Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 1253.

rocks

legendary

Activity: 1153

Merit: 1000

Quote from: wachtwoord on October 26, 2013, 04:34:01 PM

Quote from: rocks on October 26, 2013, 04:23:28 PM

Quote from: SheHadMANHands on October 26, 2013, 03:04:15 PM

The idea of "backing" blows people's minds. People feel compelled to locate a persona behind anything and everything. It's human nature.

"But who created the universe" -> Must be a "God"
"But who 'backs' Bitcoin" -> Must be a person, business, physical object (a yellow metal) or gov't entity.

If we had to place a persona behind Bitcoin, we'd probably say that it's "backed" by the people, or the users. A more interesting question would then be "why is it backed by the users?" Reason and Logic, which lead these users to believe that Bitcoin has intrinsic value as a technology.

Both Gold and Bitcoin are backed by the same entity, the free will of the people that choose to use them and the value the people place on them.

Gold is decentralized in the same manner as Bitcoin. If I have a piece of Gold in my possession, that piece of gold is out of the hands of any central system or government and fully in control by myself. Under a Gold currency system, gold is distributed and controlled by the hundreds of millions of people who each possess a piece of gold, not a central government. And it is these hundreds of millions of people who determine the real value of each unit of Gold. Similarly if I own the private keys to some Bitcoins, those Bitcoins are fully controlled by myself and out of the hands of any other entity.

Bitcoin shares more attributes with Gold than I think most people understand, but which will enable Bitcoin to reach some amazing heights. (Provided the network holds and there are no successful attacks)

BUT, various people can each own the same Bitcoin at the same time (just share your private key) and a number of people can own Bitcoin but only jointly (multi-sig). These things are not really possible with something physical such as gold.

You can have the same ownership / control with Gold as well. For example you could store it an account where multiple people are established as owners and who all are required to approve actions, or store it in a safe known only to a number of people where each person's individual key is required to open. This provides the same multi-owner control over Gold.

I agree it is easier to setup this situation with Bitcoin than Gold, but my point that both are decentralized systems because ownership is decentralized holds. It is this decentralized nature of ownership which made Gold such a strong form of money over history, and which will make bitcoin a strong form of money as well.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: ekiro on October 26, 2013, 04:09:40 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on March 13, 2012, 02:36:55 PM

very good sign IMO.

Edit : this thread is an extension of this beast:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.443129

Could people simply be getting rid of gold to buy BTC? It's. Great way to go from a physical asset to a virtual one you can redeem anywhere on the planet

that's what i did.

and i'm sure alot of ppl are now doing it also.

User705

legendary

Activity: 896

Merit: 1006

First 100% Liquid Stablecoin Backed by Gold

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 26, 2013, 04:40:24 PM

Quote

Ownership implies governmental permission.

WTF? ... are people really this indoctrinated with the facist state these days?

You haven't thought this through. Lots of buzz words though. There is control and legal ownership. Those are two distinct things.

wachtwoord

legendary

Activity: 2324

Merit: 1125

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 26, 2013, 04:40:24 PM

Quote

Ownership implies governmental permission.

WTF? ... are people really this indoctrinated with the facist state these days?

This is not indoctrination. Sadly this is fact. The states actually indoctrinate you to believe otherwise.

Land you "own" isn't really yours.

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote

Ownership implies governmental permission.

WTF? ... are people really this indoctrinated with the facist state these days?

User705

legendary

Activity: 896

Merit: 1006

First 100% Liquid Stablecoin Backed by Gold

I think the proper word is "control" of bitcoin. Ownership implies governmental permission. So yes in that regard bitcoin is superior to gold. In other ways inferior.

wachtwoord

legendary

Activity: 2324

Merit: 1125

Quote from: rocks on October 26, 2013, 04:23:28 PM

Quote from: SheHadMANHands on October 26, 2013, 03:04:15 PM

The idea of "backing" blows people's minds. People feel compelled to locate a persona behind anything and everything. It's human nature.

"But who created the universe" -> Must be a "God"
"But who 'backs' Bitcoin" -> Must be a person, business, physical object (a yellow metal) or gov't entity.

If we had to place a persona behind Bitcoin, we'd probably say that it's "backed" by the people, or the users. A more interesting question would then be "why is it backed by the users?" Reason and Logic, which lead these users to believe that Bitcoin has intrinsic value as a technology.

Both Gold and Bitcoin are backed by the same entity, the free will of the people that choose to use them and the value the people place on them.

Gold is decentralized in the same manner as Bitcoin. If I have a piece of Gold in my possession, that piece of gold is out of the hands of any central system or government and fully in control by myself. Under a Gold currency system, gold is distributed and controlled by the hundreds of millions of people who each possess a piece of gold, not a central government. And it is these hundreds of millions of people who determine the real value of each unit of Gold. Similarly if I own the private keys to some Bitcoins, those Bitcoins are fully controlled by myself and out of the hands of any other entity.

Bitcoin shares more attributes with Gold than I think most people understand, but which will enable Bitcoin to reach some amazing heights. (Provided the network holds and there are no successful attacks)

BUT, various people can each own the same Bitcoin at the same time (just share your private key) and a number of people can own Bitcoin but only jointly (multi-sig). These things are not really possible with something physical such as gold.

rocks

legendary

Activity: 1153

Merit: 1000

Quote from: SheHadMANHands on October 26, 2013, 03:04:15 PM

The idea of "backing" blows people's minds. People feel compelled to locate a persona behind anything and everything. It's human nature.

"But who created the universe" -> Must be a "God"
"But who 'backs' Bitcoin" -> Must be a person, business, physical object (a yellow metal) or gov't entity.

If we had to place a persona behind Bitcoin, we'd probably say that it's "backed" by the people, or the users. A more interesting question would then be "why is it backed by the users?" Reason and Logic, which lead these users to believe that Bitcoin has intrinsic value as a technology.

Both Gold and Bitcoin are backed by the same entity, the free will of the people that choose to use them and the value the people place on them.

Gold is decentralized in the same manner as Bitcoin. If I have a piece of Gold in my possession, that piece of gold is out of the hands of any central system or government and fully in control by myself. Under a Gold currency system, gold is distributed and controlled by the hundreds of millions of people who each possess a piece of gold, not a central government. And it is these hundreds of millions of people who determine the real value of each unit of Gold. Similarly if I own the private keys to some Bitcoins, those Bitcoins are fully controlled by myself and out of the hands of any other entity.

Bitcoin shares more attributes with Gold than I think most people understand, but which will enable Bitcoin to reach some amazing heights. (Provided the network holds and there are no successful attacks)

conspirosphere.tk

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 1064

Bitcoin is antisemitic

Quote from: vokain on October 26, 2013, 04:01:11 PM

Quote from: conspirosphere.tk on October 26, 2013, 03:55:46 PM

An easier and more transparent way would be to launch an alt.coin, even with centralized mining, at a fixed rate with gold, and actually convertible trough ATM-like machines. So to increase the money supply the issuer would have to increase his gold stock and vice versa.
The utility for users could be liquidity, transferibility, etc. compared to phyzz.

so you still have to trust the issuer? how do you remove that element? I suppose there are things present-day ETF issuers can do further to be transparent, but in the end there's still room for breaching trust, no? I don't see how this would be different.

the difference would be that the day the ATM stop working, you know that you're phucked, not like losing 98% of purchasing power in 100 years. Grin

...and the ATM may even exchange in 2-way mode, so making the system almost p2p

ekiro

full member

Activity: 176

Merit: 103

Quote from: cypherdoc on March 13, 2012, 02:36:55 PM

very good sign IMO.

Edit : this thread is an extension of this beast:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.443129

Could people simply be getting rid of gold to buy BTC? It's. Great way to go from a physical asset to a virtual one you can redeem anywhere on the planet

vokain

legendary

Activity: 1834

Merit: 1019

Quote from: conspirosphere.tk on October 26, 2013, 03:55:46 PM

An easier and more transparent way would be to launch an alt.coin, even with centralized mining, at a fixed rate with gold, and actually convertible trough ATM-like machines. So to increase the money supply the issuer would have to increase his gold stock and vice versa.
The utility for users could be liquidity, transferibility, etc. compared to phyzz.

so you still have to trust the issuer? how do you remove that element? I suppose there are things present-day ETF issuers can do further to be transparent, but in the end there's still room for breaching trust, no? I don't see how this would be different.

conspirosphere.tk

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 1064

Bitcoin is antisemitic

Quote from: vokain on October 26, 2013, 03:29:42 PM

Figured I should cross-reference this since it's probably interesting, relevant reading and a source of thought exercises for you guys:

Quote from: Luckybit on October 21, 2013, 03:50:18 AM

[...]

Quote

The most important feature of MasterCoins is the built-in support for users to create their own
currencies out of existing MasterCoins. For the purposes of demonstrating how user currencies will
work, we will use an example currency called “GoldCoins”, which are intended to track the value of one
ounce of gold, and which may be stored, transferred, bought, and sold similarly to MasterCoins.
Stability Concept [...]

An easier and more transparent way would be to launch an alt.coin, even with centralized mining, at a fixed rate with gold, and actually convertible trough ATM-like machines. So to increase the money supply the issuer would have to increase his gold stock and vice versa.
The utility for users could be liquidity, transferibility, etc. compared to phyzz.

vokain

legendary

Activity: 1834

Merit: 1019

Quote from: conspirosphere.tk on October 26, 2013, 03:18:10 PM

Quote from: molecular on October 26, 2013, 03:09:27 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 26, 2013, 02:46:34 PM

Bear in mind that in a better freer future with less financial facism or simply some locales, a system of provably gold-backed cryptocurrency, if it was ever allowed to flourish under rule of law, would probably give bitcoin a stiff run for its money, pun intended, dyodd, diversify, imho.

How would that even work? How to prove there's gold backing it? I don't see how to do this, at least not without "3rd party risk".

it may work being convertible in pm at a fixed rate as fiat money used to be once upon a time.
it just takes an alt.coin easily convertible in pm. Anyone can do it. But yes, it would require trust in a third party for the "backing"/conversion-thing.
and now trust is rightly becoming a rare commodity.

Figured I should cross-reference this since it's probably interesting, relevant reading and a source of thought exercises for you guys:

Quote from: Luckybit on October 21, 2013, 03:50:18 AM

[...]

Quote

The most important feature of MasterCoins is the built-in support for users to create their own
currencies out of existing MasterCoins. For the purposes of demonstrating how user currencies will
work, we will use an example currency called “GoldCoins”, which are intended to track the value of one
ounce of gold, and which may be stored, transferred, bought, and sold similarly to MasterCoins.
Stability Concept
So how do we drive the value of these GoldCoins to their target value, when demand for them may
surge and decline? The price of GoldCoins is decided by the balance of supply and demand. Since we
can’t control the demand for GoldCoins, we must control the supply. The key to accomplishing this is to
use an escrow fund which holds MasterCoins

The escrow fund operates like a battery on the power grid, charging when there is excess energy then
discharging where there isn't enough. When there are too few GoldCoins (GoldCoin price is too high),
the escrow fund releases new GoldCoins, and the escrow-battery “charges” by holding MasterCoins in
escrow. When there are too many GoldCoins (GoldCoin price is too low), the escrow fund purchases
some of the excess GoldCoins, thereby “discharging” the escrow-battery as it releases the stored
MasterCoins.

Can you tell me how you could create an escrow with a coin which isn't backed by anything of value? Mastercoins are backed by Bitcoins but not only by Bitcoins. The value of the Mastercoins allow you to create an escrow and to my understanding the whole system works around that, I don't even know if you can do it if it were free. [this particular excerpt is in reference to a question as to why coloredcoin can't do this just as well]

[...]

conspirosphere.tk

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 1064

Bitcoin is antisemitic

Quote from: molecular on October 26, 2013, 03:09:27 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 26, 2013, 02:46:34 PM

Bear in mind that in a better freer future with less financial facism or simply some locales, a system of provably gold-backed cryptocurrency, if it was ever allowed to flourish under rule of law, would probably give bitcoin a stiff run for its money, pun intended, dyodd, diversify, imho.

How would that even work? How to prove there's gold backing it? I don't see how to do this, at least not without "3rd party risk".

it may work being convertible in pm at a fixed rate as fiat money used to be once upon a time.
it just takes an alt.coin easily convertible in pm. Anyone can do it. But yes, it would require trust in a third party for the "backing"/conversion-thing.
and now trust is rightly becoming a rare commodity.

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote from: molecular on October 26, 2013, 03:09:27 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 26, 2013, 02:46:34 PM

Bear in mind that in a better freer future with less financial facism or simply some locales, a system of provably gold-backed cryptocurrency, if it was ever allowed to flourish under rule of law, would probably give bitcoin a stiff run for its money, pun intended, dyodd, diversify, imho.

How would that even work? How to prove there's gold backing it? I don't see how to do this, at least not without "3rd party risk".

Yes, it would most likely be some kind of legal proof, which is quite adequate for most people, ask DPR.

Unless there was some kind of crypto-secured automation system at a storage facility that could bail in/out PM, audit, etc ... like an unhackable skynet for gold.

conspirosphere.tk

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 1064

Bitcoin is antisemitic

Quote from: wachtwoord on October 26, 2013, 02:57:11 PM

Indeed. A gold backed cryptocurrency is a worse money than both gold and a cryptocurrency by themselves. This will be attempted (because people for some reason like backing, not understanding that good money doesn't need backing of any kind) but will fail. Good money beats bad money just as rock crushes scissors.

indeed. but real Austrians know that value is subjective. Even gold's
my bet is that both crypto and pm keep winning against funny fiat paper.
now i'm quite all-in in btc, and buying gold-that-i-can-hold with spare fiat.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 26, 2013, 02:46:34 PM

Bear in mind that in a better freer future with less financial facism or simply some locales, a system of provably gold-backed cryptocurrency, if it was ever allowed to flourish under rule of law, would probably give bitcoin a stiff run for its money, pun intended, dyodd, diversify, imho.

How would that even work? How to prove there's gold backing it? I don't see how to do this, at least not without "3rd party risk".

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote from: justusranvier on October 26, 2013, 02:52:55 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 26, 2013, 02:46:34 PM

Bear in mind that in a better freer future with less financial facism or simply some locales, a system of provably gold-backed cryptocurrency, if it was ever allowed to flourish under rule of law, would probably give bitcoin a stiff run for its money, pun intended, dyodd, diversify, imho.

Why?

A gold backed cryptocurrency would need to do everything Bitcoin does in order to be an effective medium of exchange, and it would also have the added expense of gathering, storing, transporting, securing, and auditing blocks of yellow metal.

What benefit does the yellow metal provide that makes it worth all the added expense and effort?

The great masses of people do not understand how a pure crypto-currency is valuable, maybe never will. They do understand gold, it is much less of a jump to understand gold-backed numbers on their screens. The added expense is a cost but so is bitcoin mining, cold storage, etc the total cost comparison of either system, when optimised, would be nearly impossible to do without having them compete in a free market together. Trust-based systems can be very efficient, think Hawala Wink

Bitcoin value may mostly be symptom of a particularly oppressive time (like cigarette money), an outbreak of freedom and enlightement in financial dealings is a risk that shouldn't be discounted, however slim it seems right now.

SheHadMANHands

legendary

Activity: 1168

Merit: 1000

Quote from: wachtwoord on October 26, 2013, 02:57:11 PM

Quote from: justusranvier on October 26, 2013, 02:52:55 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 26, 2013, 02:46:34 PM

Bear in mind that in a better freer future with less financial facism or simply some locales, a system of provably gold-backed cryptocurrency, if it was ever allowed to flourish under rule of law, would probably give bitcoin a stiff run for its money, pun intended, dyodd, diversify, imho.

Why?

A gold backed cryptocurrency would need to do everything Bitcoin does in order to be an effective medium of exchange, and it would also have the added expense of gathering, storing, transporting, securing, and auditing blocks of yellow metal.

What benefit does the yellow metal provide that makes it worth all the added expense and effort?

Indeed. A gold backed cryptocurrency is a worse money than both gold and a cryptocurrency by themselves. This will be attempted (because people for some reason like backing, not understanding that good money doesn't need backing of any kind) but will fail. Good money beats bad money just as rock crushes scissors.

The idea of "backing" blows people's minds. People feel compelled to locate a persona behind anything and everything. It's human nature.

"But who created the universe" -> Must be a "God"
"But who 'backs' Bitcoin" -> Must be a person, business, physical object (a yellow metal) or gov't entity.

If we had to place a persona behind Bitcoin, we'd probably say that it's "backed" by the people, or the users. A more interesting question would then be "why is it backed by the users?" Reason and Logic, which lead these users to believe that Bitcoin has intrinsic value as a technology.

wachtwoord

legendary

Activity: 2324

Merit: 1125

Quote from: justusranvier on October 26, 2013, 02:52:55 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 26, 2013, 02:46:34 PM

Bear in mind that in a better freer future with less financial facism or simply some locales, a system of provably gold-backed cryptocurrency, if it was ever allowed to flourish under rule of law, would probably give bitcoin a stiff run for its money, pun intended, dyodd, diversify, imho.

Why?

A gold backed cryptocurrency would need to do everything Bitcoin does in order to be an effective medium of exchange, and it would also have the added expense of gathering, storing, transporting, securing, and auditing blocks of yellow metal.

What benefit does the yellow metal provide that makes it worth all the added expense and effort?

Indeed. A gold backed cryptocurrency is a worse money than both gold and a cryptocurrency by themselves. This will be attempted (because people for some reason like backing, not understanding that good money doesn't need backing of any kind) but will fail. Good money beats bad money just as rock crushes scissors.

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 1253. (Read 2032272 times)