Topic: New essay seriously questions Bitcoin's future success - page 2. (Read 3268 times)

So now the shills try to take this stupid angle... Governments is the product of the people.... Have we not seen what citizens can do, when the governments no longer listen to

the needs of the people? Do not underestimate the power of the people... you might just be surprised. I would rather support a little life raft in the ocean, than staying on the

Titanic whilst it's sinking.  

Only because in history no form of money had been invented that could easily avoid being confiscated and was 'endorsed/created' by the ruling elite.

That's the point of Bitcoin (one of them) the fact that there is no central authority, the authority is with the people that own it (and miners), and there is little Johnny government can do about it at this stage.

Basically, if person A sells his bike for 1btc to person B, and B agrees his bike is worth 1btc and pays him, who's gonna stop him? And who can tell him he's wrong?

It's really quite simple. I find it strange how many people don't understand that a genius created Bitcoin, and that he essentially covered all the angles, economic and otherwise.

The article attributes too much to the state.

While it is tempting to think of the state as an unbeatable almighty force with ultimate power, the reality is state power is finite, and indeed purely based the confidence individuals contribute to it. Ironically, the article personally contributes more power to that which it wishes were not so powerful.

As confidence weighns in the minds of the people a state loses it's power. Instilling fear in individuals predicated upon the state having infinite power effectively amounts to a donation at the alter of one's enemy.

Let us consider the scenario in which the state produces it's own crypto coin, do we imagine such a coin to be open source and decentralized? If so then so what if they create such a coin? They have no power over it.

If we imagine that such a coin would be centralized, and even if we further imagine that the state declares that all taxes must be paid in this coin only, then again this is not a nightmare scenario. No sane individual will hold his wealth in a centralized closed source currency any more than is necessary, so we will see that bitcoin is the superior store of wealth, and the inferior centralized coin will be used only for taxes and trial trade perhaps. Bitcoin will not be destroyed in such an scenario.

Perhaps we imagine a centralized closed source state coin that is declared the only acceptable payment for tax and also bitcoin is made illegal. Even so bitcoin will persist. In the underground places of that state it will stubbornly persist, and further it will bloom in other parts of the world that are more accepting to bitcoin. Such a state will have effectively cut itself off from the rest of the world and global trade, but it will not have succeeded in deleting bitcoin. Bitcoin cannot be deleted.  

Bitcoin is here to stay, that much is a certainty. How insane states can be, that is but an irrelevant variable.

Governments will only seek to defeat Bitcoin if they stand to lose control over the masses because of it. As long as Bitcoin doesn't aspire to become a tool for rebellion they will roll with it. It would be foolish for Bitcoin to go against the current anyways because it is borne of control the same as everything else in the human world.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

EDIT: Joining you with the coffee.

I'm goin' get a fresh cup of coffee now, then read the kindly linked article.

I'm pretty sure that all extinct currencies were once based upon their then modern society, e.g., the Romans weren't using nor accepting fish bones or seashells to or for trade. That said, what ever argument that's presented, US dollars, et al., could easily be added to the list of why--cannot-win.

EDIT: Read it.

The author also wrote: Have you sold it to the NSA? At what price?

i doubt bitcoin will ever replace currency but if it can just be accepted as a " yet another way to pay " would be good enough for it

OP's article is total nonsense.And he knows that. He is trolling as hell that's it.

"The primary requirement for anything to function as money is that of being accepted by people. Bitcoin is designed to avoid relying on central authorities, which increases its function as a store of value. However, the acceptance of money (adoption) is ultimately determined by central authorities in any foreseeable socio-economic context, as has always been the case throughout history. All the desirable features of cryptocurrencies can be easily implemented by governments in their competition with Bitcoin to the extent that will preserve their monetary dominance.  The belief in Bitcoin becoming a world currency in an increasingly interconnected world is therefore based on a mistaken worldview."

it can not be done because of the decentralization nature of bitcoin, the best thing that governments can do is making an altcoin which is centralized, this is far worse than any altcoin you have out there
but i could see the blockchain technology working with this and may drive some unaware users to embrace it, instead of going with bitcoin

they are trying so hard to replicate a centralized bitcoin, but everyone know that they will fail at it, i think it's better for them to stop printing money and find a better way to rise the value of their currency

Well, but even having it as an alternate currency they lose a bit.
Like being able to buy things online without a international CC. Avoiding taxes and fees is nice but what the banks and the governments think about it?

they buy the government because they need the government,, without the laws allowing banks to run.. they wont survive. if governments were not needd to survive they wouldnt even bother to buy them..

What's wrong with it being a substitute currency? In the past states are the only people that have issued currency because it's in the power-hungry interests to do so, but whether bitcoin will succeed or even overtake a national currency is down to the people who use it. I certainly think it could become some sort of defacto world currency and one that I think we need just as a long as it's not controlled by a state.

No they don't.
They buy governments anyday of the year.
If the government in discussion doesn't co-operate, some sort of fatal accident or incident will take place.

http://www.examiner.com/article/executive-order-11110-and-the-jfk-assassination-question

As what I have understand in the article the banks can defeat Bitcoin by making a currency big enough to compete with bitcoin. And this will need a big innovation since the inflation rate was one of the big disadvantage of investing in the bank. They will need to increase the earnings of their investors to earn people's trust which in turn can result for them to suffer in a great financial lost. And since they can not manipulate the bitcoin because it's decentralized it will be really hard for them to outrun the bitcoin.

"Money is the product of society, just as Bitcoin is the product of a society of computers. Money needs the greatest human network to succeed, just as the Bitcoin blockchain needs the greatest computer consensus. This network and consensus, however imperfect, is ultimately provided by the state in modern societies, just as it was the case in the many cases of recoinage and remonetization throughout history. For as long as we have states that strong and accepted by people, for better or worse, Bitcoin will remain a substitute currency."

translation
"Money is the product of banks, just as Bitcoin is the product of social demand for change. Money needs legislation and minimum wage laws forcing the banks paper to remain and to succeed, Bitcoin blockchain needs just a non centralized consensus to succeed. For as long as we have states laws forcing fiat acceptance by people, for better or worse, Bitcoin will remain a substitute currency."

---

"For any currency to succeed ultimately, it needs to be accepted by government as good for payment of debt and taxes. Bitcoin is anathema to the bankers, and these financial terrorists will cause pain and death in any country that attempts to adopt it, and blame it on the currency extremists. They don't need governments to kiss and make up."

translation
"For any currency to succeed ultimately, it needs to be accepted by a majority of the population who refuse to barter with anything else. then governments would be forced to accept it too, else they would be out of a job. Bitcoin is anathema to the bankers, and these financial terrorists are just businesses. and a government can easily just let them dry up and not get bailed out. They need governments to survive."

Basically this would be like issuing fiat on a blockchain. We understand this is stupid, but most don't. The essence of government is control, so for them it probably sounds like a sensible idea. It allows them to retain their power, while also making them look progressive and fiscally responsible because it would save the economy money.

I think there is a really good chance we'll see this happen and it could even be a good thing Just imagine all the socialist sheep out there getting a practical schooling in economics because their favorite currency is being devalued meanwhile everyone else can freely choose to hold any of hundreds of decentralized currencies. So what I'm saying is that it might raise awareness and understanding of sound vs unsound money, etc.

This argument seems to miss the fact that there is no such thing as someone's "own" cryptocurrency.

The whole idea behind cryptocurrency is that you take away the issuer, controller, administrator, or authority, and replace that with cryptography.

Sure, they could still create their own money (not crypto), but they've already done that: fiat.

In the end, it doesn't matter what governments or banks do or say or want. With the technological advancement that came with Bitcoin, we don't need the government or bank anymore, or their consent (at least not where it concerns our money or financial system).

Bitcoin technology is a very unique and unsettling invention, with endless possibilities. It is free from any centralization, authority or a regulatory system. It doesn’t need any help from other currencies to make it look good. It can create its own existence and save the world economy from the downside of the traditional fiat currency system. In recent times, the Bitcoin network has faced many ups and downs, while raising questions among the community about its resilience. Still, everyone needs to keep in mind that this is a currency that has been operating worlwide only for half a decade. It is still adopting and struggling to make its mark. But with proper time and management, we can help Bitcoin to become “the future of money.”

https://99bitcoins.com/the-future-of-money-bitcoinized/

Nothing wrong with seeking re assurance. Asking probing questions will ultimately help if they are properly answered. This is how science progresses. Some of the pro Bitcoiners borderline on religious fanaticism, which isn't particularly convincing.