Topic: Bitcoin's are totally useless once you have a state of WAR! (Read 6431 times)

No. the Deutsche Mark only came into existence after WWII.

What you say is true though for the Reichsmark, which was in use before and during the war. All paper and book money was rendered worthless. But the Reichsmark was also issued as gold and silver coinage for the paranoid part of the people who would not trust papers and books. These coins still today have the same buying power as back then even though their emitting entities have ceased to exist long ago.

Sorry, but this guy is profoundly confusing things.
The wright brothers didnt have 17% market penetration when they made their discovery.
His observations are very very narrow-minded because there are lots of examples of companies that succeeded even when they didnt follow his nonsense.
Picking out some of the 'winners' and generalizing it to everyone is just bullshit at a very basic level.

I've been away a bit... sorry (I did ask for a 'patient' discussion )

I don't think  that your view of having my friend "go extinct" is a good idea.  He is EXACTLY the kind of INFLUENTIAL person who can help to SEVERELY DISRUPT the current system NOW! If that was what we wanted to do... I DO!

That is why I went into this discussion.

Thanks for the rest of your comment, it is well appreciated!

All bitcoin needs to succeed is 15 to 18 percent adoption. (http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action.html)

Where the hell are you going to get $100.000.000 worth of gold?

what are you going to do with 3 tons of gold if you need to get the hell out of dodge?
I can bet you my bitcoins are much safer than your gold.

The United States has been at war for the entire duration of the bitcoin block chain.  Bitcoin is of limited utility but certainly not useless.  I use bitcoin to earn dollars.

Trade promotes interdependence a byproduct is peace and prosperity.
Fighting on the other hand consumes wealth, destroys prosperity and suffering is the byproduct.
Read The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, to find out how to create an army for defense without a central bank.

The economy is a result not a means. You don't need war to make it happy unless you are insane. *edit* if you still want a war to help teh economy make sure you are fighting on the front line.

Wait what? Your friend believes we need war? What push?! Please, your friend is fear mongering. I don't need no stinking war.

Maybe it can't. Your friend doesn't need to change, he can go extinct.

As for the Bitcoin is useless during a state of war premise I'd say there was a time around 10-15 years ago when I'd maybe agree with that but today I just can see major economies allowing the destruction of something like 15-20% of their GDP by gangs of people known as governments through nationalizing all ISPs in the area they rule through violence and cutting off all the other areas so I don't think I'd accept the premise that Bitcoin automatically becomes useless in the state war. For example the land area knows as the US is at war right now in several countries and yet Bitcoin is perfectly useful to almost everyone.

I think bitcoin could be useful in preventing war.  Hard commodity money such as gold and silver can be seen by the enemy as booty to be looted.  Bitcoin cannot be looted.

CW

Once you have a state of war there'll be a shitload of people not supportive of a war who will flock towards Bitcoin because it offers an unprecedented alternative.

It'll be hard to convince people of the necessity for war when they see a new form of economy blossoming right in front of them that offers them extraordinary progress without the risk of physical violence.

First of all, glad to see this discussion going. Next, I stand corrected on calling your friend a loud know-it-all pundit. I say this because from your posts I judge that I can trust your judgement. Finally, this community (myself included) usually doesn't take criticism well, even when well founded.

Now, with all this in mind - your friend's main point is valid for as long as "warriors" (or dogs and idiots, depending on your perspective) are willing to accept their own debt as a payment. The current system quite successfully relies on the inability of most people to see that far - it is really a neurological issue, and political aspects only build upon it. The war profiteering of the few at the expense of an infinite, exponentially growing debt of the public is still not recognized as a problem by the public.

On the other hand, Bitcoin does not necessarily endanger the current system. In fact, it is much more likely that it will co-exist as an alternative store-of-value and a system for international transfers. Most people would still happily and short-sightedly accept debt-backed fiat payments. Perhaps even the "elite" cannot think that far as to recognize Bitcoin as an actual danger? To help the inevitable but slow adoption of Bitcoin, perhaps we should slow down with all the "revolutionary" anti-government yelling, and simply focus on using Bitcoin and pointing out its practical advantages where they exist? I certainly think so, and I dislike btc businesses that are vocal about their political views. Offer the service, explain the technology, and let people decide for themselves about the implications.

Does your friend think the current elite would actually recognize Bitcoin as something that endangers them?

You wont have to wait long. War is coming from the North 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWHLE3DBs38

I think his point is that it is "useless" in comparison with the current DOMINANT system which is exactly that: DOMINANT!

The current system is creating, financing, keeping a state of war the world over. 

btw. I am still waiting for more clarification on my friend's view, but it does seem to make some sense that bitcoin would have to (in theory anyway) be able to finance an army of "defenders" if push came to shove and the bitcoin system came face-to-face with the current financial, warmongering system.

I do love a challenge!

No. Sorry, not so easy to dismiss, he is not mentally retarded, quite to opposite.

I think it could facilitate it as some other's have mentioned that gold has been used for that in the past... the question is:

Would Bitcoin be a better (winning) facilitator when compared to Fiat or Gold for that matter (?)

Right about the first few: No wars.  No bitcoins.  Very modern.
Wrong about: Pundit. Loud-talking. Know-it-all.

Actually, the whole point of my post is to have the community here help me have a nice intelligent conversation with someone who's intelligence I value, and who lives in the normal "economy" with his family etc.

He sees the current system for what it is, and he sees it from the inside as he is a very skilled mathematician and statistician.  He uses these skills to work and make money for a huge company, and he is taking the time to talk to me and to help me understand why he thinks Bitcoin is not a good idea. 

He is open to discussion.  He is listening at the moment.  I am trying to see if I can "convert" him, or if he can convince me that I am infact wrong.

Some people's posts here miss the point. I am only trying to see how a patient, and open discussion can lead to informing someone who is VERY INTIMATELY connected to the current system and how he can be converted to see the light of Bitcoin as we all do!

One idea at a time.

That's all. 

Thanks for you help, and input.

I don't even think it will have to come to war.
Bitcoin is fully dependent on the current system and cannot function without it.

Your friend isn't putting forward any rational arguments. The better question I would ask myself if I were you is, what drives me to continue engaging with an irrational person? Curiosity toward yourself if pretty important.