Topic: Convince me that the bitcoin elite cannot become the next Rothschild family - page 3. (Read 11718 times)

Mr. Butch just hit the nail on the head. That is all.

Absolutely. There is no such thing as "absolute cost". There isn't even a "price of bitcoin", it's just an abstraction of the market, a general consensus of series of pairs of people deciding on exchanging certain amounts of things with each other.


Not really. Bitcoin is a truly free market currency that cannot be controlled, and has limited predictable supply, which makes it valuable. Solidcoin is not even a currency based on what you are describing. It would not even work economically, which is difficult to prove of course, because it has not gained and I don't think will gain any widespread acceptance. Controlling money supply based on some subjective norms of "fair", "cost" of things, and other incentives is exactly what governments are doing and what is wrong with the american monetary system for example. Thank god the bitcoin is free from that.


What exactly makes solidcoin more secure for any governmental or other agency with enough resources to shutdown? Faster retargets? Anyone with enough resources to disturb bitcoin could make solidcoin and everyone using it dissapear from the face of the earth if there was every any point for that.

Riiiiiight, is that why they say this?:

The history is irrelevant.

We had oh so many huge wars in our history and yet, we know today, after the atomic bomb, we are not going to have another world war ever again, because if we are, it's going to be the last one. Technology changed used forever on that issue. Once every place on earth has a few nuclear missiles to defend themselves meaning a deterrent, who the fk is going to attack anyone anymore?

Same goes for individuals. Your body strength and physic used to be pivotal for you to able to defend yourself against one stronger or multiple attackers. More and more sophisticated weapons have eliminated that requirement. And as these weapons become cheaper and cheaper and more available they'll pose the same deterrent functionality as nuclear weapons do on the national scale. Once every single person has a gun and a machine gun, who's going to try and and kill anyone? I know! Only crazy people and suiciders, which is far less violence than we have today and there will be no more state, no more oppression, no more coercion.

History is irrelevant because technology we'll introduce such strong deterrents that using violence will guarantee death for the perpetrator and no one will use violence anymore.

Sorry, if you knew the code in SolidCoin you would know how ridiculous this sounds. As more miners join, more coins are created.  This is the exact opposite of a pyramid. In Bitcoin as more miners join the blocks get harder to make but they are still worth the same number of Bitcoins. It means that Satoshi generating them on his CPU (and who made about a million or so) did so at a cost of only a cent a coin vs about 50c a coin now. You think this is fair?

And unlike Bitcoin we use real metrics like electricity to determine how much a block is worth.


Bitcoin has innovated over its competitors (which were none) more than SolidCoin has over Bitcoin, no one can deny that. However SolidCoin is a better product than Bitcoin technically speaking. Banks and governments cannot take us down by mining SolidCoin like they can Bitcoin.

If a bank can spend 5 million dollars and shut down Bitcoin do you think Bitcoin is that secure? You may argue that it's 10 million or 20 million, but 3 years ago banks were given over 5 trillion dollars just to keep running. 20 million is nothing if it means shutting down a true competitor to their system. Zimbabwe could should shut down Bitcoin if they wanted. It isn't hard and it's entirely legal. Put as much faith into such a system as you want but we offer people a safer solution at SolidCoin.

I make no secret I am against banks, governments and the "elite" from messing with SolidCoin. Our supporters know this. Meanwhile check the video below to see Gavin (the leader of bitcoin) admitting he wouldn't care if Bank of America was running Bitcoin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=0ljx4bbJrYE#t=1894s

Interesting post.

Please...
It's you who are building a pyramid and a trying to make a quick buck. The original bitcoin is the innovation and is worth something. It has actual beneficial properties that are making it valueable. Solidcoin on the other hand is just an attempt to make money off the same concept, off the people that don't know any better. You didn't invent anything, you didn't give the world anything, you've just tried to become an "early adopter" of a new thing, because you were too late to be that for the old thing, and seem to have missed, or chose to miss the fact that "early adopters" phenomenon is not the point of Bitcoin, nor an important part of Bitcoin, it's just a side-effect of the fact that coins have to be generated somehow and that blocks have to be generated somehow.

You are the reason people think that cryptocurrency is a scam.

Historically that isn't true.  The Rothschilds got money as bankers long before fiat money was normal.  The made a fortune when England won the Battle of Waterloo.

You'd really prefer the government? I think this is where fanaticism comes into it.

You are right that the first 2.7 million coins in SolidCoin weren't "fair" compared to the next coins created. However unlike Bitcoin those 2.7 million coins are owned by thousands of people. I've spent the most effort in SolidCoin and I only have 1.5% of the coins, so put that in perspective.

If anyone tried starting what SolidCoin is "right now" it would fail. You need to do things in baby steps so that it is acceptable to the people using the system in the context of "what they know". An analogy would be like trying to get someone to understand algebra before addition.

About a dozen people mined the first 2 million coins in Bitcoin, of which only 21 million will ever be created. The later you become aware of Bitcoin the worse off you are.

Regardless of the "top dozen guys" benefiting greatly it's obvious that Bitcoin is the definition of a pyramid. The earlier you get on the better ride you get. We have addressed these issues with SolidCoin so if you want a coin that is always going to be :-

1) Against the existing banking system
2) Against government control of your money
3) For freedom
4) Decentralized currency creation based on real work instead of invented numbers
5) Isn't a pyramid scheme

You know where to go.

States only exist because people desire them. Similarly as slavery did in the past. Slavery has long been considered immoral (in most cases), but still existed because people thought that that's simply the way it is. The risk that it will return is not very high. Similarly, if sufficient amount of people realise that state is immoral and harmful and stop supporting it, it will stop playing a role in our lives.

There is plenty of anarchocapitalist literature dealing with all kinds of questions regarding stateless societies, for example Demoncracy the God That Failed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Myth of National Defense (ed. the same), Chaos Theory by Robert Murphy, Market for Liberty by Morris & Linda Tannehill, the video blogs of Stefan Molyneux, and so on. Pick whichever you like.

A summary is on the Bitcoin wiki. A discussion is on the Bitcoin wiki talks page, and continues on the forum. My forum posts also include references to support my claims.

Silence please. Shhhhhhh!

Maria.

Then they'll make a tv show about them. 

While I may share some of the OP's concerns, I fail to see how these relate to Bitcoin. To asnwer the OP's question directly:

1. There is no "Bitcoin elite". It's a p2p system, open source, and open for anyone to jump on and off board as they please. Moreover, the majority of coins have not even been mined yet. I don't see the problem. You are free to mine, buy, sell and use coins as you please. You don't depend on any central authority to do so.

2. Even if there were "Bitcoin elite," they could never become the next Rothschild family, simply because they are not a family. My view is that, while generations of Rothschilds were born into wealth and therefore inevitably understand how wealth functions (better than an average Joe anyway), some fraction of this presumed "Bitcoin elite" are dysfunctional, paranoid trash who will - if by some coincidence their amassed  coins become significantly valued - quickly slide into a spiral of personal disasters related to addiction, lawyers, vanity, abuse, and stupidity.  All I hope is that they spent their coins on their way, instead of losing them irreversibly to a black hole. The other fraction may just be fine folks, who will do with their coins as they please, without causing much harm to themselves or others. Many members of this forum come to mind, and I am glad if they got wealthy. Good for them.



 

he said the truth so keep reading or research yourself

when in doubt, resort to strawman

You may be able to pander to many with this carrot, but this does not pander to me. The promise of wealth for nothing is not something I desire, because I know it comes at a cost to someone else.

Convince ME.

And they got that wealth by controlling the money supply.

Basically, you're just bothered by the fact that some people are insanely rich? Should the title of the OP then be: "convince me that the bitcoin early adopters won't become really rich". personally, I don't really care as long as they can't rob me by printing money.

The presence of somebody at one location means his absence at another location.

If you all go play king of the hill, and somebody better than you, or somebody who was there before you is on the top of the hill, you can either:
-Fight your way to the top. Winning means you're at the top, losing means you're stuck at the bottom.
-Find another hill.

Bitcoin is another hill where there's no king yet. You have a chance to progress on this hill without having someone at the top trying to push you back. Eventually, somebody will make it at the top, and will try to protect the top. At that moment, you'll have two choices:

-Fight your way to the top.
-Find another hill.

Oh, and you know, the definition of early adopter is relative. Ok yeah, Satoshi had the chance to get a load of Bitcoins 2 years ago, but you know, in 10 years from now, there will be no more new Bitcoins. Those people in 10 years, when they'll enter the Bitcoin market, for them, WE'll be early adopters.

No they don´t! Especially the Rothschilds do not! They have sperad their wealth very widely. Let all money get worthless, but they are still pretty well off. Let gold or diamonds get worthless, they care less than you do.
Like them or not, its a winning strategy.

p.s.
I don´t think they got Bitcoins. Probably maybe be they better should have.