aaaaaaaand
ignore engaged
ahhhh, so much nicer in here now
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 16851. (Read 26712678 times)
July 29, 2017, 10:54:20 PM
July 29, 2017, 10:52:55 PM
I have argued bitcoin doesn't fail and so it doesn't suffer a fungibility problem that has any significance.
Again, more leftist-style nonsense where people claim things like sex and race are social constructs or that you can be 1/2 pregnant. It's either fungible or it's not, and it's not actually possible for cryptocurrency to be fungible.
Bitcoin has threatened your core beliefs and in regard to fight or flight you have chosen to go on a forum that discusses something you know little about and don't support or believe in to fight and argue against it with no intention to seek truth.
This is something that cult members type. This is why I said I'm probably talking to Trace Mayer. When you talk about bitcoin and use words like "belief system" it's outrageous. Bitcoin is simply a linked list with a get rich quick scheme built on top of it. It's not even a new invention, the linked list has existed a long time. Bitcoin is not a religion, although you seem to think it is; it's just a plain old Rube Goldberg machine, not the second coming of jesus.
July 29, 2017, 10:49:36 PM
Getting tired repeating myself, but it's called cryptocurrency for a reason.
We're getting tired of you repeating yourself too, dude. You come into this thread every night not only repeating the same old tired arguments over and over, you've even resorted to copy-pasting your own old rambling texts from previous posts.
We've all heard your arguments about Bitcoin, and we still don't care. If someone perceives Bitcoin to be a superior form of money or value transfer over precious metals, then let them.
We don't need you to be the patron saint of Precious Metals, any more than we need to hear JStolfi's tired arguments of why cryptocurrency in general is a worthless giant Ponzi scheme.
July 29, 2017, 10:46:20 PM
Ok, you've already outed yourself as a fraud now. Anyone can pump and dump anything. Just because someone makes the price of an asset rise does not grant it objective, non-opinion based traits like fungibility. You're now arguing from a leftist viewpoint where they claim things like sex and race are social constructs. No, objective reality exists and cryptocurrency never has and never will be fungible. Get Trace Mayer the fuck outta here, or whoever this wannabe Trace Mayer is.
You know what is really happening?
Bitcoin has threatened your core beliefs and in regard to fight or flight you have chosen to go on a forum that discusses something you know little about and don't support or believe in to fight and argue against it with no intention to seek truth.
It's no wonder you are tired and your argument falls on deaf ears.
July 29, 2017, 10:44:12 PM
You already admitted bitcoin is not a reliable store of value (I would say because it's synthetic price floor is recursive based on it's own demand while metals economics are non-recursive) so we can skip that issue, but all it takes is even failing one aspect like fungibility and bitcoin is not money anyways. Getting tired repeating myself, but it's called cryptocurrency for a reason.
No I didn't say its an unreliable store of value I said it can't be perfectly stable in value as it is deflationary etc. Gold we should note has been losing its value for the last 5 years and this is without bitcoin influencing it. Gold is no longer a reliable store of wealth and this observable.
all it takes is even failing one aspect like fungibility and bitcoin is not money anyways.
None of the aspects are failing, bitcoin is clearly money and people are using as such. You have created an esoteric definition. Getting tired repeating myself, but it's called cryptocurrency for a reason.
You tire because you have twisted the definitions and argued for something that is irrational under scrutiny which your definitions don't allow. You have argued gold is superior in the face of contrasting evidence and that bitcoin fails due to fungibility in the face of contrasting evidence.
July 29, 2017, 10:43:10 PM
I typed why bitcoin is not fungible and you avoided that issue like the plague.
In regard to fungibility you have no point to make. You can cry about fungibility all you want but the markets are rallying behind bitcoin and have no problem with the level of fungibility it has. Ok, you've already outed yourself as a fraud now. Anyone can pump and dump anything. Just because someone makes the price of an asset rise does not grant it objective, non-opinion based traits like fungibility. You're now arguing from a leftist viewpoint where they claim things like sex and race are social constructs. No, objective reality exists and cryptocurrency never has and never will be fungible. Somebody get Trace Mayer the fuck outta here, or whoever this wannabe Trace Mayer is.
July 29, 2017, 10:37:47 PM
You're just typing opinion based rambling and not dealing with any of the actual required traits of money. I typed why bitcoin is not fungible and you avoided that issue like the plague.
I've cited my points so far and so again you have said something untrue. In regard to fungibility you have no point to make. I have said nothing other than bitcoin will serve as a settlement layer like a gold 2.0. And it is far superior to gold in this fashion. You can cry about fungibility all you want but the markets are rallying behind bitcoin and have no problem with the level of fungibility it has. You have a belief in what ideal money consists of and I do not share belief because its not founded. Money's greatest role is an objective measurement of value, that it transfer utility is a byproduct of such a measurement device. When the value of it fluctuates arbitrarily it loses its greatest function.
Stability of value is the only important quality, the rest hold up this quality. If our money systems stabilize in regard to comparative value because of bitcoin as the bedrock standard for decently stable value, then your argument about its lack of fungibility becomes irrelevant.
July 29, 2017, 10:33:37 PM
You're just typing opinion based rambling and not dealing with any of the actual required traits of money. I typed why bitcoin is not fungible and you avoided that issue like the plague. You already admitted bitcoin is not a reliable store of value (I would say because it's synthetic price floor is recursive based on it's own demand while metals economics are non-recursive) so we can skip that issue, but all it takes is even failing one aspect like fungibility and bitcoin is not money anyways. Getting tired repeating myself, but it's called cryptocurrency for a reason.
July 29, 2017, 10:30:02 PM
And using a physical, commodity based currency like noble metals is NOT pure barter, thus everything you typed is completely irrelevant! It's the smallest abstraction away from barter needed in order to maintain things like removal of counter party risk, durability, divisibility, fungibility, portability, etc. I don't want to hear you lies about how bitcoin is the 2nd coming of god as money when it's not even fungible. Most of you guys are either delusional or disgusting liars.
Every time a government over prints money or devalues, more citizens hear about and procure bitcoin, so there is something to compete with not and central banks are forced to tend to the quality of money on a vector they previously did not need to consider.
You can call me names all you want. Your argument isn't reasonable or founded.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43339.pdf
Quote
In this case, for the Fed to maintain the same degree of monetary accommodation, it would need to undertake a compensating tightening of monetary policy. At a minimum, a substantial use of Bitcoins could make the measurement of velocity more uncertain, and judging the appropriate stance of monetary policy uncertain.
Also, a substantial decrease in the use of dollars would also tend to reduce the size of the Fed’s balance sheet and introduce another factor into its consideration of how to affect short-term interest rates (the instrument for implementing monetary policy).
Also, a substantial decrease in the use of dollars would also tend to reduce the size of the Fed’s balance sheet and introduce another factor into its consideration of how to affect short-term interest rates (the instrument for implementing monetary policy).
July 29, 2017, 10:19:01 PM
Is this a joke? None of the crap you say makes any sense then you post this horrific shilling for the central banks statement LOL. The further you abstract money from barter the bigger a scam it is. Using a physical, commodity based currency (noble metals in native coin format - you know, like gold coins, silver coins, copper coins, etc) is about as close as it gets to barter, which is why it's generally the only non-scam monetary system.
Pure barter was PROVED by John Nash to be not optimal for all parties involved.
And using a physical, commodity based currency like noble metals is NOT pure barter, thus everything you typed is completely irrelevant! It's the smallest abstraction away from barter needed in order to maintain things like removal of counter party risk, durability, divisibility, fungibility, portability, etc. I don't want to hear you lies about how bitcoin is the 2nd coming of god as money when it's not even fungible. Most of you guys are either delusional or serial liars.
No, bitcoin is not fungible even if you tumble it:
CT and schnorr sigs will make btc fungible.
Cryptocurrency is NOT fungible. You're trying to make believe that if coins can be tumbled it's somehow fungible but there is more to it than that. If anything about the protocol at all can be altered via a strongman or banana republic voting to take over it's exposed power vacuum it's not fungible.
Money = has objective, static traits
Currency = random arbitrary bullshit some guy makes up and constantly fiddles with like fiat or bitcoin. If it's possible for your money to "hard fork", or randomly morph from one thing to another, it's not fungible, and hence not money. In that circumstance you are involved in some type of scheme with a schemer ruling over you.
It doesn't matter if said forks are orchestrated by a banana republic of miners in a voting process. There is no Nash equilibrium in cryptocurrency, only a power vacuum to be filled by a top down hierarchy or strongman. To escape this master and servant hierarchy you have to use real money that cannot be altered or tampered with by third parties.
July 29, 2017, 10:12:02 PM
Is this a joke? None of the crap you say makes any sense then you post this horrific shilling for the central banks statement LOL. The further you abstract money from barter the bigger a scam it is. Using a physical, commodity based currency (noble metals in native coin format - you know, like gold coins, silver coins, copper coins, etc) is about as close as it gets to barter, which is why it's generally the only non-scam monetary system.
Commodity money is not superior to bitcoin for the reasons you are implying. In fact it would be optimal that we release gold and oil from their monetary components as inflation hedges so that they can be used as resources otherwise.
You are implying gold is scarce, but gold is not scarce and so going forward it would not be a good money. And historically we have seen issues in this regard. Bitcoin doesn't suffer from this problem.
There is no evidence and no founded argument that money must consist of an otherwise useful commodity.
I don't want to hear any of your Keynesian garbage where you attempt to obfuscate the monetary system through a Rube Goldberg machine in order to scam people whether it's bitcoin or some other poorly constructed Rube Goldberg likes the ones CBs already use. Occam's Razor wins in the end and shekling scammers can BTFO.
My argument is not pro-keynesian by any standpoint it is based on the Nashian viewpoint:
Quote
The label “Keynesian” is convenient, but to be safe we should have a defined meaning for this as a party that can be criticized and contrasted with other parties.
So let us define “Keynesian” to be descriptive of a “school of thought” that originated at the time of the devaluations of the pound and the dollar in the early 30’s of the 20th century. Then, more specifically, a “Keynesian” would favor the existence of a “manipulative” state establishment of central bank and treasury which would continuously seek to achieve “economics welfare” objectives with comparatively little regard for the long term reputation of the national currency…~Ideal Money
So let us define “Keynesian” to be descriptive of a “school of thought” that originated at the time of the devaluations of the pound and the dollar in the early 30’s of the 20th century. Then, more specifically, a “Keynesian” would favor the existence of a “manipulative” state establishment of central bank and treasury which would continuously seek to achieve “economics welfare” objectives with comparatively little regard for the long term reputation of the national currency…~Ideal Money
To be clearer:
Quote
There can be Keynesians Neo-Keynesians New-Keynesians Post-Keynesians. Even the Post-Keynesians are still Keynesians~Lecture, Ideal Money
You have to be more careful with your arguments and presumptions cause I'll make a mockery of your missteps. Call me Keynesian again...
July 29, 2017, 10:09:27 PM
You do realize that you are talking to a wall? And subsequently we all are observing you talking to that wall......
Now I understand why the gold man wants to spread his
yeah, but I do like imagining him doing yet another line of speed on his pallet of silver bars, eyeing those suspicious, dark skinned, deckhands nervously and checking his mags for the 40th time in the last few minutes. Oh God, does this thing have to rock so?
July 29, 2017, 10:05:12 PM
You don't know that bitcoin's settlement capabilities will shore up the quality of our fiats
Is this a joke? None of the crap you say makes any sense then you post this horrific shilling for the central banks statement LOL. The further you abstract money from barter the bigger a scam it is. Using a physical, commodity based currency (noble metals in native coin format - you know, like gold coins, silver coins, copper coins, etc) is about as close as it gets to barter, which is why it's generally the only non-scam monetary system.
I don't want to hear any of your Keynesian garbage where you attempt to obfuscate the monetary system through a Rube Goldberg machine in order to scam people whether it's bitcoin or some other poorly constructed Rube Goldberg likes the ones CBs already use. Occam's Razor wins in the end and shekling scammers can BTFO.
July 29, 2017, 09:54:52 PM
That's just the textbook definition of sunk cost fallacy. If anything you are just proving my point. We spend a bunch of time, resources, and energy to create a virtual commodity (bitcoin) that has no real value, especially if bitcoin died. If you spent all that same time, effort, and resources to dig up silver instead, worst case scenario you could convert them to 29% efficiency solar panels in the end. It's crazy to waste time and resources on a black hole called mining for an imaginary resource when you can mine for a real resource instead.
Claiming that you NEED bitcoin to send money to China is also another fallacy because as I've stated a million times, bitcoin is only a currency and not money or the base of Exter's pyramid. Just like the Chinese wouldn't want an infinite stream of digital US T-bills, they would also not want a continuous stream of bitcoins. They are going to want some type of REAL WORLD good or service for their trade so you will be shipping them something in a large ship anyway. You do not eliminate the movement of real world goods by using bitcoin.
You have only shown you don't know the purpose or value of money:
Quote
Here we can return to the understanding that money has the practical value of creating games for traders. These are games with transferable utility, but if the money were not available, the game of the traders would be a game without transferable utility and thus naturally a game with less efficiency with regards ot the possibilities for the participants to maximize their combined gains.~Ideal Money
There is nothing in that that necessitates it to be a commodity to for us to gain value from it. And if silver cannot fulfil the role of bitcoin then you have given no argument that we've wasted any energy.
You don't know that bitcoin's settlement capabilities will shore up the quality of our fiats and so you have no observation point for why bitcoin is net valuable to us. And bitcoin's blockchain DOES have other uses than settlement such as tamper proofing files so you don't have an argument from your view anyways.
July 29, 2017, 09:49:21 PM
and a coin with 1mb blocks forever has economic viability?
Yes it does. It would help us secure bitcoin's greatest use caseThis is false. Bitcoin has zero value as a settlement layer because far better alternatives for settlement existed before it's creation (noble metals). For bitcoin to have value as a settlement layer it would need to be able to compete as the base of Exter's pyramid, but it can't for numerous reasons I've stated before:
1) Bitcoin has built in middlemen (transaction validators) and counter party risk, negative traits that are typically found among "currencies" and never found among "money". The entire purpose of the base of Exter's pyramid is to remove counter party risk so that even if everyone else on the planet dies, you are not left holding a worthless coupon. This is why something is required to be an actual commodity, not a fake psuedo commodity (bitcoin) to be real money. Bitcoin will always be just a currency alone and not money, and currencies derive value from transaction flow (scalability) not stock.
2) Money is an abstract concept that represents goods or the ability to do work (services). This means the ideal form of money would be energy based since it represents both a commodity and service at the same time. The problem there is that humans don't have the technology to do so and remove counter party risk, and the free market time after time has signaled removing counter party risk is even more important, so it utilized metals. The fact that anything you do in bitcoin is going to make you a 1 of N participant means there is no removing counter party risk in bitcoin and it's dead on arrival for competing as a settlement system, aka money, aka the base of Exter's pyramid.
3) All forms of money and currency have elements of a pyramid or ponzi scheme to them, meaning it's all about me finding some resource and hoarding a bunch of it to try and create a master/slave relationship where I now rule over you because I got what you need. Such a paradigm doesn't actually work with a "virtual" commodity. If Elwar or Jimbo corners the entire 21 millioin coin market, it really doesn't mean shit to me. Under no circumstance do I need their coins when they have no intrinsic real world use, so I can completely ignore them and thus no master/slave relationship is formed. This is also a good reason why gold may lose a lot of it's market cap to silver in the long run due to gold having far less use.
Well one could argue that bitcoins value is derived from the work (labor) needed to bring each new bitcoin to market.
That's just the textbook definition of sunk cost fallacy. If anything you are just proving my point. We spend a bunch of time, resources, and energy to create a virtual commodity (bitcoin) that has no real value, especially if bitcoin died. If you spent all that same time, effort, and resources to dig up silver instead, worst case scenario you could convert them to 29% efficiency solar panels in the end. It's crazy to waste time and resources on a black hole called mining for an imaginary resource when you can mine for a real resource instead.
Claiming that you NEED bitcoin to send money to China is also another fallacy because as I've stated a million times, bitcoin is only a currency and not money or the base of Exter's pyramid. Just like the Chinese wouldn't want an infinite stream of digital US T-bills, they would also not want a continuous stream of bitcoins. They are going to want some type of REAL WORLD good or service for their trade so you will be shipping them something in a large ship anyway. You do not eliminate the movement of real world goods by using bitcoin.
July 29, 2017, 09:43:41 PM
You do realize that you are talking to a wall? And subsequently we all are observing you talking to that wall......
Now I understand why the gold man wants to spread his
July 29, 2017, 09:42:46 PM
Well one could argue that bitcoins value is derived from the work (labor) needed to bring each new bitcoin to market. This would be the work performed by the miners and as anybody who has any history with bitcoin and specifically the act of mining would tell you is that at this stage mining is not about the hardware but about the energy required. And the price of that energy. So bitcoin is energy based representing both a commodity and a service, therefore fitting your description of the ideal form of money.
However this is not ideal money. Ideal Money is money that is stable in value over a very long period of time. Bitcoin is good but not ideal. Nothing from the poster you are addressing speaks to this.
July 29, 2017, 09:41:20 PM
Bitcoin will always be just a currency alone and not money, and currencies derive value from transaction flow (scalability) not stock.
I think you said the higher the velocity the higher the value.
Quote
Regarding the velocity of money, if the increase in the use of Bitcoin leads to a decrease in need for holding dollars, it would increase the dollar’s velocity of circulation and tend to increase the money supply associated with any given amount of base money (currency in circulation plus bank reserves held with the Fed).
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43339.pdfYou have made your own distinction of money and currency that is not a commonly held distinction. Your entire argument falls apart under scrutiny which suggests you need to make more and more points so I cannot break it down.
Statements like this are empty:
Quote
This is why something is required to be an actual commodity, not a fake psuedo commodity (bitcoin) to be real money.
And bitcoin is a real money by and reasonable and widely held definition of the term money. Like this empty statement:
Quote
so that even if everyone else on the planet dies, you are not left holding a worthless coupon.
Gold has great settlement value because its not very useful otherwise and it certainly wouldn't be useful if everyone else died. You haven't made any sense and nothing you are saying is accepted economic theory. July 29, 2017, 09:23:41 PM
and a coin with 1mb blocks forever has economic viability?
Yes it does. It would help us secure bitcoin's greatest use caseThis is false. Bitcoin has zero value as a settlement layer because far better alternatives for settlement existed before it's creation (noble metals). For bitcoin to have value as a settlement layer it would need to be able to compete as the base of Exter's pyramid, but it can't for numerous reasons I've stated before:
1) Bitcoin has built in middlemen (transaction validators) and counter party risk, negative traits that are typically found among "currencies" and never found among "money". The entire purpose of the base of Exter's pyramid is to remove counter party risk so that even if everyone else on the planet dies, you are not left holding a worthless coupon. This is why something is required to be an actual commodity, not a fake psuedo commodity (bitcoin) to be real money. Bitcoin will always be just a currency alone and not money, and currencies derive value from transaction flow (scalability) not stock.
2) Money is an abstract concept that represents goods or the ability to do work (services). This means the ideal form of money would be energy based since it represents both a commodity and service at the same time. The problem there is that humans don't have the technology to do so and remove counter party risk, and the free market time after time has signaled removing counter party risk is even more important, so it utilized metals. The fact that anything you do in bitcoin is going to make you a 1 of N participant means there is no removing counter party risk in bitcoin and it's dead on arrival for competing as a settlement system, aka money, aka the base of Exter's pyramid.
3) All forms of money and currency have elements of a pyramid or ponzi scheme to them, meaning it's all about me finding some resource and hoarding a bunch of it to try and create a master/slave relationship where I now rule over you because I got what you need. Such a paradigm doesn't actually work with a "virtual" commodity. If Elwar or Jimbo corners the entire 21 millioin coin market, it really doesn't mean shit to me. Under no circumstance do I need their coins when they have no intrinsic real world use, so I can completely ignore them and thus no master/slave relationship is formed. This is also a good reason why gold may lose a lot of it's market cap to silver in the long run due to gold having far less use.
Well one could argue that bitcoins value is derived from the work (labor) needed to bring each new bitcoin to market. This would be the work performed by the miners and as anybody who has any history with bitcoin and specifically the act of mining would tell you is that at this stage mining is not about the hardware but about the energy required. And the price of that energy. So bitcoin is energy based representing both a commodity and a service, therefore fitting your description of the ideal form of money.
July 29, 2017, 09:11:43 PM
You are, of course, welcome to your opinion, but I fail to see, unless you are going to sleep on top of your pallet of silver with an AK47 while it crosses the Pacific ocean, how physical delivery does not have counter party risk.
Don't get me wrong, huge physs fan here, if it weren't for that dammed boating accident we could get together and try and out macho each other curling our stacks, but yeah, I guess I am a lunatic...I think teleporting the equivalent value of that pallet in an hour or so, securely, does in fact have value.
You do realize that you are talking to a wall? And subsequently we all are observing you talking to that wall......
Now I understand why the gold man wants to spread his
Jump to: