giving an address over the phone is almost impossible.
If I knew I had to tell someone an address over the phone, I'd first hit up btc.to or pay.btc with some easy to remember (and vocalize) link.
Topic: I have seen the light - page 3. (Read 8503 times)
If I knew I had to tell someone an address over the phone, I'd first hit up btc.to or pay.btc with some easy to remember (and vocalize) link.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye
Bitcoin is backed by:
Distributed trust
Ease of transactions
Hardcoded rarity
Distributed trust
Ease of transactions
Hardcoded rarity
Trust is fickle, and as the Pirate fiasco (and all the people who had lent money to him) showed, trust can fail and ripple through the whole economy.
Bitcoins are easy if the sender and receiver already have set up bitcoin accounts and you have a way to copy-paste the address. Trying to get one of the parties set up is difficult and giving an address over the phone is almost impossible.
The base money supply of bitcoins is hardcoded to a certain level, but credit monies can be built on top of it, like by using ripple to exchange BTC.
Bitcoins are not so much backed by trust, they are backed by other people wanting them. As long as other people want money (I assume this will always be the case) you will be able to sell your bitcoins.
My whole point of this thread is that as time goes on the probability that any two people will both already have a bitcoin account, and know of a way to fund it if it is empty, that probability rises over time, until having somebody suggest paying with bitcoins will be as inauspiscious as using cash is today.
You can use systems like Ripple to extend the bitcoin monetary base, but it will never be completely disconnected from the hard limit built into the bitcoin code.
The bible says that money is the root of all evil.
Quote that? I believe it actually says the love of money is the root of all evil.
New International Version (©2011)
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.
II have seen this misquoted so many times. The LOVE of money is the root of ALL KINDS of evil, not all evil.
Money is not evil in itself but I think everyone could agree that loving it can lead to some serious problems for sure.
Loving money is silly. Loving power is another thing and money is certainly a convenient way to acquire many kinds of power.
That is why I think that the Love of money is so dangerous. The reason people love money is because they want power and control or to feed their own prideful ego.
Some people, on the other hand, realize that money is simply a tool that can be used for good. Those who choose to use it for good are the true philanthropists and thanks to them we have more hospitals, organizations that feed the poor, and various other non-profit organizations that do great things in this world.
I hope that if by chance BTC increases substantially and the very small amount I hold does end up having great value that I can withstand the temptation to become a rich and prideful person and instead use the gift I have received to make the world a better place.
Bitcoin is backed by:
Distributed trust
Ease of transactions
Hardcoded rarity
Distributed trust
Ease of transactions
Hardcoded rarity
Trust is fickle, and as the Pirate fiasco (and all the people who had lent money to him) showed, trust can fail and ripple through the whole economy.
Bitcoins are easy if the sender and receiver already have set up bitcoin accounts and you have a way to copy-paste the address. Trying to get one of the parties set up is difficult and giving an address over the phone is almost impossible.
The base money supply of bitcoins is hardcoded to a certain level, but credit monies can be built on top of it, like by using ripple to exchange BTC.
Quote
The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes.
Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. David Dunning and Justin Kruger of Cornell University conclude, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others".
Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. David Dunning and Justin Kruger of Cornell University conclude, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others".
So we had one person who wasn't aware of the basic principles relating to the argument (the "incompetent"), and one person who was. (The "competent.") The "competent" grew irritated that the incompetent did not possess the equivalent understanding. ("Error about others.") The "incompetent" at first was unaware of this issue ("Error about the self.")
Although, we have to start with the assumption that in any given argument, there is an objectively 'competent' set of knowledge. So someone with a different opinion on the criterion for competence could place the actors in reverse roles - i.e. the person demanding that their opponent understand the basic principles (as explained by voorhees) could be placed in the role of the incompetent with illusory superiority. It all depends on whether or not you're a socialist weenie, I guess.
I really like this, Like what I always say, "You can be sure you are mistaken when you think you are absolutely right"
Money is not evil in itself but I think everyone could agree that loving it can lead to some serious problems for sure.
Loving money is not evil in itself, but I think everyone could agree that pretenting that you don't love money can lead to some serious problems for sure - to let those bankers who loves money rule the world
Quote
The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes.
Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. David Dunning and Justin Kruger of Cornell University conclude, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others".
Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. David Dunning and Justin Kruger of Cornell University conclude, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others".
So we had one person who wasn't aware of the basic principles relating to the argument (the "incompetent"), and one person who was. (The "competent.") The "competent" grew irritated that the incompetent did not possess the equivalent understanding. ("Error about others.") The "incompetent" at first was unaware of this issue ("Error about the self.")
Although, we have to start with the assumption that in any given argument, there is an objectively 'competent' set of knowledge. So someone with a different opinion on the criterion for competence could place the actors in reverse roles - i.e. the person demanding that their opponent understand the basic principles (as explained by voorhees) could be placed in the role of the incompetent with illusory superiority. It all depends on whether or not you're a socialist weenie, I guess.
The bible says that money is the root of all evil.
Quote that? I believe it actually says the love of money is the root of all evil.
New International Version (©2011)
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.
II have seen this misquoted so many times. The LOVE of money is the root of ALL KINDS of evil, not all evil.
Money is not evil in itself but I think everyone could agree that loving it can lead to some serious problems for sure.
Loving money is silly. Loving power is another thing and money is certainly a convenient way to acquire many kinds of power.
Being rare and useful gives something value.
That's a given, though how much? And how much of that value is convention & faith?
That depends on the usefulness and the rarity.
That is however not the question here. The above clearly shows 'backing' is unnecessary. Bitcoin backs itself.
Are you saying Bitcoin's value is due to its rarity & usefulness? In that case, i'll release Bitcoin V2.0 -- identical to Bitcoin in every respect, but with just half the coins.
Backed by funds invested in mining rig and payment for the electric. As ASIC mining rigs are only build for BTC mining, those devices have not residual value, so I assume here that people pay cash for those devices are equal to cash flow into BTC world, look today more and more people joint to mining business, because the attraction of profitability. Therefore more and more cash are indirectly investing into BTC...if we assume that miner are rational they will only sells their BTC for profit...then ,the value of BTC will be secure by their rationality.
The bible says that money is the root of all evil.
Quote that? I believe it actually says the love of money is the root of all evil.
New International Version (©2011)
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.
II have seen this misquoted so many times. The LOVE of money is the root of ALL KINDS of evil, not all evil.
Money is not evil in itself but I think everyone could agree that loving it can lead to some serious problems for sure.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye
The bible says that money is the root of all evil.
Quote that? I believe it actually says the love of money is the root of all evil.
The bible says that money is the root of all evil.
It also says that it's OK to own slaves.
You have a decent argument, no need to quote the big book of bullshit.
The bible says that money is the root of all evil.
It also says that the earth is 6000 years old.
Okay, I was just thinking about bitcoins and how amazing they are. Then I realized that it is inevitable for the price of bitcoins to go up over time, because as each person decides they will accept bitcoins the overall network effect increases. As the population of the world is increasing, so too must the price of bitcoins. I look forward to the amazing world we will build together using this wonderful technology.
I highly doubt very much, that there is an 'amazing world we will build together' using bitcoins.
Bitcoins are just another way of using money is all. If bitcoins ever level off more, then they will become just as boring as any of the currencies. Perhaps the hope of huge percentage increases, if a person bought lower, might be what you mean?
But if so, then why don't you consider buying into some of the so-called 'alt-coins', and those coins are much less expensive than bitcoins, with perhaps much larger percentage increases for some of them coming in the future.
The problems surrounding money in the past will continue with bitcoins as with other forms of money.
The bible says that money is the root of all evil.
Okay, I was just thinking about bitcoins and how amazing they are. Then I realized that it is inevitable for the price of bitcoins to go up over time, because as each person decides they will accept bitcoins the overall network effect increases. As the population of the world is increasing, so too must the price of bitcoins. I look forward to the amazing world we will build together using this wonderful technology.
Welcome to the club!
I just wish people would listen, because if they would, what I am saying would be true.
Regarding 2: The FED can only "print" money by asking the treasury to issue debt. This actually increases demand for USD more than it increases supply due to interest, and while it is short term inflationary, it is long term and overall deflationary.
Yes, they have to exponentially increase the amount of money supply to pay back the interest for their bond issued earlier, and all those added money supply are backed by a even larger new debt. This means that economy must grow exponentially to keep up with the money supply increase, and the debt just get bigger and bigger
People have already overdrawn their income for the next decade due to housing, they must start another round of consumption (which should be much larger than housing) to keep the current system alive
No. The number of people who know what Bitcoin is is insignificant. The number of people who would take 1BTC over $100, given a choice, isn't even worth talking about. As far as trustworthy medium? Certainly not in practice, and certainly not now.
If it is significant, then you probably need to add several 0 after the current exchange price
The problems people are having with debt today will neither be helped or hurt by Bitcoin, so ... irrelevant.
Debt based money issuering require exponential growth in consumption, which is not sustainable. With bitcoin, people can select a constant growth or flexible growth
[...pretty much agree...]
The value of a currency is decided by a consensus, so if people have reached a consensus that one satoshi worth one dollar, then it just worth that much. How to reach that consensus? Not through market force, but through study and thinking
...
The value of a currency is decided by a consensus, so if people have reached a consensus that one satoshi worth one dollar, then it just worth that much. How to reach that consensus? Not through market force, but through study and thinking
...
No one teach the knowledge about money in school, no books tell either, most of the people have zero knowledge about money and how it works
Some common misconceptions:
1. Saving now is for spending in future
The truth: One could save a billion but still do not spend them even when he die, it never hurt to have more savings, as long as his living standard is enough high
2. More money supply will cause inflation
Truth: FED printed 400% more money but there are no inflation, since the value of USD is a consensus, not affected by supply and demand (at least in +-1 magnitude of supply)
3. Money is not wealth
Truth: Money is wealth, if you can exchange money for any wealth, then it is the ultimate form of wealth
Because the demand for saving is endless and bitcoin is the most credible form of wealth with limited supply, in principle its exchange price will rise forever to hold forever increasing saving
This is just one of many possibilities
Regarding 2: The FED can only "print" money by asking the treasury to issue debt. This actually increases demand for USD more than it increases supply due to interest, and while it is short term inflationary, it is long term and overall deflationary.
Okay, this conversation has indeed happened many times so I'm going to provide you with some reading material instead because Erik Voorhees has worded it all quite nicely.
Firstly, Bitcoin - The Libertarian Introduction (April 11th, 2012): http://evoorhees.blogspot.nl/2012/04/bitcoin-libertarian-introduction.html
Secondly, Bitcoin 2013 – The Role of Bitcoin as Money (May 23rd, 2013): http://evoorhees.blogspot.nl/2013/05/bitcoin-2013-role-of-bitcoin-as-money.html
Please continue the discussion after reading both of those
Firstly, Bitcoin - The Libertarian Introduction (April 11th, 2012): http://evoorhees.blogspot.nl/2012/04/bitcoin-libertarian-introduction.html
Secondly, Bitcoin 2013 – The Role of Bitcoin as Money (May 23rd, 2013): http://evoorhees.blogspot.nl/2013/05/bitcoin-2013-role-of-bitcoin-as-money.html
Please continue the discussion after reading both of those
Listen, how about we cut to the chase: I'll paste a couple of links to counter your couple of links, and then our links can take the conversation from there, deal?
Listen, these aren't merely links, these are two high quality easy to understand essays on the matter. Re-discussing this would require a very long topic and likely not get the point across judging by your posts.
If you are too lazy to read those articles, I'm too lazy to explain this further to you as I don't think you deserve to have the opportunity to benefit from this knowledge.
See you in a few years.
Erik Voorhees has made himself an icon in the Bitcoin community and he is a fantastic wordsmith -- I'll read those papers today for sure. May have already
That wouldn't be so ironic if it wasn't for the Dunning Kruger Effect.
Word.
There are also culture and history factors in the acceptance of one medium as a currency. Platinum never replaced gold as a medium of exchange, although it has more superier properties than gold
Neither one of us is arguing that gold was chosen because of its qualities. Consensus, remember? Same goes for Bitcoin & CopyCoin. Except neither Bitcoin nor CopyCoin have "culture & history" to fall back on, but ... irrelevant.
Check this:
The information is now double every 2-3 years to expand human's whole knowledge base, so does the speed of generating a history. It took bitcoin 4 years to reach today's status, that is almost equal to gold's thousand years, information wise
...And almost 15 in dog years. Information explosion is nothing more than having more books in your house: It doesn't suggest that you, or anyone, reads them. whocares.gif
Quote
There are also culture reasons behind bitcoin's rise, mostly due to a sentiment change after financial crisis and bank bail out. People now have more knowledge about banking and money, and they start to seek for other alternatives after they understanded what banking really means. They need a trustworthy saving medium that can not be inflated by central banks. Although gold suits the purpose, but this is a networked society, an electronic form of value storage is better
No. The number of people who know what Bitcoin is is insignificant. The number of people who would take 1BTC over $100, given a choice, isn't even worth talking about. As far as trustworthy medium? Certainly not in practice, and certainly not now.
Quote
And, new IT generations with totally different mindset and computer skills, they generally welcome a special type of payment method that is fashion and cool. I found out that it's much easier to teach my little sister to use bitcoin instead of my father
That's because your dad is an adult, and your kid sister is a child. Fooling children = easy.
Quote
So, the consensus is: The supply is fixed and demand is rising forever, means value will rise forever
This consensus is not unbreakable, the only variable is the demand. If one day, everyone could get as much loan as they want without worrying about returning those loans in the future, then the demand for bitcoin as a medium of saving will be very limited. You really won't care weather VISA will charge you 3% fee, as long as you could get a 10% bigger loan from their credit card every year and never need to payback interest
But I don't think that is likely to happen. In fact, many people has already borrowed quite much for their house and they will stuck in the pay back process for nearly a decade, combined with more automation and less job, their future outlook is getting worse
Another thing, with less and less investment return and longer and longer life expectancy, those almost-broke-pension funds are desperately searching for investment opportunities, bitcoin will become one of their target
This consensus is not unbreakable, the only variable is the demand. If one day, everyone could get as much loan as they want without worrying about returning those loans in the future, then the demand for bitcoin as a medium of saving will be very limited. You really won't care weather VISA will charge you 3% fee, as long as you could get a 10% bigger loan from their credit card every year and never need to payback interest
But I don't think that is likely to happen. In fact, many people has already borrowed quite much for their house and they will stuck in the pay back process for nearly a decade, combined with more automation and less job, their future outlook is getting worse
Another thing, with less and less investment return and longer and longer life expectancy, those almost-broke-pension funds are desperately searching for investment opportunities, bitcoin will become one of their target
See my reply above, and the one above that. The problems people are having with debt today will neither be helped or hurt by Bitcoin, so ... irrelevant.
Jump to: