikely it will be possible.

You actually think this is "debatable?"



It's not even remotely debatable. It's an obvious and overwhelming no.

The issue is that not all growth is linked to physical resources.

Growth! Economic growth, is ALL linked to and constrained by physical resources of the natural world. Growth in economic terms is defined by the capacity of a population to turn resources into consumables. The goal of economic development is to create spending opportunities for the benefit those who control and tax our money supply. So natural resources are depleted to create, what money can be spent on. It's the spending of money not the consumables themselves, that generate the government and banking benefits. The vested interests monopolizing the the money supply, largely don't care about what is being used up in terms of physical resources nor what happens to it after the money is spent on it. They may have some conscience (as individuals) about the plight of humanity, but that is not what they are paid to have. Their direct reward is derived from doing the opposite of what is in the overall interests of society. The greedier they are the more they will plunder the environment with impossible to pay back credit. We are not only incentiveised to increase consumer debt and resource plundering indefinitely, we are trapped and OBLIGED by our rulers and their unsustainable system which we are forced to use.

Even more so now with our service (including financial) economies.

Are you kidding? You think that because a service provider does non directly use much in the way of natural resources, that they don't put much drain on the economy? They are consumers; people who need food and cloths and houses an energy and... little knick knacks to put on raffia doilies on the hallway shelf. What's worse their contribution is actually not as tangible or as easily justifiable in terms of the practical resources we need to live. We could do without another gossip columnist or interior decorator. But a potato farmer is a provider of stuff; (stuff we need or at least can easily justify). The potato farmer we can live with and their agriculture industry is vital to society. The 'growth' areas that only provides services (help) that adds cost to living without necessarily adding value to the end product (like advertising and marketing), are the first places to look for efficiency benefits, when the economy slumps and the fat needs to be trimmed.

The western world is choking, because we are loosing all our manufacturing to the (non-unionised) developing nations like China. We are buying the products they make, with money we haven't yet got (never will have - least not in fiat) and trying to find ways to make a living by cutting each others lawns, washing each others windows, decorating each others houses and gossiping about each other for $$$. We produce very little, so we are becoming expendable. All stuff produced has a service overhead built in BTW. Services are just the consumable resources of an eating, spending, shitting machine. A human service provider is a cash cow to the government and a garbage producer to the environment. All human industry is services; services added to material resources is manufacture. We ALL deplete the resources of this planet and economic growth is proportional and tantamount to human population growth. Financial 'services' are the worst of all. They are now thankfully completely unnecessary if only people will just wake up. Time to kick the banks out:

BANKS THE FIFTH VICTIM

The whole thing seems like a hoodoo scheme to me, but I admit that I only know the broad issues in economics.

I don't mean to be facetious, but I would have thought I understood economics 'broadly' before my foray into to the bitcion world. Yet I couldn't understand why Mr Ron Paul kept calling inflation ''effectively a hidden tax' and such things. I understood the law of effort and reward and a little economic game theory, but I simply didn't know how the existing money system worked. I didn't understand the role of the federal reserve in finance, nor how our money comes into existence in the first place. Most people only have some vague assumptions about this. It's simply a lack of background facts that we all seem to be deluded by, not the lack of common sense, wisdom or intelligence.

But anyway, even when we are still using more resources, that can be overcome to a degree by recycling. It's going to depend on how good recycling can get. The main bottleneck to recycling everything (if the technology existed) is energy. But energy is effectively infinite (i.e. solar, and therefore wind and tidal etc). I think we can't go on growing for ever, but I think the point where we hit a wall is going to be a lot further down the line than the doom sayers predict.

You think? Srsly? I don't see how you come to this conclusion. If you want to see how I rather disagree, I urge you to watch the video posted above on the exponential function, and then watch Money As Debt if you don't understand the link between the physical world and economic growth, as I'm fairly sure you don't. Again. Not being factious or condescending but if you are wrong there are serious consequences afoot. I wish everybody understood just a few simple things. If I am wrong, I would want to know how and why.

We live on a finite planet with finite resources. You can't have a system where you just create money out of thin air, which you correctly point out, must have never ending growth, to be sustained.

It will be our doom.

It's simple really. The faster the population grows, the sooner the demise of the human race.

The primary problem for us now is pollution (i.e. linked to material resources) and ecosystem destruction. CO2 and other pollutants are going to fuck us over before "never ending" growth hits a wall.

Don't kid yourself. The video above explains that the growth we think is linear and gradual, is acctually exponential. The Money As Debt one shows how using the existing fiat money system we are doomed to the outcomes of the exponential function. Take the facts about how the money system works, and apply simple yet mathematically indisputable principles and you will see we are on a perilous and relentless course towards our imminent doom. That's a fact afaik.

I'm not usually into having more laws, but charging interest should be illegal. I mean shit, they just create the money out of fucking thin air. Charge interest on freshly created air money? WTF?

There has to be a price on new money. Otherwise governments would just print it non-stop.

HUH? How does banks charging citizens interest, discourage governments from printing money? Do you realize government's only print a tiny fraction of the money in circulation, even then it's not for spending but to replace federal reserve notes that need to be destroyed? The vast bulk of money is created by banks themselves when people take out loans. You'd save me a lot of time if you just watched the video.

It's probably far from a perfect system, but I don't know what else could work.

There's this new software and peer 2 peer network protocol called bitcoin. Ever heard of it? It makes banks (and probably governments) obsolete, by circumventing their money monopoly and allowing people to trade freely without restrictions or borders. It's international and transactions are nearly instant and can be used over the Internet. Was there anything else that we needed? OH YEAH! and there will only be 21 million bitcoin in existence, so that pretty much puts paid to the infinite inflation and runaway debt addiction. Bitcoin was the currency deliberately designed from the grass roots, preciceley to solve this very problem.

[Skepticus]

If you think anybody is getting a free lunch, then you either don't understand bitcoin, don't understand basic economics, or both.

Or you do understand the possibilities of speculative trading in an entirely unregulated and unprotected market.

If you think that anybody with the power to regulate or 'protect' a market, will be doing so for your benefit, it's definitely the economics (and politics) you don't understand. See video above: Money As Debt.

[PsychoSerenity]

If you think anybody is getting a free lunch, then you either don't understand bitcoin, don't understand basic economics, or both.

Or you do understand the possibilities of speculative trading in an entirely unregulated and unprotected market.

If you think that anybody with the power to regulate or 'protect' a market, will be doing so for your benefit, it's definitely the economics (and politics) you don't understand. See video above: Money As Debt.

Trust me, I'm well aware of how our money system works and many of the major problems with it. As far as I can see bitcoin doesn't solve any of them and, like any alternative currency, adds a handful of extra ones. Oh, unless because of a Libertarian/Austrian School bent you believe taxation of hoarded wealth to be a problem.