And I noted that in his report on youtube he says "You can make a lot of money by trading in bitcoins...." 
so you mean he sparked the current rally
Topic: Bill Still ("The Money Masters") not a fan of Bitcoin (Adam vs The Man) (Read 4990 times)
April 01, 2013, 08:13:06 AM
so you mean he sparked the current rally
April 01, 2013, 06:53:22 AM
I have deep respect for Bill Still. His documentary was one of the things that led me to bitcoin. And I noted that in his report on youtube he says "You can make a lot of money by trading in bitcoins...."
April 01, 2013, 04:52:17 AM
Still has always been consistent, he say's WHAT money is is irrelevant, its WHO CONTROLS THE SUPPLY!
His opposition to Gold has always been due to the inevitable small-elite-group which ALREADY controls the supply of Gold, when he looks at BTC he sees something that's already concentrated in a few hands and which is even easier to monopolize then Gold because the supply is fixed, thus he rejects it on the same grounds. Present him with ANY kind of monetary reform or movement and his first and only question will be who is/will control the supply, if it's anything other then "The People through the Democratic process" he will give it a thumbs down.
His opposition to Gold has always been due to the inevitable small-elite-group which ALREADY controls the supply of Gold, when he looks at BTC he sees something that's already concentrated in a few hands and which is even easier to monopolize then Gold because the supply is fixed, thus he rejects it on the same grounds. Present him with ANY kind of monetary reform or movement and his first and only question will be who is/will control the supply, if it's anything other then "The People through the Democratic process" he will give it a thumbs down.
Democracy is not controlled by the people to start with, so he has a problem.
But watching his movies and how historically inaccurate they are Im not surprised the least about his way of thinking.
April 01, 2013, 02:43:30 AM
Still has always been consistent, he say's WHAT money is is irrelevant, its WHO CONTROLS THE SUPPLY!
His opposition to Gold has always been due to the inevitable small-elite-group which ALREADY controls the supply of Gold, when he looks at BTC he sees something that's already concentrated in a few hands and which is even easier to monopolize then Gold because the supply is fixed, thus he rejects it on the same grounds. Present him with ANY kind of monetary reform or movement and his first and only question will be who is/will control the supply, if it's anything other then "The People through the Democratic process" he will give it a thumbs down.
His opposition to Gold has always been due to the inevitable small-elite-group which ALREADY controls the supply of Gold, when he looks at BTC he sees something that's already concentrated in a few hands and which is even easier to monopolize then Gold because the supply is fixed, thus he rejects it on the same grounds. Present him with ANY kind of monetary reform or movement and his first and only question will be who is/will control the supply, if it's anything other then "The People through the Democratic process" he will give it a thumbs down.
March 31, 2013, 07:08:54 PM
Still: , it was hacked about two years ago.
It was? oh man SHA256 is done, that its I am selling all my BTC ...
Well he is not wrong: look it up, there have been two cases now where major flaws in the source have been found and luckily fixed by getting everyone to update and recalculate the blockchain (this fixing he forgets to mention)
But its worth thinking about... What if the next bug accidentally doubles all mining output? Do you really think all the large mining pools will be as quick to update their version to take away their benefit?
Unless I'm mistaken I don't think in any way could a "flaw in the source" around 2 years ago be considered Bitcoin having been hacked. It seems most likely he was talking about the Mt Gox hack which as other people mentioned is a far cry from Bitcoin itself being hacked.
Also thinking about the next bug accidentally doubling all mining output is probably merited as much as thinking about the next fed dollar printing creating potentially volatile explosive bills.
I think it's fine if some people are skeptical of the future permanency of Bitcoin, it is still experimental after all. However if you are going to take that stance you should base it on researched fact rather than quote fiction to back up your uninformed gut feeling, especially so when it's going on record. It is funny to watch the fans of this guy do mental gymnastics to attempt to rationalize his dumb comment though.
March 31, 2013, 12:00:51 PM
Still: , it was hacked about two years ago.
It was? oh man SHA256 is done, that its I am selling all my BTC ...
Well he is not wrong: look it up, there have been two cases now where major flaws in the source have been found and luckily fixed by getting everyone to update and recalculate the blockchain (this fixing he forgets to mention)
But its worth thinking about... What if the next bug accidentally doubles all mining output? Do you really think all the large mining pools will be as quick to update their version to take away their benefit?
March 31, 2013, 09:00:25 AM
Still still rocks !
March 31, 2013, 04:05:11 AM
Bill Still on the Bitcoin: March 29th 2013
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qDgnu5B1SJM#!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qDgnu5B1SJM#!
March 30, 2013, 03:19:57 PM
Still: , it was hacked about two years ago.
It was? oh man SHA256 is done, that its I am selling all my BTC ...
March 30, 2013, 11:20:55 AM
dang!! what happened?
Bill lost his mind?
March 30, 2013, 02:01:11 AM
And still, Still got me originally thinking about a lot of things. I hope he has gotten himself some Bitcoins nonetheless
March 30, 2013, 12:24:09 AM
I have no idea what he is talking about..
All biblical things about BTC users expecting the devil and other people doing god's will by helping other people..
March 30, 2013, 12:05:44 AM
I remember when Bill Still appeared during George W's first term on a radio station I listen to. Bill thought George was a good president, much to the embarrassment of the programs hosts.
Still is a man of very deep biases that make it hard for him to see things objectively.
There's a lesson there for all of us: beware of ideology. Seek truth and see things as they are.
Still is a man of very deep biases that make it hard for him to see things objectively.
There's a lesson there for all of us: beware of ideology. Seek truth and see things as they are.
Beware of those that are certain. The strongest red flag is a highly controversial opinion conveyed with complete certainty. Also: people that seem to fall in a certain category. Educated people tend to excel in variety.
March 29, 2013, 10:00:41 PM
I remember when Bill Still appeared during George W's first term on a radio station I listen to. Bill thought George was a good president, much to the embarrassment of the programs hosts.
Still is a man of very deep biases that make it hard for him to see things objectively.
There's a lesson there for all of us: beware of ideology. Seek truth and see things as they are.
Still is a man of very deep biases that make it hard for him to see things objectively.
There's a lesson there for all of us: beware of ideology. Seek truth and see things as they are.
March 29, 2013, 08:55:30 PM
February 08, 2013, 11:08:20 AM
No need to look for conspiracies [...]
+1. Bitcoin is a high flying UFO. [...]
I want to believe.
February 08, 2013, 10:20:41 AM
It really bothers me when people go around claiming Bitcoin is somehow a fiat currency. Look up what fiat money means and you will know that Bitcoin is NOT fiat. I really shouldn't be posting this because people will probably try to retort and derail (k maybe this post is a bit of a derail)...but they are wrong. Just look it up!
If you looked it up properly you would know bitcoin is a fiat currency.Quote
The term fiat money has been defined variously as:
* any money declared by a government to be legal tender.[7]
* state-issued money which is neither convertible by law to any other thing, nor fixed in value in terms of any objective standard.[8]
* money without intrinsic value.[9][10]
While gold- or silver-backed representative money entails the legal requirement that the bank of issue redeem it in fixed weights of gold or silver, fiat money's value is unrelated to the value of any physical quantity. Even a coin containing valuable metal may be considered fiat currency if its face value is higher than its market value as metal.
Fiat Money - Wikipedia
* any money declared by a government to be legal tender.[7]
* state-issued money which is neither convertible by law to any other thing, nor fixed in value in terms of any objective standard.[8]
* money without intrinsic value.[9][10]
While gold- or silver-backed representative money entails the legal requirement that the bank of issue redeem it in fixed weights of gold or silver, fiat money's value is unrelated to the value of any physical quantity. Even a coin containing valuable metal may be considered fiat currency if its face value is higher than its market value as metal.
Fiat Money - Wikipedia
Please..
Define intrinsic value without using a circular argument.. You can't. All value is subjective. Even all meaning of words is subjective, so one can very well say bitcoins are fiat money. But.. if one goes by old traditions of what people most commonly used the word fiat for back when they spoke Latin it's clear bitcoins are not fiat money, because fiat, back then, meant "let it be so" i.e. a command, i.e. a government decree and bitcoins, unlike dollars, certainly do not have value or are used because of a government's decree.
But yes, we can argue like 5 year old idiots whether bitcoins are fiat money, and we can ignore history and claim they are, OR we can focus on what actually matters and what bitcoins actually bring to the table and RECOGNIZE that Bitcoin is a FIRST OF IT'S KIND TECHNOLOGY and comparing it with anything we had up until now is at best inadequate and much more likely just plain old fallacy.
I don't know about you all, but I have decided, at least for myself, that I'm simply not going to take anyone serious who doesn't treat Bitcoin like that. Period. If you are someone who doesn't recognize that it's a first of it's kind technology and not comparable to anything we had before, then "you" are irrelevant and a waste of my time.
February 08, 2013, 12:14:17 AM
Still: ....Number one, it was hacked about two years ago.
If he was talking about what happened to a certain large market, that was a bitcoin market, not bitcoin, that got hacked. Big difference.
The market format needs to be changed.
February 07, 2013, 09:53:26 PM
It really bothers me when people go around claiming Bitcoin is somehow a fiat currency. Look up what fiat money means and you will know that Bitcoin is NOT fiat. I really shouldn't be posting this because people will probably try to retort and derail (k maybe this post is a bit of a derail)...but they are wrong. Just look it up!
If you looked it up properly you would know bitcoin is a fiat currency.Quote
The term fiat money has been defined variously as:
* any money declared by a government to be legal tender.[7]
* state-issued money which is neither convertible by law to any other thing, nor fixed in value in terms of any objective standard.[8]
* money without intrinsic value.[9][10]
While gold- or silver-backed representative money entails the legal requirement that the bank of issue redeem it in fixed weights of gold or silver, fiat money's value is unrelated to the value of any physical quantity. Even a coin containing valuable metal may be considered fiat currency if its face value is higher than its market value as metal.
Fiat Money - Wikipedia
* any money declared by a government to be legal tender.[7]
* state-issued money which is neither convertible by law to any other thing, nor fixed in value in terms of any objective standard.[8]
* money without intrinsic value.[9][10]
While gold- or silver-backed representative money entails the legal requirement that the bank of issue redeem it in fixed weights of gold or silver, fiat money's value is unrelated to the value of any physical quantity. Even a coin containing valuable metal may be considered fiat currency if its face value is higher than its market value as metal.
Fiat Money - Wikipedia
February 07, 2013, 06:43:59 PM
I did and apparently it's an Italian car? 
Jump to: