New topic:
Any counter-proof that Apple stock is not a ponzi scheme?
Topic: Any counter-proof that Satoshi Nakamoto did not design a ponzi scheme on purpose - page 3. (Read 7693 times)
March 26, 2013, 11:29:02 PM
March 26, 2013, 11:27:57 PM
You either didn't read the thread. Or if you did, you are incapable of comprehending it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
With a name like odolvlobo, it is not surprising.
Btw, what happens to Bitcoin bcz transaction fees won't scale?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
With a name like odolvlobo, it is not surprising.
Btw, what happens to Bitcoin bcz transaction fees won't scale?
March 26, 2013, 11:24:03 PM
Good to see that you didn't read the thread. Or if you did, you are incapable of comprehending it.
MUST....NOT.....FEED.......THE......TROLL 
I CAN BEND SPACE AND TIME!!!
Now to go back in time and buy when I should have, at $5
March 26, 2013, 11:21:04 PM
Good to see that you didn't read the thread. Or if you did, you are incapable of comprehending it.
MUST....NOT.....FEED.......THE......TROLL March 26, 2013, 10:56:00 PM
Must...not...feed....troll.... 
March 26, 2013, 10:33:32 PM
Currency must be backed by production, else by force.
That is a basic reality of economics and politics.
No. Backing a currency is only needed to prevent the supply of the currency from being inflated without bound. And it's even an imperfect solution to that.That is a basic reality of economics and politics.
For inherently backed currencies like gold, there's always the risk some cheaper way to get or make the inherently backed item could be found. We could find a way to mine an asteroid made of gold some day.
For agency-backed currencies like dollars or redeemable certificates, the backing entity can always collapse or betray you. The US government can print more money. The organization that redeems your silver certificates can go out of business or declare an emergency and force a partial redemption.
This is a problem Bitcoin doesn't have. The only way to create more Bitcoins is for the stakeholders to get together and change the rules of the system. If you're going to worry about that, then no currency will work for you -- they all have remote risks on that kind of level. Gold can be stolen or seized by the government.
You don't understand the reason that I said, "Currency must be backed by production, else by force.".
It has nothing to do with making sure the currency is not debased or making sure the backing is paid.
The reason I wrote that is because all currencies are UNFAIR, because both inflation and deflation concentrate wealth from the less wealthy to the more wealthy, for no merit reason.
Also all currencies are manipulated by the rich. Even Bitcoin is manipulated and it will be more and more manipulated. The rich will control all the mining, they control 50% of the coins, and they control the laws.
Your idealistic bullshit about Bitcoin being different, is just naive and nothing more.
What is worse for you, is that if you are developer of the software or the foundation or otherwise connected to informing the public about bitcoin, you run the risk of being held liable for all the manipulation and have it blamed on you.
Currency is the game of the Rothschild. Don't fuck around with your bitcoin so far up your arse that you think you suddenly changed the reality since the beginning of time and to the end of time.
David, I like you, I was just using some vulgar words for the hyperbole. Please don't mind it. It is not personally directed at you.
March 26, 2013, 09:54:01 PM
Currency must be backed by production, else by force.
That is a basic reality of economics and politics.
No. Backing a currency is only needed to prevent the supply of the currency from being inflated without bound. And it's even an imperfect solution to that.That is a basic reality of economics and politics.
For inherently backed currencies like gold, there's always the risk some cheaper way to get or make the inherently backed item could be found. We could find a way to mine an asteroid made of gold some day.
For agency-backed currencies like dollars or redeemable certificates, the backing entity can always collapse or betray you. The US government can print more money. The organization that redeems your silver certificates can go out of business or declare an emergency and force a partial redemption.
This is a problem Bitcoin doesn't have. The only way to create more Bitcoins is for the stakeholders to get together and change the rules of the system. If you're going to worry about that, then no currency will work for you -- they all have remote risks on that kind of level. Gold can be stolen or seized by the government.
March 26, 2013, 09:47:12 PM
Korbman, let's talk about fraud. Where are the prospectus on your site? I see you are selling notes to fund mining pool in ASICs. No wonder you hate me, because I was going to use hard-disks.
So where in your prospectus do you disclose that bitcoin is lying about being modeled on gold?
Let's get legal now. Put here on the written record.
Come on, don't get shy now
So where in your prospectus do you disclose that bitcoin is lying about being modeled on gold?
Let's get legal now. Put here on the written record.
Come on, don't get shy now
March 26, 2013, 09:13:33 PM
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8671/any-counter-proof-that-satoshi-nakamoto-did-not-design-a-ponzi-scheme-on-purpose/8723?noredirect=1#comment11426_8723
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8671/any-counter-proof-that-satoshi-nakamoto-did-not-design-a-ponzi-scheme-on-purpose/8723?noredirect=1#comment11435_8723
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8671/any-counter-proof-that-satoshi-nakamoto-did-not-design-a-ponzi-scheme-on-purpose/8723?noredirect=1#comment11421_8723
Tell that to an angry Obama mob. Courts are not computer programs David. It doesn't matter what you call it, the government will invent a new description, if the prospectus is fraud or even deception, there is big trouble ahead if many people are harmed. A golden rule in business is never let your customers get harmed, else you WILL suffer too. Only Wallstreet can break that rule, bcz the judges are bought and paid for.
Quote
You are very naive about consumer protection law. And we are headed into increasing socialism, not less. There is a clear intent to deceive on page 3 of Satoshi paper. He said Bitcoin's supply curve is motivated by gold, but it is not. Gold's supply & periodic nominal increase both increase forever, Bitcoin's decreases to 0 fast. Lies in the prospectus are FRAUD. Bad invesment ≠ fraud. Ponzi, mania, pump&dump = fraud. See a difference?
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8671/any-counter-proof-that-satoshi-nakamoto-did-not-design-a-ponzi-scheme-on-purpose/8723?noredirect=1#comment11435_8723
Quote
If you own already, pump&dump is applicable. It doesn't matter what you call it, the government will invent a new description, if the prospectus is fraud or even deception, there is big trouble ahead if many people are harmed. A golden rule in business is never let your customers get harmed, else you WILL suffer too. Only Wallstreet can break that rule, bcz the judges are bought and paid for.
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8671/any-counter-proof-that-satoshi-nakamoto-did-not-design-a-ponzi-scheme-on-purpose/8723?noredirect=1#comment11421_8723
Quote
Doesn't matter if u name it pump&dump, mania, or ponzi — they're all fraud. Fraud is an intent to deceive. Page 3 of the Satoshi's paper, as well the Bitcoin foundation logo, are fraudulent deceptions, implying that Bitcoin has a similar debasement/inflation model as gold. I refuse to be part of fraud, neither as a developer nor as an early adopter defrauding the naive later adopters. So you go ahead & fool yourself that the name makes a difference, I don't plan on joining y'all to jail. The banksters throw their underlings to the guillotine after finished using to do their bidding.
Quote
Quote
@AnonyMint: "X is motivated by Y" is entirely consistent with "X is different from Y".
Tell that to an angry Obama mob. Courts are not computer programs David. It doesn't matter what you call it, the government will invent a new description, if the prospectus is fraud or even deception, there is big trouble ahead if many people are harmed. A golden rule in business is never let your customers get harmed, else you WILL suffer too. Only Wallstreet can break that rule, bcz the judges are bought and paid for.
March 26, 2013, 08:19:05 PM
I QUIT
Nice. Since that's supposedly the end of this ridiculousness, my summary has been updated: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1676413
March 26, 2013, 07:35:35 PM
FUCK! 
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8671/any-counter-proof-that-satoshi-nakamoto-did-not-design-a-ponzi-scheme-on-purpose#comment11415_8728
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8671/any-counter-proof-that-satoshi-nakamoto-did-not-design-a-ponzi-scheme-on-purpose#comment11415_8728
Quote
And when they drop $billions on hashing power, and Bitcoin is the accept currency, then they can decide which transactions are never processed. They can modify the protocol to require each transaction to have your 666 global id. TOTAL CONTROL. No one will take your gold & silver any more, bcz it isn't allowed to convert these to the 666 bitcoin. As in Belgium, u can't work w/o govt permit for that specific job. No transaction allowed if contract or goods code isn't attached. All inventory of businesses tracked with an id code. Welcome to 1984.
March 26, 2013, 06:53:40 PM
I QUIT
Also I am not replying to DataPlum's ignorance any more. He is thicker than molasses.
Also I am not replying to DataPlum's ignorance any more. He is thicker than molasses.
March 26, 2013, 06:47:23 PM
And then disappears and no one knows him. He has no parents, no siblings, no friends, who had any clue that he might be working on something for 3 years.
So what? He obviously (to me) planned to stay out of the spotlight from the start. Didn't want it. Doesn't care. We can speculate about his motivations but speculation does not constitute proof.Also math nerds do not have the networking programming skills to code what was already a completely working version when he released it.
Apparently not the ones you know. In my experience, math nerd translates to programmer quite well.Also programmers don't just leave and never say anything again. I have never seen that happen.
What does your personal experience have to do with it? If you've never been mugged, it never happens?Any one who has a case of a programmer who was on a big project and never mentioned it or put it on their resume, etc?
?
Not everyone thinks like you do. Not everyone behaves as you do. Your premise that you must be able to understand his behaviors using your value system is fundamentally flawed.?Then why does he choose to halve the # of new coins every 4 years, then say this is like gold, when gold's production is NEVER halved. It always increases!
The shape of the gold production curve is inverted in concavity:
There IS a fixed supply of gold, we just haven't gotten it all out of the ground yet. The shape of the gold production curve is inverted in concavity:
March 26, 2013, 06:38:12 PM
March 26, 2013, 06:23:19 PM
Occam's Razor.
A guy who studied previous e-currency, learns enough about cryptography to write a theoretical article.
That doesn't sound like a Ponzi scheme. It sounds like a math / CS nerd who proposed an experiment and then created the software to implement the experiment. Since latecomers can benefit from trading Bitcoin, it is certainly no Ponzi scheme. It merely is a cool, math / computer science experiment that involves many people.
A guy who studied previous e-currency, learns enough about cryptography to write a theoretical article.
That doesn't sound like a Ponzi scheme. It sounds like a math / CS nerd who proposed an experiment and then created the software to implement the experiment. Since latecomers can benefit from trading Bitcoin, it is certainly no Ponzi scheme. It merely is a cool, math / computer science experiment that involves many people.
And then disappears and no one knows him. He has no parents, no siblings, no friends, who had any clue that he might be working on something for 3 years.
Also math nerds do not have the networking programming skills to code what was already a completely working version when he released it.
Also programmers don't just leave and never say anything again. I have never seen that happen.
Any one who has a case of a programmer who was on a big project and never mentioned it or put it on their resume, etc?
?Then why does he choose to halve the # of new coins every 4 years, then say this is like gold, when gold's production is NEVER halved. It always increases!
The shape of the gold production curve is inverted in concavity:
March 26, 2013, 06:05:24 PM
I cannot think of any currency, current or past, that doesn't have every property of a ponzi scheme:
That it has no value other than what has been paid by previous investors and is only gaining value by specuation.
That it has no value other than what has been paid by previous investors and is only gaining value by specuation.
BINGO! What took you guys so long to reach that important realization.
For Bitcoin to be fraudulent, It has to have a back door in the code or another weakness only known by Satoshi or a few. This would be difficult to implement, as it's open source...
The fraudulent point is very important. You can rationalize all you want about what is and is not fraudulent, but the fact is that when the public interest is harmed, and many people get angry, history shows you can be prosecuted without fairness:
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8671/any-counter-proof-that-satoshi-nakamoto-did-not-design-a-ponzi-scheme-on-purpose/8709?noredirect=1#comment11400_8693
Quote
Good point about being fraudulent-- what I mean by the requirement for the "white lie". What income? Currency systems don't generate any income. They are all fraudulent according to who receives the debasement. Usually that is the banksters, so we can't prosecute them for it. It is very dangerous to be a developer on a currency system that has rewarded you and is going destroy the wealth of many greater fools. I would never be aligned with Bitcoin, many prosecutions are coming after it fails. You've been warned
What is fairness anyway? It is just another word for "I got mine and got away with it".
Now you know why I won't touch a bitcoin even if you offered it to me for free. I am not stupid.
Read this:
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/8728/3441
Here is what I wrote:
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8671/any-counter-proof-that-satoshi-nakamoto-did-not-design-a-ponzi-scheme-on-purpose/8709?noredirect=1#comment11404_8728
Quote
I was working on money systems from 2007. I stopped bcz I concluded that no money system can exist w/o a central repository. Bitcoin moves it into the cloud, but still a single centralized copy. As you say, much net traffic goes thru govt routers along some hop. The rest they harvest via google, facebook cookies, etc.. I feel sad now bcz Bitcom idealism that is going to end up giving the government exactly what they want from a digital currency. I am working a different idea where the software code is the money-- a money for programmers. Their code is their money. We use each other's code.
March 26, 2013, 05:43:47 PM
Occam's Razor.
A guy who studied previous e-currency, learns enough about cryptography to write a theoretical article.
That doesn't sound like a Ponzi scheme. It sounds like a math / CS nerd who proposed an experiment and then created the software to implement the experiment. Since latecomers can benefit from trading Bitcoin, it is certainly no Ponzi scheme. It merely is a cool, math / computer science experiment that involves many people.
A guy who studied previous e-currency, learns enough about cryptography to write a theoretical article.
That doesn't sound like a Ponzi scheme. It sounds like a math / CS nerd who proposed an experiment and then created the software to implement the experiment. Since latecomers can benefit from trading Bitcoin, it is certainly no Ponzi scheme. It merely is a cool, math / computer science experiment that involves many people.
March 26, 2013, 04:43:36 PM
Autism is a fascinating condition...
March 26, 2013, 04:39:45 PM
I cannot think of any currency, current or past, that doesn't have every property of a ponzi scheme:
That it has no value other than what has been paid by previous investors and is only gaining value by specuation.
For Bitcoin to be fraudulent, It has to have a back door in the code or another weakness only known by Satoshi or a few. This would be difficult to implement, as it's open source.
If Satoshi had criminal intent in creating Bitcoin, i.e. financial "terrorism" or other ill intentions towards a lot of people or society in general, would still not make Bitcoin by itself, fraudulent.
The early adoptor argument is also invalid as every ground breaking startup have had a single individual with that never thought off before idea that wil become the new sliced bread of the internet. Most are of course less briliant than they think, but they all have the early adoptor advantage.
Can Bitcoin be a vehicle for a Ponzi scheme? Yes indeed and more so than fiat in general as there is less regulation. Could the early developers around Satoshi have finished off that idalistic nerdy coder because they saw the great potential in using Bitcoin to defraud the planet? Sure but that is unlikely, firstly they would have nowhere to run and secondly, the whole process in the history of Bitcoin have been almost completely transparent. There would also have been other tell tales like missing information about mysterious code parts and inconsistencies in the explanations for various properties of Bitcoin.
Bitcoin have been evaluated by several independent universities and the FBI out of curiosity and the possibility that Bitcoin was a fraud, They have found nothing in the code and with the people involved in early development as far as I know.
That it has no value other than what has been paid by previous investors and is only gaining value by specuation.
For Bitcoin to be fraudulent, It has to have a back door in the code or another weakness only known by Satoshi or a few. This would be difficult to implement, as it's open source.
If Satoshi had criminal intent in creating Bitcoin, i.e. financial "terrorism" or other ill intentions towards a lot of people or society in general, would still not make Bitcoin by itself, fraudulent.
The early adoptor argument is also invalid as every ground breaking startup have had a single individual with that never thought off before idea that wil become the new sliced bread of the internet. Most are of course less briliant than they think, but they all have the early adoptor advantage.
Can Bitcoin be a vehicle for a Ponzi scheme? Yes indeed and more so than fiat in general as there is less regulation. Could the early developers around Satoshi have finished off that idalistic nerdy coder because they saw the great potential in using Bitcoin to defraud the planet? Sure but that is unlikely, firstly they would have nowhere to run and secondly, the whole process in the history of Bitcoin have been almost completely transparent. There would also have been other tell tales like missing information about mysterious code parts and inconsistencies in the explanations for various properties of Bitcoin.
Bitcoin have been evaluated by several independent universities and the FBI out of curiosity and the possibility that Bitcoin was a fraud, They have found nothing in the code and with the people involved in early development as far as I know.
March 26, 2013, 04:33:23 PM
You expect me to be nice and respect you when you continue batshit dumb juvenile behavior?
I'd suggest you go back up and see who started that. Your very first reply on this thread was condescending and rude, and had I noticed that at the time I might have declined to engage you.Liar. Here is my first reply to you:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1674023
Nothing there but being respectful and answering your question.
Your constant belittling of the intelligence of everyone on this thread ...
Yadayadayada.You continue to waste my time on politics. Stop, or I will ignore you.
This is a forum for discussion, but you're not here for a discussion, you're here to preach your same points (while tolerating no argument) until you're blue in the face.
I think we can both agree that all of your "facts" are irrefutable... to you.
Jump to: