What the hell do you think SHA256 is? Reading Comprehension (haha i guess it is sorta)? Woodshop? Nope, Its definitely math.
Additionally, I think it is safe to say that the state is backing a currency if they are allowing debts to be paid using it.
Topic: What to say against the claim "backed by the state/bank" (Read 2128 times)
I dont think it would be hard to argue, legitimately, that if bitcoin is backed by anything, it IS math.
What the hell do you think SHA256 is? Reading Comprehension (haha i guess it is sorta)? Woodshop? Nope, Its definitely math.
Additionally, I think it is safe to say that the state is backing a currency if they are allowing debts to be paid using it.
What the hell do you think SHA256 is? Reading Comprehension (haha i guess it is sorta)? Woodshop? Nope, Its definitely math.
Additionally, I think it is safe to say that the state is backing a currency if they are allowing debts to be paid using it.
Also, notice how the meaning of the word "backed" has changed. The meaning of "backed" had to change because now that the gold standard is gone, the dollar is no longer "backed" by anything under the old definition of "backed". No government would be willing to say their money is "backed" by nothing, so they had to change the meaning.
When the U.S. was on the gold standard, the dollar was "backed" by gold. That meant that the dollar represents and can be exchanged for a fixed amount of gold.
Now, the dollar is "backed" by (depending on who you ask) the U.S. economy, the U.S. military power, the ability of the U.S. to tax its citizens, or the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Now, it means that the dollar is supported by or defended by something, as in "Don't worry, bro. I've got your back."
Of course, as I pointed out earlier, the new meaning of "backed" is just as fictitious as the backing itself.
When the U.S. was on the gold standard, the dollar was "backed" by gold. That meant that the dollar represents and can be exchanged for a fixed amount of gold.
Now, the dollar is "backed" by (depending on who you ask) the U.S. economy, the U.S. military power, the ability of the U.S. to tax its citizens, or the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Now, it means that the dollar is supported by or defended by something, as in "Don't worry, bro. I've got your back."
Of course, as I pointed out earlier, the new meaning of "backed" is just as fictitious as the backing itself.
I would say that Bitcoin is backed by all the users of Bitcoin wallets who all will claim and have proof that you have a certain amount of money.
In the end, all money is based upon trust. The decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that you can share your trust between multiple people who are all keeping each other in line. This in contrast to centralized systems where you will have to put your trust in only one entity(person/company/government) that will be able to do what they wish with a certain valuta.
In the end, all money is based upon trust. The decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that you can share your trust between multiple people who are all keeping each other in line. This in contrast to centralized systems where you will have to put your trust in only one entity(person/company/government) that will be able to do what they wish with a certain valuta.
Simply point out that regardless of how the dollar is backed, it is has lost 95% of its value since the Fed was created. Whatever the backing may be, it has not been very effective.
Backed by the state = the state can take it away whenever they want.
Backed by the banks = the banks can take it away whenever they want.
That's all you need to know.
+1Backed by the banks = the banks can take it away whenever they want.
That's all you need to know.
This is a great response.... It is best to emphasize this idea...Bitcoin is backed by the only person who can take yours away: you.
Backed by the state = the state can take it away whenever they want.
Backed by the banks = the banks can take it away whenever they want.
That's all you need to know.
Backed by the banks = the banks can take it away whenever they want.
That's all you need to know.
Bitcoin is backed by trust in a large functioning network system.
The point people are making is that you are failing do recognise the different meanings of "backing" as in 1)underwriting and 2) being in favour of.
I referred to the underwriting of the Euro, and given the recent events in Cyprus have proven it is false. And if "being in favour of" is a form of backing, then in that case it needs to be clear from the get go in every conversation because I don't think that's how most people understand currencies to be "backed". "Being in favour of" is very, very different than how I define "backing" a currency.As for "currency backing"....well now you're just moving the goalposts.
Fine. Call it "backing a currency". We're not just talking about any "backing", are we? If I put my back against the wall and call it "backing", should we discuss if bitcoin is being "backed" by anyone in such a way? There are so many stupid things in this thread. Quoting wikipedia like some kind of abirter of truth, semantic interpretation of backing, bitcoin being backed by math. Conceptual misunderstandings all over the goddamn place. What a mess.
How about this. I already defined what I believe can be considered "backing", semantically speaking:
"Backing" is a term reserved for a guarantee by another party that something is of value, such as being exchangeable for another asset by that third party, or being insured in some other way (hence being guaranteed).
I may, however, be wrong and I want anyone who disagrees with me to please define "currency backing" so that we can get the semantics out of the way.you're using the term "backed" literally, and ignoring its less literal meaning... while what you're saying is basically true, the Euro and US Dollar are REGULATED by the government. Which is a form of backing.
What?? Since when is regulation = backing? Wait, cigarettes are regulated by governments, does that mean that cigarettes are backed by governments?
The point people are making is that you are failing do recognise the different meanings of "backing" as in 1)underwriting and 2) being in favour of.
As for "currency backing"....well now you're just moving the goalposts.
There are so many stupid things in this thread. Quoting wikipedia like some kind of abirter of truth, semantic interpretation of backing, bitcoin being backed by math. Conceptual misunderstandings all over the goddamn place. What a mess.
How about this. I already defined what I believe can be considered "backing", semantically speaking:
"Backing" is a term reserved for a guarantee by another party that something is of value, such as being exchangeable for another asset by that third party, or being insured in some other way (hence being guaranteed).
I may, however, be wrong and I want anyone who disagrees with me to please define "currency backing" so that we can get the semantics out of the way.you're using the term "backed" literally, and ignoring its less literal meaning... while what you're saying is basically true, the Euro and US Dollar are REGULATED by the government. Which is a form of backing.
What?? Since when is regulation = backing? Wait, cigarettes are regulated by governments, does that mean that cigarettes are backed by governments?
Sure, regulation is everywhere.
The only backing fiat money has is that you are force to accept it because of legal tender laws. But nothing forces you to accept a specific amount of fiat money for rendering a good or service. In this sense, the backing really means nothing. If someone were to say to me that their money is "backed" by the government I would just say ok what will they give you if you returned it to the Fed?
There are so many stupid things in this thread. Quoting wikipedia like some kind of abirter of truth, semantic interpretation of backing, bitcoin being backed by math. Conceptual misunderstandings all over the goddamn place. What a mess.
I agree with some of your points about counterfeiting and underwriting but the topic title is "What to say against the claim "backed by the state/bank"." Why do you think we should claim that bitcoin isn't backed by a state/bank?
Because it's not?
I'm not even saying "claim that bitcoin isn't backed by a state/bank", I'm just saying claim that fiat isn't.
I would say: "You're right, Bitcoin is backed by no government ( just a bunch of regular folk running validating nodes (like me), enterprising miners securing the network, intrepid business owners adapting the technology and increasing acceptance, and clever devs creating the technological basis for our future money)....dont forget, Bitcoin is not exposed to incredbly large sovereign debt burdens or central bank mismanagement risks either."
I agree with some of your points about counterfeiting and underwriting but the topic title is "What to say against the claim "backed by the state/bank"." Why do you think we should claim that bitcoin isn't backed by a state/bank?
What is happening to money backed by the state Bank Of Cyprus ?
Exactly that.
It's so nice that the state itself makes our counterpoints for us...
What is happening to money backed by the state Bank Of Cyprus ?
This is what has come to mind for me recently when people ask the question about how Bicoins are 'backed'. How's was the money of the citizens of Cyprus supposedly 'backed? How's that working out for them?
People trust what they know, THINK they understand, and are comfortable with. When I read some of the comments replying to articles about Bitcoin, I think about the 'Flat Earth Society' of old. Only time will tell who was right, and perhaps we're headed for the edge, but that, to me, is part of what has made this speculation so enjoyable an exciting.
What is happening to money backed by the state Bank Of Cyprus ?
Fiat money are backed by idiots. Bitcoin is backed by math.
No it's not. Bitcoin of the same blockchain cannot be counter-fitted, thanks to certain mathematical properties of bitcoin. But "math" does not "back" the value of bitcoin. Even counter-fitting is possible with bitcoin using a few types of attacks.
Can we please stop with this?
Jump to: