Topic: Is Buffet right or wrong? - page 5. (Read 11017 times)

a technical objection about the feasibility of tracking all of those dirty satoshis, from a comment to this article:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/03/missing-boat-on-bitcoin-ownership.html

I think some of the confusion is that people think rich people know something about money others don't. They do not.
Most wealthy people are born wealthy and learn how to manage their family money over a lifetime. The ones like Buffet who make it themselves become rich from hard work and a psychotic drive to beat others. They wake up at dawn and can't stop working, even if it means pain for their family and personal life. They are like a winning race horse, they would just as soon die as loose the race.

I feel that even the coming 6 moths in the crypto world will bring as much change as the past 5 years combined. Time is speeding up since a lot more people are involved - especially in the alt-coin business. It's almost silly to speculate 2-3 years ahead.
Bon fyah!

As a programmer I'd think you would need to be deliberate and concise with things you do and "say" for lack of a better word? Guess not, huh?

I can stop at any time, you appear to be the one lacking in that regard. Again contradicting yourself in the same post. If you want out, walk away. Don't say stop, throw a few more stones and cry when I throw them right back.

What in the hell does the thread linked to have to do with anything. All I see is you stating more assumptions as fact, things you can't possibly know, then forming your super duper programmer logic on top of a pile of mud. In other words, the same thing you've done here! Bullshit speculation, clouded by an ego so large it couldn't fit inside a superdome.

ROTFL, asks a few questions and is smart enough to start assigning IQ's to people. You are a certain kind of special 

I strongly feel that Buffet has some money invested into cryptocurrencies despite publicly speaking it down...

You need to take a class in formal logic.

No where did I make a statement excluding it reaching zero.

I said it eventually reaches virtually 0. That is logically consistent with (no exclusion of) it reaching 0 later.

I am a programmer and you are not. I have extremely accurate logic. Else I wouldn't have made the programs that I did. Period.

Now I said I want to stop this nonsense. Can we please?

Wrong again,

Bitcoin coin generation does not virtually reach zero, it does reach zero. Quite a difference, really, but I'd expect as much from you.

Hol-le-fucking shit, people are dumb.

I like how you totally dropped the transaction time issue, once met with the technical difficulties of such a thing. Don't want to argue that point any more, either?

Sigh.


vir·tu·al·ly
ˈvərCHə(wə)lē/
adverb
adverb: virtually

    1.
    nearly; almost.

Thank the lord!

Oh, wait...


Well, that lasted a whole two lines of text, just like the last time you were going to finally fuck off.

Again, we are back to the mighty US government demanding anything on the internet, the same speculative bullshit you've been spewing forever. Somehow I guess that's different than my "broken arguments." Loosing badly, PM's? Whatever.

The world just lines up to do what the united states says. Especially now, after the world sees what we (US) do with control of the internet, or anything at all for that matter.


Bull FUCKING shit, you stupid bastard. What reason do you have to assume this will be the case? Unless EVERY FUCKING COUNTRY in the world empathetically agrees with the US, anything they attempt to do will FLOUNDER, as it does currently. Until that time, you are speculating just the same as I, except that your scenario DEMANDS impossible regulations, in both bitcoins and new currencies that may be exempt to new laws on technical points alone. How is a government going to regulate a new currency that DOESN'T EVEN EXIST YET, that possibly works in an inconceivably different way? How are bitcoins going to support the innovation in that area, if you can't move coins to an alt-chain without tainting them? Regulation on new currencies would kill them before they start, game over.

And that's just one massive hole in your "take over the world" theory. You contradict yourself, saying [your flavor of] regulation and new crypts will co-exist, it is not possible.


Tin hats, folks. Why the fuck are you here anyway, if you are so certain? Shouldn't you be digging bomb shelters, piling gold, and gathering MREs? Get the fuck outta here with your sensationalist bullshit, or at least post undeniable proof. You'll have to forgive me, but seeing your postings in the past doesn't exactly give me the utmost confidence in your "deep" research on who knows what. Can't even form a proper sentence on a regular basis, but calls the total financial seizure of the entire world by the USgovernment? Seems about right  


Let me ask you a simple question, is 0.2% ZERO? No? Wow, so you mean coins will still be made? Exactly like I said, eh? According to the chart you linked to, coins will be generated till 2136. Is that not a solid 100 years? Or are you going to argue the fact that .00000001 is not a coin. I'd bet you will, because that's your style. If 6th grade math isn't my style, what does that say about you? Least I can read numbers posted in a table, RIGHT IN FRONT OF MY FACE.

Next, you'll probably say that's not enough coins to generate to sustain, like a typical know it all retard, completely missing the fact I already addressed that issue previously.

Stroke that ego buddy, it must be nice to be so old as to know everything in the world so perfectly.

I will not be replying to pontiacg5 and toknormal again, because they repeat the same broken non-arguments again and again. I have more important things to do.

Come on guys, this silly arguing is wasting our time. You guys go with Bitcoin and I will go my own direction.

You two can have the last word. I will prefer the last action.

You guys are losing badly where it matters for me. I am receiving overwhelming support in my private messages. You two are making fools of yourselves for those who are smart enough to see. And those are precisely the people I wanted to reach. My teaching goal here is done or at least as far as I am willing to take it in this forum. My wish is for all the dumb people to stay in Bitcoin and the smart people to exit something better.

toknormal, I already explained upthread that offchain accounts lead to fractional reserves and failure. You are repeating the same nonsense. Proceed with your offchain Bitcoin plan so you can retain the status quo of fiat banking and commerce.

pontiacg5, the issue for miners is not just tax compliance, it is about forcing you to force tax compliance on all transactions you add to the block. It is all about coin taint. You can read up on this coin taint issue from the core developers such a gmaxell, mike hearn, etc..

What you fail to appreciate is history. I guess you didn't pay attention during world history or perhaps your dumbed down education there in Kansas doesn't teach you about the way socialism slides into totalitarianism over and over throughout history.

The salient point (and I'm confident it will fly over your head and you will reply something off point again) is that don't expect the government to act sane as it slides into the abyss. They will demand blood from a turnip.

All the nations will be bankrupted and under severe riots and stress by 2016ish. And the FATCA is coming this year which will compel all nations to comply with USA demands. And the dollar will become incredibly strong in 2015 as all the other currencies become very weak. Every nation will be eating from the USA's hand. The emerging markets are massively short the dollar. But you don't know any of this information because you don't study as deeply the details as I do.

Sorry that you can't understand that when I pay with a credit card, I am done and get my domain name or download product in seconds. With Bitcoin, I wait 20 - 30 minutes. When I need to do this several times per day, it makes me curse Bitcoin. And this has actually happened to me numerous times.

Bitcoin's new coinbase awards will be 1.7% in 2020, 0.8% in 2024 and 0.2% in 2032, that is not 100 years from now. I can see 6th grade math is not your strong suite.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply#Projected_Bitcoins_Long_Term

Your points about alt/BTC exchange entirely misses the point that without anonymity, altcoins will be subject to the same regulatory controls as Bitcoin. Period. No tinfoil hats required to do that simple analysis.

I must agree with you that the nonrefundable quality of Bitcoin can open new markets. It also closes off much larger markets. See also my reply to toknormal above. Note Bitcoin has multisig on chain, so if developers would simply use it, then Bitcoin could do refunds via escrowed third parties. At least it would be on the block chain, so no slide into fractional reserves failure.

Except that "every single Bitcoin that has ever been mined" is not up for sale.

Only a tiny proprtion of the money supply is ever offered on an exchange order book.

Even if he did find some way to buy them all up - there's a name for that in economics, it's called demand. Such phenomenal demand for Bitcoin would translate into demand for cryptocurrencies in general if supply dried up.

In short, "buying up all the money supply of a particular coin" is not an option for someone who sees it as a threat.

Lack of influence of monetary policies, government influences and decentralized supply.

It is not the same as fiat.

The quote is accurate. You can see his interview here http://www.coindesk.com/warren-buffett-investors-stay-away-bitcoin/

He talks about Bitcoin for only 10 seconds of the interview.

That doesn't make sense if you think about it.
Warren Buffet made enough last year to buy every single Bitcoin that has ever been mined. If he truly thought this what would stop him buying up some Bitcoin?

I think he is being honest with his interpretation. Whether that interpretation is correct is open to debate.

wrong because he does not understand bitcoin (and nobody explained it to him)

It's obvious why he said that: He owns tons of Fiat money. Bitcoin is NOT fiat money. This is bad for him, thus he tries to spread rumors and fear against Bitcoin and a lot of people fall for it and spread these rumors over and over again. Simple as that ! DO NOT fall for this cheap propaganda/misinformation attempt.

Not sure if he was misquoted on this one. It's also strange in a way for him to comment when normally he refuses to do so on matters he doesn't understand.

People on this forum will go against what he says most of the time.

Jeez. You are one little defeatist whiner aren't you.

The arguments you come up with are unbelievably fickle. You're making it all up as you go along. I don't know what agenda you're pursuing but it's about as consistent as an unguided missile.


pontiacg5 was right - that point is hogwash. In fact all the nonsense about speed and convenience that you've been spamming on this thread is nonsense. No point in elaborating on it since you don't seem to have the first clue about how the banking clearing system, account transfers vs money transfers, POS and back office requirements or anything else of practical relevance to this discussion works.

Suffice to say that cryptocurrencies blockchain speed are of no significance to the performance of point of sale transactions - just as they aren't right now when doing trades on exchanges. All transactions are more or less instantaneous because accounts are used.

The point about regulation of pools is idle speculation and highly unrealistic. It's already an obsolete issue given that:

 - the technology is global and not under the juristiction of any one government
 - thr cryptocurrency technology has already surpassed the need to mine anyway
 - de-centralised mining would work just as well and generate the required supply, just at a lower self-adjusted difficulty level


All you're straw man arguments have been exhaustively dealt with by people that actually know something of what they're talking about.