Topic: What is the 'purpose' and 'nature' of Bitcoin? Some questions. (Read 3530 times)

but to me i think the only reason is to use bitcoin for online system and facilitate the online traders and those who give preference to online shopping, but as people have still no such awareness about bitcoin therefore they are using it as investment.

The bitcoin payment system is a virtual currency system that was first created to make exchanging money on the internet much easier and much safer than using real money that can get your money stolen by hackers and compromising your personal data, but from that idea bitcoin has grown and became the cryptocurrency that we all use and its price went higher and higher by the time.

to me ti think the only purpose of bitcoin is to make a decentralize currency of the world. which will be using as a single currency of the world without changing it into any other currency.

The transactions are decently anonymized, but there are ways to track you if someone really wants to go and find out what you do and potentially who you are. It just requires them to own a store that you shopped at and put any sort of personal information into.

The good news is, something like that is almost bound to never happen, unless you go shopping at the wrong places.

To my mind purpose of bitcoin is to make transactions anonymous that means protecting our privacy.
And now, the nature of bitcoin is similar of real money but in a different and opposite way. We can't print money but we can mine bitcoin, this both are same situation as you see in a different way. Mining of bitcoin is available for every people. Also banks can't controll us if we are using offline wallets.

It appears you need to study more on the topic of partial reserve banking. While there are boundaries and conditions, banks do indeed create money out of nothing. It happens (almost) every time they make a loan.

Okay, maybe mining is not the best solution for them. But are there really so many people without access to the Internet? Anyway, bitcoin is useful for people from poor countries but in which there is internet nearly everywhere.
Well, a bank is not usually producing the money itself. Secondly, you need to be indentified in a bank but can mine btc without many people being aware of that.
Because thus, creating a simulacrum we can become independent from the government in real life and turn btc into the real goods.

In contrast to the apocalyptic predictions of the Luddites 200 years ago, we are all much better off now.

Bitcoin in the beginning existed as a token for value transaction which eventually with its potential grew as a payment processor. When more and more started using it, eventually it got accepted as an alternative for banking system. Further due to its decentralized nature got to be used in for anonymous and illegal transactions. Now users had started to give preference as a investment as the price variation towards increasing side happens often.

Bitcoin is a crypto-currency. It’s a digital currency. Bitcoin is cash for the Internet. Bitcoin is Decentralized, peer-to-peer, and it is limited to only 21 million Bitcoins that will ever exist, unlike fiat currency. Due to the limit it’s a deflationary currency.The number of Bitcoins creates in a day is actually a fixed number. It’s controlled by the network itself. So, what we actually have is the value of Bitcoin increases as more people get involved. So, it’s not printing money to decrease the value. It’s actually getting more people involved and increasing the value of Bitcoin.  It is a benefit for anyone who’s willing to invest in a Bitcoin.

Here is the problem: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/dec/05/mark-carney-isolation-globalisation-bank-of-england
And again: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4003756/Robots-steal-15m-jobs-says-bank-chief-Doom-laden-Carney-warns-middle-classes-hollowed-new-technology.html

From the DM article: "Mr Carney claimed that 'up to 15million of the current jobs in Britain' – almost half of the 31.8million workforce – could be replaced by robots over the coming years as livelihoods were 'mercilessly destroyed' by the technological revolution."

That's coming from the Governor of the Bank of England of all people. I've said this before and I will say it again: the social consequences of the coming revolution will not be solved by the blockchain or cryptography or by decentralising monetary systems. The 'smart' revolution challenges the very concept of money itself, i.e. as something that needs to be 'earned' in any conventional sense of the term. Who will pay for the millions that will be made jobless over the next couple of decades? How will they live? It is a social problem, not a technological one.

What we need is a new sociology of money. Once we accept that the 'smart' revolution is the revolution (i.e. that the jobs it eliminates will not be replaced and in fact do not need to be replaced) then we have to look for a monetary solution that is equally radical. A revolution of this magnitude requires a completely new economic paradigm. We need to abandon everything we think we know and acknowledge that existing concepts (based on economic theories that are centuries old) have zero utility in a scenario where people simply can't earn because jobs are no longer available.

We have to change the 'polarity' of money, from a negative charge to a positive charge. It is pointless to pretend that money needs to be earned through labour or that computers need to 'earn' money for us. I'm currently working on my own solution (different from the white paper I posted elsewhere on this board) but it's not based on the blockchain and I'm not prepared to make it public. What I will say is this:

1. A new currency requires an internal market to get started. M-Pesa is a success because it is built on an existing internal market (for mobile phone services) within existing internal markets (the Kenyan and Tanzanian economies). Consider loyalty cards for example, the kind operated by major supermarkets. They're basically closed-loop credit cards, and if you build up enough points then you can pay for a trolley full of goods in 'points' rather than money. They work because they have an internal market, i.e. the supermarket itself. I used to design these systems, and in the UK some of the biggest schemes have five times more subscribers than Bitcoin is estimated to have worldwide. The closest thing Bitcoin has to an internal market is the dark web.

2. Having an internal market removes all obstacles to the acceptance of a new currency in the early stages, i.e. everyone entering into the market does so freely, knowing that there is a single accepted unit of currency. This means there is no one to break the chain so to speak. No one can refuse to accept the currency or deny that it has 'value' without leaving the market itself.

3. Once an internal market has reached a certain size it is far more likely that an attempt to extend the currency's use beyond its own boundaries will be successful.

Ultimately though, the solution is for the human race to grow up and to stop dashing around after bits of paper and electromagnetic charges. This may sound like madness to some right now, but it will become increasingly easier to accept once jobs begin to disappear and it becomes harder and harder to actually dash around after bits of paper and electromagnetic charges.

HS

 Well, I was waiting for someone else to say something else... since there is no one else... I'll speak my last bit.

 Money can be extremely malleable it can be modified in ways you cannot even begin to imagine.
Think of the value transition that occurs in currency exchange, what if that occurred at a smaller scale.
Say you received instant discounts or penalties depending on where you were, who you did business with automatically?
Your money evaluated differently by a myriad of factors.

 about your question is Bitcoin a mining simulator? Yes, yes it is.

 Every parameter in bitcoin is meant to have malleability, to change as necessary, to adapt.
What happens in the real world when a few individuals begin to accumulate more power than others?
So far it hasn't done much, these miners are running a service for us, if they stop delivering a bang on service... there are others in the wings to take their place.

 Everyone that chose to use Bitcoin had a choice in the mining, they could mine for themselves, they could become part of a mining pool... and they could have gone for the 100% solution if they wanted too. A few small changes to the code and every node would be linked across the network, delivering a reward to all participants for their time, efforts and access to resources. More and more the abstraction you speak of is happening, everyone works for themselves, but more and more that necessary work is being, centralized, delegated to automation, forfeiting that reward, is this right?

 But is this the choice that The People want?

 Everyone was given the choice from the beginning, Bitcoin was founded on innovation, that is why it is Opensource, so anyone can change the code and make it their own, and if it is a better solution then it will be successful.
 People have been doing amazing things for Bitcoin from the beginning; Modifying the mining algorithms, the development of ASICs, the businesses... People built this, and there were a few cynical rotten apples in the beginning, but we are learning, adapting, changing with Bitcoin with every change everyone makes.
 People can choose to advance the ideas we are developing, change the transaction cap 2mb, 8mb, 32mb? sure; Develop better Cryptography instead? Why not? Use better compression algorithms? yeah. Nothing is supposed to be set in stone, but that still has to be tempered with the fact that this is our value system, is it perfect?

 Can Bitcoin help people in Sub-Saharan Africa? Yes it can, it gives people the opportunity to invest in them to bring them into the fold, those are our customers! why should we not setup infrastructure for them so they can participate? Why can't we go to off chain transactions? develop that too. Paper wallets? Bitcoin intermediaries? yeah, anyone could have just started a over the phone system with Bitcoin and act as an escrow... that's all that Mpesa is... it's Bitcoin, but with a phone layer added on top.

 The solutions that have been created are amazing, why hasn't someone just used OpenTransactions to mediate off-chain transactions with people who only have access to a smart phone? they can be bought for only $25 at any outlet in the developing world. Sub-Saharan Africa?   no access to electricity? Pre-denominated paper and instantly verifiable notes and objects to be exchanged cash style, this could have been done ages ago with a 3d printer, encoding the data into an intricate design, that will always belong to that object, when it is gone, it will effectively have been burned forever off the blockchain. there are  2.1 quadrillion coins... it can be done, I can imagine one day people will find these objects and realize their unfathomable value, what is 60k Satoshis, could be worth millions tomorrow.

 So how can we help these people?

 How can we modify the concept of money to suit our needs? Are there value transformations that should be done in currency?

 What information should we pin to the blockchain?

 How should we best program automated programs to interact with the Blockchain?

 Should we go for the 100% solution and make sure that every active user received a dividend for the over all activity of Bitcoin?

 We could go crazy on the modifications... automate money even more! Only have a certain income? your value is doubled automatically.
Sending small amounts? free transactions. Doing a lot of Business? here's a bonus. There is a lot we can do... I want to hear your suggestions Hugo... Where do we start?

 The problem that you are describing is at the core of the creation of Bitcoin, it was thought of as a compelling force to develop the Blockchain concept.

 I have limited time to explain, and this is why I can't write everything at once, but I will try to write what I can.

 What is Money? In my opinion it is a Resource Allocation System, much like Hadoop Yarn, or Google Omega/Borg, MapReduce, etc...
It is a Dynamic Signaling System composed of all the elements that are required for evaluating any one object, it's construction, distribution and marketing. The price of any given object is given an arbitrary value that reflects it's perceived usefulness in comparison to every variable that it is related too: Materials used, distribution effort, time to market, demand,  etc...

 The Bitcoin experiment required that every user dynamically link their own values to the system, and hence every contribution and evolution of the Blockchain by everyone has contributed to the whole development of an answer to this question: What is the correct monetary system that will meet our needs at the moment?

 I thank everyone who contributed to this project, every opportunity we as a community took to learn, to explore, to develop and create has given a measurable answer, not a definitive answer, but a good baseline... we rebooted money and cataloged with scientific precision it's development and in the process tested human nature as well... because well, Human Nature is a vital aspect to this endeavor.

 Now to the problem of Automation... Karl Marx knew what he was talking about, The machines will reach infinite productivity over time, what happens when all the money is accumulated into a few hands? The system breaks down, a single individual simply cannot allocate effectively all the resources available, entire communities fail when money begins to develop scarcity. Production is there, the will is there, but there is no demand signal being received! Even worse, what happens when there is no emergency stop button? Endless production of unallocatable resources?

 Money is our power of choice! It is a way for an individual to state their demands, needs, dreams and hopes without these money is useless! and even more it is a marker that tells us we must stop and move on to other things. It gives us the appropriate signals to know what is of most value. The machines we are making will require this and hence, we need to rethink what variables need to be considered in the system.

 Is the work that a person can do more valuable than their ability to think and reason? The Answer: No, thinking and reasoning are more valuable than the work a single person can carry out. Machines have been able to out work us for centuries... and yet we somehow fear the masses of Humanity... Those that control the system fear their ability to Think and Reason because of the Cult of Ignorance that has perpetuated among the masses, so they keep them busy, forcing them to maintain their minds, bodies and hopes lest they succumb to further ignorance, perversion and self-destruction. We have Sigmund Freud to thank for this belief. This Belief can no longer be maintained, the machines can not only out work us, they can out think us now and it is blatantly apparent... it's enough to drive anyone into an alcoholic depression.

 We have effectively outsourced our pride and belief in ourselves to machines. What happens now?

 Is our ability to think and reason more valuable than our capacity to dream of new horizons? No, it is not. our dreams are more valuable than the work of our hands and the reasoning our minds can produce. The cultures we can produce, the civilizations that we can create are ours, this is the measure of ourselves.

 So, should we evaluate the needs of the individual into our calculations of value... should we force people to produce for no other reason than to keep them busy? No, we should not. Should we force people to think and participate in the well being of themselves and their society? Yes, yes we should. Machines can produce for us, we must simply decide what they should produce. No individual should starve or go thirsty or be homeless in our society, their dreams for themselves and others are more valuable than anything they could produce or create.

There are some resources that must be considered apriori, Human life is one of those.

The Blockchain will allocate the resources necessary once everything is built and connected, for this reason it was designed to be usable by Artificial Intelligence Systems.

Lest I'm misunderstood, I don't disagree with what you say or your synopsis of the development of Bitcoin.


The internet itself can spread the idea. Bitcoin is an idea, the internet is the tool used to disseminate it.


My questions are intended to get people thinking about whether Bitcoin itself is the answer. Let me put it this way. The UK (and the US I believe) is currently running the second series of a TV programme called "Humans". It depicts an alternate present in which most human labour is performed by synthetics. It's a play on the scenario we can expect to see once smart technology really starts to have an impact beyond the so-called 'smart TV'. The strange thing about the series is that the people in it still use fiat: money issued as debt that has to be earned. Who's earning it though? It could be argued that people are sending their synthetics out into the workplace to 'earn' money for them, but can you think of a more ridiculous and surreal scenario than 'employing' a computer to 'earn' on your behalf? At this level of abstraction, the process of earning money becomes nothing more than a simulation.

What I mean by this is that we have created an artificial link in our heads between performing a function in society and earning money. As mentioned above, millions of people create goods and offer services just because they can. There is no fixed link between working and earning. So why would we need (or indeed want) to run a simulation predicated on computers earning money for us? Imagine you're a fisherman with a 'smart boat' that can go out to sea all by itself and bring in nets full of fish. Imagine that most other industries operate on a similar basis. What would you 'charge' people for your fish? Does it make any sense whatsoever to conceptualise your 'customer' as a 'debtor' who 'owes you' for your fish? If they had no money then would you tell your customers to 'employ' their own 'smart' machine to 'earn' money on their behalf so that they can 'pay you back'?

This is why I say we need to reconceptualise what money is. The logic of all existing monetary systems breaks down under these scenarios. The illusion can only be maintained by creating another even more ridiculous illusion, whereby computers are 'employed' to 'earn' on our behalf. The series I refer to above isn't science-fiction. It doesn't present us with a theoretical vision future of the future - it actually depicts the present. The 'future' is already here, but people do not see it because people do not think about and comprehend the time we're living in. Conceptually, people's heads are still somewhere in the 1970s and they address the digital revolution using terms, methods, and frames of reference that belong to the old analogue age. Some people are so far behind they even think electronic cash is a new idea.

"The first widely used service for wire transfers was launched by Western Union in 1872 on its existing telegraph network. Using passwords and code books, a telegraph operator in one office could "wire" money that had been paid to that office by the sending customer to another telegraph office to be paid out to the receiving customer. By 1877 the service was used to transfer almost $2.5 million each year."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wire_transfer#History

HS

the purpose of bitcoins to make the whole country united by its decentralized system .its main aim is to make the whole world united rather than by its changing its value into their country s currency .it sounds wierd but it happens .and u gotta accept it .

Have you seen the fiat currencies of the world?

They are mostly all digital.

They rise and fall every day just like Bitcoin and its derivatives.

They have value because people said they do.

They are not trying to attract liquidity so they can cash out.

They are in for the long haul.

What is the purpose of bitcoin ? i understood your question like that and i m answering with this question to you , What is the purpose of dollars or other  currencies ? this question's answer is so easy think , why we use currencies ? we use them for to make our life easier and we use them for to buy someting or for to pay some bills  ..., bitcoin is like that too  and bitcoin is advanced currency in our term .

I have been thinking about your original post... and I feel an explanation is needed.

There is an original Bitcoin, that went along with an original white paper; From this came the principles that came to be what we know today.

I've been researching Bitcoin for many years, delving into it's lore as best as I can, trying to piece the puzzle together.
What comes next is opinion gathered from snippets, bits and pieces said from people who were there at the beginning.

The True original Bitcoin White Paper is unfortunately lost to the sands of time, as is the code for the first iteration of the network, but there are people here on this forum who received pieces, snippets of the code. From what I have read it was far different than what we know.

The First White Paper, one forum member described it as being far more interesting, I tend to believe them; Though I have never read it. If I could read that paper I would be shocked at the difference, what we received was a toned down, generic, sterilized White Paper.

The First Bitcoin Core, which was programmed by Satoshi Nakamoto was distributed in two pieces to the people who started the network. All they had to do was put the two halves together to have a compilable version of the Original Bitcoin Core. They proofed the network, the concept and many of the ideas... but The Idea behind Bitcoin was bigger than that. From what I have read it was way more advanced than the first iteration that was released to the public. So somewhere out there there is a even more powerful version of Bitcoin.

Why was this done? It was a token to the idea of Bitcoin, that it was,"For the Community, By the Community". The first person willing to code this new core, with the finalized principles of the ideas was... I believe Cirrus? They were given specifications and when they completed the coding of a viable working core it was released to the public. This version was primitive compared to what the original code could do, it didn't even have a GUI, but it got the job done.

This is the first principle: Each person has the right to learn, to explore, to create something new, to participate.

So what was the purpose of the First Bitcoin Core?

It was to solve the Double Spend problem, but a centralized solution could not work, you'd have to trust them to carry out the work properly. Anything that gives another party power over you is not a solution at all, it was posited, it must not rely on Trust. But how do you proof that it is a True Solution? The Solution: Let everyone know what is going on.

So many times we are prevented from knowing the Truth, by our governments, corporations, and establishments. They hide behind a system filled with fallacies, inefficiencies, and incompetence, using the guise of bureaucracy to hide Human short comings. The Blockchain solved this, "If everyone knows the Truth, they cannot be fooled."  This solution's realization was bigger than the problem it solved, information could no longer be duplicated on the internet... the Truth would no longer compete with hyperbole, lies and misinformation.

The statistics of what is truly going on could be known by everyone, without occlusion.

The short Answer to your Question, what does Bitcoin do that other Monetary systems can't? It can spread an idea, "that we do not have to be at the whim of those we elect to carry out the Rights and Services necessary for the Health and Well-being of the People."

We can know the principles by which we choose to abide, these principles are bare for all to see within the code that we choose to follow, and no one or group can prevent us or delay us from knowing what principles are being followed at any one time.


Many in this community know the answer: Bitcoin is an agent above morality, it carries out it's monetary principles without judgement, letting it's users decide if they wish to build a New World or Watch The World Burn.

... And yet it is greater than this... far greater...

Millions of people already donate their time without charge for all sorts of reasons. It's called volunteering. People volunteer for all sorts of reasons, but mostly because they believe in something or someone and enjoy being helpful and creative. You've heard of the Open-source movement? Lawyers working pro bono? So by definition, "labouring for a wage" is not the only means by which goods are produced and services offered. In my view, people are inherently restless and creative and like to find outlets for their creativity.

Some things are more scarce than others. Generally speaking, food isn't scarce - yet millions are malnourished and under-nourished. Water isn't scarce either, yet millions don't have access to clean drinking water. In my view, there's genuine scarcity and then there's the perception of scarcity fostered by the existing system. Where scarcity does exist, is it unsolvable? Many of these 'scarcity' issues could be solved (and solved intelligently, with a focus on minimising damage to the environment and maximising recycling potential) if only sufficient financial resources were available to solve them.


See above. Let me rephrase your statement as follows: money must not be scarce, else the problem of scarcity will never be solved.

I will also repeat what I said earlier: if the logic of technological development reduces the need for human labour then we have a problem, don't we? Your solution is to throw your hands in the air in despair and do nothing at all. That is no solution.


OK, it's Black Friday and the media will no doubt kick up a fuss about the pushing and pulling and fighting a very small number of people are willing to engage in just to get something they want. The vast majority of people are not like that. Ever been to a supermarket in the middle of a massive snowstorm? I have several times and most of the stuff I needed was already gone. I didn't fight anyone for what was left though. I didn't see anyone else fighting over what was left either. Nor did I read anything in the media about people fighting over what was left. Fact of the matter is, you're looking in the wrong direction. You're very specifically and deliberately looking at theoretical negatives while ignoring all the potential positives.

HS

So you're really not asking about the nature of Bitcoin, you are asking Big Questions. I think I grasp what you are seeking. I think you want a new economic model in which all are able to create their own abundance.

Frankly, this is a question in which I have no interest. Not because it is not important. But because I believe it is insoluble.

Here is the central nugget upon which I think you must chew: Money 'must be' scarce, because the things that it purchases are scarce.

There are quite a few corollaries that flow from that seemingly simple statement. But I'll merely outline a couple aspects to ponder.

Society enjoys what limited abundance it has due to the fact that laboring for a wage is what leads to production of goods and services (i.e., wealth). If each person is free to create money (presumably in unlimited quantity?), for what reason will anyone labor? But no labor, no stuff. Problem.

If unbounded money is chasing after a certain item, whose money will be accepted for that item? Why does that person get the item, while everyone else is left grasping air?

On that note, I'm out. If you solve it, you're a better man/woman than Satoshi - whom I think gave mankind perhaps the second most important invention within my lifetime. May whatever god you ascribe to be with you.