Topic: What happened to bitcoin: Money and Power corrupted the early adopters (Read 681 times)

Nothing's wrong with bitcoin, only the users screwed up.

Guess most people who have lots power or money will be corrupted by greed
People just have different opinion or ideal, that's all.

I have the thickest skin on the internet, you will notice this.  My heart just dropped for a moment.

Cheers.

Don't be like this  
Just simply don't get everything on your way too personal. I feel what you mean by idealism: but this world is not an ideal place.
The only ideal place we have is within ourselves.

Don't bother too much about others people thinking, actually don't bother too much about what I said as well.

 

Yes you see this irrationality is tied to the quality of our money, in what nash calls the "gresham's" sense.  This metric has changed dimensions through our history so we have not yet formalized it.  But as our money tends towards idealness, we will become more rational in regards to coherence as a group.  He wants us to understand this

Cheers. Simple thanks mean the world to me right now, its tough content to carry, I don't have preparation for it.  Someone made me cry from sadness tonight (im ok), called me egotistical which I understand but is not fair to say about me, you made me cry from compassion and gratitude.

I don't agree. Intelligent beings should be in power of controlling their needs. It means that the people you are talking about are a perfect product of this corrupted society that wants us to be slave of everything even our own needs. Aldous Huxley should be a good read.

Op, I agree with you when you wrote that most of these people don't even realize that they got simply extremely lucky.
Your post was really worth a read. Thank you

Everything you say is fair and mostly agreeable.  But this last part Nash doesn't agree with.  You see, he explains that Ideal Money comes about through natural order.  In other words such change is inevitable as evolution.  So if we think about it, what has happened is, we have sold ourselves the religious belief that things cannot change.  But he also painted the picture of what it will be like when they start to change http://sites.stat.psu.edu/~babu/nash/money.pdf

It really is amazing what he says, but it is difficult to traverse because he only dances around the context.  You might start here:

Nothing happened to Bitcoin. The thread/title is wrong from the start. If the early adopters become corrupted that does not change Bitcoin itself. Exactly what did you expect, that Bitcoin is going to change the nature of the people?

Trust me, it is never enough. The more you have, the more you will spend and the more you will need. It is a vicious cycle, until you surpass the point of having too much (unless you spend on extremely expensive nonsense that you don't need).

In a corrupted world where greed is overpowering human beings (cloud ponzis is an example of how stupid, corrupted and greedy people are) this things will happen. The early adopters may think since we were the first to adopt Bitcoin it is our right to do what we can to have even more money , cause money is something every human being is after. This will never change unfortunately.

Most human were with the same mentality. Though they have more than enough for their entire lifetime survival keeps adding up through different methods. This would never change, also everything gives greater life to early adopters rather than the mid or later adopters.

Yes but you see it is not so anymore.  We have bitcoin, we were bestowed an evolution of technology that changes that.  I don't believe these people will be able to win their argument.  I am here to point out in clear form that they are irrational and power driven.

The more of us that understand what Ideal Money TRULY is and how these people are wrong in the way they want to bring it out, the more coherence we will have in regard to the underlying community that supports the technological movement.

I agree. early adopters extremely know the difference of the price along time. that's probably makes they do corruption.

you and I know, human will not be satisfied even when they got more money if there are still many ways to get more money.

This is the world we're stuck in right now. It would be cool to have a cryptocurrency designed and maintained entirely by machine. It sure would clear up a world of doubt and strife. bitcoin's taught me that it's humans who always screw everything up.

Fair enough.  I suspect rational minded people will find I am quite on point then.  The big issue here is, these people are very wrong about the direction we need to take bitcoin, and I have a very coherent argument to show this.  The problem is, their power is drowning me out and they refuse to engage the counterview to their "proposals" and arguments.

If I was an early adopter with hundreds of thousands of coins there's pretty much no doubt I'd be a conservative shady asshole too. Once you a get a taste of that then you're gonna do anything to protect it including totally selling out.

Thank you.  It is so nice to get a reasonable response first off.  I agree with you.  It's an really interesting phenomenon.  You get these speakers that attract ignorant masses, so they really get a lot of support. And then there is a feedback loop of ego.  These people like AA that claim r/bitcoin is full of trolls, but who doesn't know that those trolls are coming from his seminars because he is speaking about something he doesn't know anything about anymore.  This is clear.

These early players adopt a belief they made the "correct" moves, but this is not how economics and game theory works.  

They go around saying "debate should have free speech" and "content shouldn't be censored" but they are using their power to censor and drown out legitimate arguments and content.  They are acting like Satoshi would agree with them because there is no one in their view to tell them otherwise.

How can we protect ourselves from such ignorance and abuse of power?

I don't find it surprising that a lot of people who entered into Bitcoin early started to drift towards being corrupted, money is what matters to everyone and when there are large sums to be had, people are bound to start accepting extra funds in exchange for their power.

This happens with every facet of society, and it will never stop.

Statistically speaking, though, something like this is kind of expected to happen. The earliest users had the most power, and, over a long enough timeline, all of them will be corrupted. Same goes for all of us.

I would appreciate any response and dialogue or even debate on the issue of why we feel Ideal Money is not relevant to bitcoin.  This is a repost here, because our bitcoin community highlighted the fact that my posts get auto downvoted by bots.  I hope to call attention to this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4g6wox/what_happened_to_bitcoin/

It's not a question. I know now. I understand what I didn't previously.


The below is from Ideal Money as well. I suspect for example /u/vbuterin might be able to explain it better, especially if I gave the context, but I want to take it further:

 
For this writing I wish to discuss something relevant but of a higher order we weren't prepared for-Speculative religious mass.

We aren't worried about preparation in regard to interests from foreign states, rather we are “worried” about the effects of hysterical speculation by ignorant masses. Do I need to explain why this bad?

Probably.


I've wrote about this. Relevant content. But here I explain what happened to bitcoin. A bunch of speculators and accidental early adopters got rich and powerful. Now they think it was intelligence rather than chance that brought them their success, so they are espousing false views and beliefs like a poker player that won their first tournament, but otherwise can't do basic math, doesn't know basic game theory, doesn't know basic poker strategy etc.

These players don't know what efficient market hypothesis implies.

/u/andreasma recently called out theymos, to give up his moderation powers. He states theymos unfairly moderated only in favor of his own agenda. But simultaneously AA admits he doesn't know what goes on in r/bitcoin.

I know what is going on. Andreas wants theymos' power. Andreas and the like aren't decentralizing anything. They are hoarding whatever power they can. Spreading misinformation and half-truths (Evidence: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4g4q24/andreas_antonopoulos_blows_me_away_by_probably/).

Andreas is full of nothing but rhetoric of the negative context.

I offered proof to Andreas that he is wrong, and he simply claimed I never listened to the podcast which we both clearly know I did, and I listened to it twice, and I listened to it a third time. I can't get a reasonable debate or response, from a person that suggests content shouldn't be censored.

Many posters here know I am absolutely willing to listen, engage, read, learn, and concede. All with sincerity. Andreas isn't sincere. None of these players are.

SOME content SHOULD be censored Andreas-checkmate. Your sentiments were wrong. You are power tripping. You refused to look at the proof. You refuse to confront the opposing viewpoint with sincerity. You exude irrationality and hypocrisy.

/u/evoorhees claims Shapeshift is STILL secure after a massive security exploit. This guy (https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4g1t1l/erik_voorhees_looting_of_the_fox_the_story_of/d2dze28) claims he trained his entire staff and that security is by nature insecure. He claims insecure solutions are secure. Is this what Satoshi teaches us? Is this what Szabo means when he says “Secure all things”.

Voorhees won't engage me either, he fears me, because he know he faces the truth to his lies and misgivings. Let's debate without emotion, let's use sincerity, and reason. No?

He said your ENTIRE staff was taught by this man that security solutions MUST be insecure and I believe him based on your blog post. That's a clue, not a mission statement (hint, start your investigation there).

I'd be blown away if Andreas supported this sentiment, and I'll start a branch of science if that's accepted fact.

Ya'll need to address this...

You all want to affect our money system /u/gavinandresen, Hearn, /u/luke-jr., /u/nullc, /u/petertodd all these players. Please call them ALL here; there is no one I am not calling out. I want them to address something. I have no other forum to speak to these players about this subject. Theymos (et all!) is the only protector of my content on the entire internet.

You all want to optimize bitcoin as a global currency. But I keep telling each of you, your sentiments go against the man that understood money better than all of you combined. You're all too power hungry to consider you might be wrong.

I want dialogue, bohmian dialogue, but I will settle for discussion or debate. You are each selling the world short. We are wasting energy and none of you are without fault. Someone address this, someone at least take the time to debate why I am wrong-NO ONE has ever said so to me, sincerely, in regard to Nash's thesis. I will put each of you in your place, if you give me a sincere shot at doing so.

Tell me why each of you will not comment on the subject, will not entertain the works.

You want to tell us how bitcoin can be optimized...then talk about Ideal Money. Just because Nash shows you are wrong, doesn't give you a right to ignore him. I know most of you haven't read his works, and for those that glanced, I know you didn't give it sincere intent. There is 20 years of lectures and papers on the subject and we have debated heatedly for but a few.

He is done. He out-played all of you.

None of you will give me the time of day on the subject. Yet each of you wants to tell me how the world money systems should work...

Fellow bit-redditors...these people will tell you that we need to debate to come to consensus. The truth is debate is the opposite of consensus...the dilemma is a lie...conflict is the tool of the ignorant...

TL;DR To the above mentioned...power and money corrupted you.