Author

Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 435. (Read 2032286 times)

sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
April 04, 2015, 09:21:30 AM
i made a point some time ago that if Bitcoin were to become a global reserve currency, much like gold, due to maintaining the 1MB block size, all Bitcoin 2.0 projects trying to ride the MC would be eliminated due to high tx costs.  in that case, the blockchain would only be applicable to Bitcoin as Money:

https://twitter.com/bramcohen/status/557287567121346560
There is no such thing as intrinsic value.

All value is subjective , as beheld in the mind of the observer.

All value is subjegated collectively through the market which reaches a consensus price.

If you do not beleive me ask a monkey what has more value - a warehouse full of gold bullion or a single bannana.

There is a thing called intrinsic value. It means that the thing has value in itself. The intrinsic value is subjective, as you stated. Most things have intrinsic value. It is only money that have value that is not intrinsic, money has exchange value. So for instance fiat money have no intrinsic value, the only value is speculation that others will exchange something for it in the future, near or far.

From this we can draw the conclusion that paper money, and bitcoin has only speculative value, gold and houses have partlty intrinsic value, partly speculative value, and most other things have only intrinsic value.

Please don't spread confusion, these concepts are really easy to understand if not clouded.

Not as simple as that.
"Intrinsic" has several usages/definitions.  There's a relatively rigid definition for "intrinsic" as used in the context of philosophy--
"An intrinsic property is a property that an object or a thing has of itself, independently of other things, including its context. An extrinsic (or relational) property is a property that depends on a thing's relationship with other things."--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrinsic_and_extrinsic_properties_(philosophy)

In other words, your claim that "intrinsic value is subjective" is nonsensical.  It breaks the definition.

"Intrinsic value is an ethical and philosophic property. It is the ethical or philosophic value that an object has "in itself" or "for its own sake", as an intrinsic property. An object with intrinsic value may be regarded as an end or (in Kantian terminology) end-in-itself."--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrinsic_value_(ethics)

This is another piece of phil. jargon, differentiating "intrinsic value" from from "instrumental value." An example of "intrinsic value would be something like "Truth is good, art is good, murder is bad"--things that are good in themselves, not as a means of getting at something else.  These are held as axiomatic & not requiring further proof, so there's that.

Here's an example of "Instrumental value": "A shovel has instrumental value--it is useful for getting gold, which, in turn is also instrumentally valuable for obtaining the thing I ultimately want--bliss."

Again, intrinsic value, by definition, can not be subjective here either.  It could be [convincingly] argued that there's no such thing as "intrinsic value," but subjective it ain't.

Finally, there's an iffy definition of "intrinsic" as used in finance:
"In finance, intrinsic value refers to the value of a company, stock, currency or product determined through fundamental analysis without reference to its market value.[1] It is also frequently called fundamental value. It is ordinarily calculated by summing the discounted future income generated by the asset to obtain the present value. It is worthy to note that this term may have different meanings for different assets."--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrinsic_value_(finance)

Feel free to rassle with that one Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
April 04, 2015, 08:27:28 AM
i made a point some time ago that if Bitcoin were to become a global reserve currency, much like gold, due to maintaining the 1MB block size, all Bitcoin 2.0 projects trying to ride the MC would be eliminated due to high tx costs.  in that case, the blockchain would only be applicable to Bitcoin as Money:

https://twitter.com/bramcohen/status/557287567121346560
There is no such thing as intrinsic value.

All value is subjective , as beheld in the mind of the observer.

All value is subjegated collectively through the market which reaches a consensus price.

If you do not beleive me ask a monkey what has more value - a warehouse full of gold bullion or a single bannana.

There is a thing called intrinsic value. It means that the thing has value in itself. The intrinsic value is subjective, as you stated. Most things have intrinsic value. It is only money that have value that is not intrinsic, money has exchange value. So for instance fiat money have no intrinsic value, the only value is speculation that others will exchange something for it in the future, near or far.

From this we can draw the conclusion that paper money, and bitcoin has only speculative value, gold and houses have partlty intrinsic value, partly speculative value, and most other things have only intrinsic value.

Please don't spread confusion, these concepts are really easy to understand if not clouded.

legendary
Activity: 2002
Merit: 1040
April 04, 2015, 08:16:35 AM

Terminology doesn't matter.
e.g. UBS to Open Blockchain Research Lab in London

Troy = the fiat-debt-money bankster citadel
Wooden Horse = the blockchain
[inside] = have a bit of a guess... :-)



Love this - "The blockchain is the public and decentralized online ledger which verifies transactions in digital currencies such as bitcoin. It is an indelible record, whose authenticity is verified by a network of computer users rather than a centralized authority."

"Such as bitcoin" lol

I can see it now. All these research units coming out from behind closed doors after 6 months to say: "Well, it turns out the blockchain IS bitcoin! Buy Buy Buy!

legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1006
100 satoshis -> ISO code
April 04, 2015, 03:50:22 AM

Terminology doesn't matter.
e.g. UBS to Open Blockchain Research Lab in London

Troy = the fiat-debt-money bankster citadel
Wooden Horse = the blockchain
[inside] = have a bit of a guess... :-)

Q7
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
April 04, 2015, 01:46:52 AM
i made a point some time ago that if Bitcoin were to become a global reserve currency, much like gold, due to maintaining the 1MB block size, all Bitcoin 2.0 projects trying to ride the MC would be eliminated due to high tx costs.  in that case, the blockchain would only be applicable to Bitcoin as Money:

https://twitter.com/bramcohen/status/557287567121346560
There is no such thing as intrinsic value.

All value is subjective , as beheld in the mind of the observer.

All value is subjegated collectively through the market which reaches a consensus price.

If you do not beleive me ask a monkey what has more value - a warehouse full of gold bullion or a single bannana.

 Grin Everything right on the part that relates to definition of value, except a bit of doubt there on the monkey analogy. If only I could ask the monkey that question, perhaps if he could understand me or maybe if they monkey can think rational, he would rather have the whole warehouse of gold bullion and use that to buy acres of banana farm
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
April 03, 2015, 07:23:26 PM
i made a point some time ago that if Bitcoin were to become a global reserve currency, much like gold, due to maintaining the 1MB block size, all Bitcoin 2.0 projects trying to ride the MC would be eliminated due to high tx costs.  in that case, the blockchain would only be applicable to Bitcoin as Money:

https://twitter.com/bramcohen/status/557287567121346560
There is no such thing as intrinsic value.

All value is subjective , as beheld in the mind of the observer.

All value is subjegated collectively through the market which reaches a consensus price.

If you do not beleive me ask a monkey what has more value - a warehouse full of gold bullion or a single bannana.

Does your monkey like shiny objects? Wears gold chains perhaps?
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1028
April 03, 2015, 07:17:22 PM
i made a point some time ago that if Bitcoin were to become a global reserve currency, much like gold, due to maintaining the 1MB block size, all Bitcoin 2.0 projects trying to ride the MC would be eliminated due to high tx costs.  in that case, the blockchain would only be applicable to Bitcoin as Money:

https://twitter.com/bramcohen/status/557287567121346560
There is no such thing as intrinsic value.

All value is subjective , as beheld in the mind of the observer.

All value is subjegated collectively through the market which reaches a consensus price.

If you do not beleive me ask a monkey what has more value - a warehouse full of gold bullion or a single bannana.
legendary
Activity: 1153
Merit: 1000
April 03, 2015, 05:57:39 PM

[...]

To me a blockchain is just that, a chain of crytographically connected blocks. A blockchain can be imagined to have any security mechanism.

Bitcoin's security mechanism is an SHA256 based lottery system, this makes the security mechanism to be a distributed system where any miner can participate and add their hash power.

Google or the FED could create a blockchain with a single signer security mechanism. For example Larry, Sergey or Yellen could have the only key to sign and validate a chain of blocks. They would then issue new blocks every x minutes, creating a chain. Anyone and everyone could transact on that blockchain in the exact same manner as Bitcoin. The only difference is there would be a centralized server to communicate with (not a P2P network) and you'd have to trust Larry, Sergey or Yellen (not distributed hash power).

To me a blockchain is just a chain of crytographically connected blocks, of which there are many options.

Bitcoin's blockchain adds to that by implementing a distributed security mechanism on top of the blockchain. At least that is my terminology.

That may be your terminology, but in that case we are not talking about a technological breakthrough, just about a simple data structure with pointers.

The blockchain (assuming my terminology above) was not a technological breakthrough by any means. You are right, the blockchain is just a simple tree based data structure and there is nothing special about that, at least to anyone with a CS background.

What is special about Bitcoin is the distributed security mechanism. Creating a SHA256 based lottery that rewards a scarce token in order to facilitate a distributed P2P security mechanism, was a wholly unique idea. Satoshi was the first to create that, and since Bitcoin was the first implementation it is Bitcoin that will win (if any do). It was the distributed security mechanism that Satoshi invented in creating Bitcoin.
full member
Activity: 660
Merit: 101
Colletrix - Bridging the Physical and Virtual Worl
April 03, 2015, 05:40:48 PM

[...]

To me a blockchain is just that, a chain of crytographically connected blocks. A blockchain can be imagined to have any security mechanism.

Bitcoin's security mechanism is an SHA256 based lottery system, this makes the security mechanism to be a distributed system where any miner can participate and add their hash power.

Google or the FED could create a blockchain with a single signer security mechanism. For example Larry, Sergey or Yellen could have the only key to sign and validate a chain of blocks. They would then issue new blocks every x minutes, creating a chain. Anyone and everyone could transact on that blockchain in the exact same manner as Bitcoin. The only difference is there would be a centralized server to communicate with (not a P2P network) and you'd have to trust Larry, Sergey or Yellen (not distributed hash power).

To me a blockchain is just a chain of crytographically connected blocks, of which there are many options.

Bitcoin's blockchain adds to that by implementing a distributed security mechanism on top of the blockchain. At least that is my terminology.

That may be your terminology, but in that case we are not talking about a technological breakthrough, just about a simple data structure with pointers.
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1019
April 03, 2015, 05:18:58 PM
Any suggested places to withdraw to?
Withdrawing is more a state of mind than an aspect of geography.

Bingo.

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."

Why should I stay somewhere where I can summarily be rounded up for suddenly breaking some new unconstitutional law passed (see Snowden donations)? What if that place is imminently changing expatriation laws to make it near impossible to shed citizenship? Then withdrawing would be throwing away what our founders built akin to the Niemoller "First they came..." lesson, and the only moral thing to do staying is being some sort of beacon for liberty.

“If success or failure of this planet and of human beings depended on how I am and what I do... HOW WOULD I BE? WHAT WOULD I DO?”
legendary
Activity: 1153
Merit: 1000
April 03, 2015, 04:57:53 PM
Any suggested places to withdraw to?
Withdrawing is more a state of mind than an aspect of geography.

Bingo.
legendary
Activity: 3794
Merit: 5474
April 03, 2015, 04:20:25 PM
Any suggested places to withdraw to?

Betty Ford
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
April 03, 2015, 03:59:47 PM
Any suggested places to withdraw to?
Withdrawing is more a state of mind than an aspect of geography.
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1019
April 03, 2015, 02:52:53 PM
Any suggested places to withdraw to?
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
April 03, 2015, 02:04:31 PM
Just to add another point to the above list:

Court accepts DOJ's 'state secrets' claim to protect shadowy neocons: A new low.

Quote from: Glenn Greenwald
But then something quite extraordinary happened: In September of last year, the U.S. government, which was not a party, formally intervened in the lawsuit, and demanded that the court refuse to hear Restis’s claims and instead dismiss the lawsuit against UANI before it could even start, on the ground that allowing the case to proceed would damage national security.

i didn't think it was possible but this makes the situation even worse.

And the MSM and every lefty I know is just silent because "their" guy is in office. What this means is the US has fully descended into tribalism, where no one focuses on objective facts and logic as they exist or on first principles, but instead only focus on if their "clan" is wianning.

The R team is just as bad, but at least when they are in office everyone is suddenly against government overreach, whereas otherwise they'd be for it.

It seems that there's really no limit to the bad

http://www.jmwagner.com/

Nothing new under the laws prospective, but this story just seems to summarize all the abnormal aspects mentioned above. This is a really sad story.

Wow, and this is all for just trading Bitcoins outside of the Coinbase or other "clean" KYC abiding services.

It seems a lot of people here disagree with me that the government has any tools to control bitcoin and that forcing everyone to use green address provided by the IRS is an impossibility. Just imagine if this type of government raid/arrest/life destroying case is done against anyone and everyone who is even suspected of having a non-green addresses or of using Bitcoin before the IRS implemented their system (all of us). I'm pretty sure they would be able to convince most people to go along.

Quote
Whenever I call Burt and he doesn’t answer right away, she is afraid her daddy has been arrested again.  She is scared of law enforcement and gets nervous when she sees police cars.  She won’t say the Pledge of Allegiance at school.  We had to put her into counseling.  She had to see a counselor every other week until recently (Feb 2015).  Sometimes she will suddenly cry uncontrollably for no reason.  She is afraid the feds will come back and raid our house again.

She should be afraid of the government. That is why our founders gave us the bill of rights and other protections. The baby boomers may have thrown that all away, but maybe after being kicked enough times the following generations will re-learn their lessons and take back what was lost.
I don't expect any "taking back" to happen in the US.

The cost/benefit doesn't add up.

Those with any sense will simply withdraw and let the Boomers stew in the consequence of their own choices.
legendary
Activity: 1153
Merit: 1000
April 03, 2015, 12:42:40 PM
It is perfectly possible to have a Google blockchain or a FED blockchain

This would be a distributed database.  IMO we need to get the terminology correct.  A blockchain, by definition, is decentralized where validating nodes are controlled by different parties.  Any system where validating nodes are controlled by one party is a distributed database or something else entirely, but not a blockchain.  If someone referred to a horse and carriage as an automobile, they would be wrong.

To me a blockchain is just that, a chain of crytographically connected blocks. A blockchain can be imagined to have any security mechanism.

Bitcoin's security mechanism is an SHA256 based lottery system, this makes the security mechanism to be a distributed system where any miner can participate and add their hash power.

Google or the FED could create a blockchain with a single signer security mechanism. For example Larry, Sergey or Yellen could have the only key to sign and validate a chain of blocks. They would then issue new blocks every x minutes, creating a chain. Anyone and everyone could transact on that blockchain in the exact same manner as Bitcoin. The only difference is there would be a centralized server to communicate with (not a P2P network) and you'd have to trust Larry, Sergey or Yellen (not distributed hash power).

To me a blockchain is just a chain of crytographically connected blocks, of which there are many options.

Bitcoin's blockchain adds to that by implementing a distributed security mechanism on top of the blockchain. At least that is my terminology.
legendary
Activity: 1153
Merit: 1000
April 03, 2015, 12:30:16 PM
Just to add another point to the above list:

Court accepts DOJ's 'state secrets' claim to protect shadowy neocons: A new low.

Quote from: Glenn Greenwald
But then something quite extraordinary happened: In September of last year, the U.S. government, which was not a party, formally intervened in the lawsuit, and demanded that the court refuse to hear Restis’s claims and instead dismiss the lawsuit against UANI before it could even start, on the ground that allowing the case to proceed would damage national security.

i didn't think it was possible but this makes the situation even worse.

And the MSM and every lefty I know is just silent because "their" guy is in office. What this means is the US has fully descended into tribalism, where no one focuses on objective facts and logic as they exist or on first principles, but instead only focus on if their "clan" is wianning.

The R team is just as bad, but at least when they are in office everyone is suddenly against government overreach, whereas otherwise they'd be for it.

It seems that there's really no limit to the bad

http://www.jmwagner.com/

Nothing new under the laws prospective, but this story just seems to summarize all the abnormal aspects mentioned above. This is a really sad story.

Wow, and this is all for just trading Bitcoins outside of the Coinbase or other "clean" KYC abiding services.

It seems a lot of people here disagree with me that the government has any tools to control bitcoin and that forcing everyone to use green address provided by the IRS is an impossibility. Just imagine if this type of government raid/arrest/life destroying case is done against anyone and everyone who is even suspected of having a non-green addresses or of using Bitcoin before the IRS implemented their system (all of us). I'm pretty sure they would be able to convince most people to go along.

Quote
Whenever I call Burt and he doesn’t answer right away, she is afraid her daddy has been arrested again.  She is scared of law enforcement and gets nervous when she sees police cars.  She won’t say the Pledge of Allegiance at school.  We had to put her into counseling.  She had to see a counselor every other week until recently (Feb 2015).  Sometimes she will suddenly cry uncontrollably for no reason.  She is afraid the feds will come back and raid our house again.

She should be afraid of the government. That is why our founders gave us the bill of rights and other protections. The baby boomers may have thrown that all away, but maybe after being kicked enough times the following generations will re-learn their lessons and take back what was lost.
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
April 03, 2015, 10:51:05 AM
Just to add another point to the above list:

Court accepts DOJ's 'state secrets' claim to protect shadowy neocons: A new low.

Quote from: Glenn Greenwald
But then something quite extraordinary happened: In September of last year, the U.S. government, which was not a party, formally intervened in the lawsuit, and demanded that the court refuse to hear Restis’s claims and instead dismiss the lawsuit against UANI before it could even start, on the ground that allowing the case to proceed would damage national security.

i didn't think it was possible but this makes the situation even worse.

And the MSM and every lefty I know is just silent because "their" guy is in office. What this means is the US has fully descended into tribalism, where no one focuses on objective facts and logic as they exist or on first principles, but instead only focus on if their "clan" is wianning.

The R team is just as bad, but at least when they are in office everyone is suddenly against government overreach, whereas otherwise they'd be for it.

It seems that there's really no limit to the bad

http://www.jmwagner.com/

Nothing new under the laws prospective, but this story just seems to summarize all the abnormal aspects mentioned above. This is a really sad story.

hero member
Activity: 622
Merit: 500
April 03, 2015, 09:48:10 AM
It is perfectly possible to have a Google blockchain or a FED blockchain

This would be a distributed database.  IMO we need to get the terminology correct.  A blockchain, by definition, is decentralized where validating nodes are controlled by different parties.  Any system where validating nodes are controlled by one party is a distributed database or something else entirely, but not a blockchain.  If someone referred to a horse and carriage as an automobile, they would be wrong.
Jump to: