Comments on: This Time Is Different Part I: What Bitcoin Isn’t

By: Dominic

Dominic — Sun, 31 Jan 2021 17:29:03 +0000

In reply to Dominic. Correction One compelling reason Bitcoin has no intrinsic value is that an endless number of crypto currencies can be created all with the same qualities.

By: Dominic

Dominic — Sat, 30 Jan 2021 23:14:41 +0000

Yes, you have convinced me that “technically” Bitcoin is not a ponzi scheme. I would rather define it as greed.

Thus I disagree about Bitcoin’s value. The reason is that Bitcoin has no intrinsic value and one reason it has no intrinsic value is because you can create an endless number of crypto currencies all with the same qualities.

If I created a corporation and created a finite number of shares using the technology of crypto currencies what would I have created? If there were a total of one million shares and they were first issued at 1 dollar the total value of the enterprise would be one million. What would be the value of each share the next day? The shares could be traded just like Bitcoin. Who would pay more than one dollar a share? Bitcoin is worse because what the early buyers paid for it is gone. Bitcoin is worthless.

By: wushi

wushi — Sat, 03 Oct 2020 20:50:31 +0000

Interesting reads but money is controlled by power – economic and military.

The power will control it or destroy it.

The IRS and US Treasury have already taken the first steps in this direction

By: Sam

Sam — Sat, 24 Mar 2018 00:57:46 +0000

Thank you for addressing these myths and common misconceptions about Bitcoin. There is nothing more frustrating than hearing someone spread around false information. So many people offer their two-cents without being properly informed.

By: Michael Harrington

Michael Harrington — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 22:18:26 +0000

Yes, why wouldn’t money come to be backed by consensus that can’t be manipulated by a central bank? Fiat money is money by consensus, but an inferior one because the supply is at the discretion of the fallible and self-interested central bankers. The biggest consensus today is around the US$, but that is certainly not sacrosanct. Especially when you look at the monetary base and debt leverage.

By: Ted Byrne

Ted Byrne — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:58:27 +0000

In reply to Leslie.

You don’t seem to looked into cryptro at all, otherwise you’d understand what level of control you have when you own crypto. If you leave it at an exchange (like Coinbase) then yes it is subject to regulatory whim.

The solution is to put your coins on an encrypted thumb drive (Trezor and KeepKey are 2 examples). On KeepKey you have a 12 word passphrase along with a 6 digit pin. I can light my Keepkey on fire, run it over with a steamroller and then drop it to the bottom of the ocean and my coins are still safe. I buy another KeepKey, enter the 12 word passphrase and all my coins are restored. Like many things in this world, If you can’t touch it, you don’t own it.

Money transfers you speak of can be traced, but all they show is that an amount was sent from 1 address (3HyvoPY5srKgMbtXv1RUixEiN7wG5k92ce) to another. As every transaction/transfer i do has a new unique address it’s nearly impossible to trace back to any individual. Of course, if you use the same computer WITHOUT a VPN, then your IP address is stamped on everything you do.

And worry not about the “criminality”. BTC is worth 350billion USD (give or take). The USD float is between 3 and 4 TRILLION. I assure you, more greenbacks are used for criminal enterprise than all the crypto in the world.

By: Adam Engst

Adam Engst — Tue, 05 Dec 2017 18:27:44 +0000

Brad Templeton argues that the real problem with Bitcoin is that there are hundreds of other cryptocurrency systems.

http://ideas.4brad.com/bitcoin-bubble-and-real-value

By: Leslie

Leslie — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 04:08:59 +0000

I’ve looked at bitcoin off and on over the past year or two, but I haven’t invested, because I’ve several times been in the situation where local elites teamed up with corrupt officials to take my property and/or business. — similar to civil forfeiture, but for more complicated assets. From what I hear, my experience is more common than one realizes. Traditional assets have some legal protections (the law could only take away the use of the property, to force a sale, for example); but bitcoin has no real legal status. Additionally, it seems that governments have been propagandizing it as “only for criminals and money launderers”. I am very interested to know if other people have been thinking about this issue, and what the thoughts are?

Bitcoin is anonymous to buy, but subpoenas still exist, money transfers are traced, and as we see in Saudi Arabia, shakedowns based on physical detention happen (it also happens in the US). Bitcoin strikes at the centre of modern government; at it’s ability to tax, and to control money flows, won’t it be a case of government co-opting it, or fighting bitcoin to the death, so to speak?

By: Mark E. Jeftovic

Mark E. Jeftovic — Thu, 30 Nov 2017 19:56:13 +0000

In reply to Michael.

Have you ever heard of Charles Hugh Smith and if so, read his “A Radically Beneficial World” ? (I actually produced the audiobook version of it).

What you are talking about here:

The moment you have a crypto-currency which is backed by a legitimate way of measuring human productivity – is the moment you have a crypto-currency that in my opinion is not fairy-dust.

Sounds pretty close to what CHS envisions and proposes as his “CLIME” system.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 30 Nov 2017 19:48:48 +0000

I think the point here is not what is backing fiat currency or what is not backing fiat currency. Whether we consider current fiat to be spineless (which it has been since it was not backed by gold since the 70’s) does not matter. What matters is the perception that the value of world currencies is mostly due to the value of their stock market which is (theoretically) meant to represent the productivity of a given country. Ideally, a strong stock market index, results in a strong currency value – that is the perception (whether that is real or not is a different conversation and I myself believe it is actually all fairy dust).

Bitcoin however is backed by no perception of productivity *at all*. It is backed by the only fact that each of them is more and more scarse as the mathematical problems to solve become more and more complex – thus requiring more and more KWh to find. It is not backed by anything that is measured by human productivity and to actually say that “oh, but it is measured by machine productivity” is …. a little dystopian and useless – since nothing is produced other then a solution to a math problem – if the collective of these solutions would then be utilized to cure cancer – then heck… yes, you now have value – but to simply state “it has value because there is not a lot of it” well…. little naive imho

The moment you have a crypto-currency which is backed by a legitimate way of measuring human productivity – is the moment you have a crypto-currency that in my opinion is not fairy-dust. And honestly, If someone tells me that crypto-currencies can be backed by the stock-market I’ll puke a little because that would be like building a castle on a pile of .