Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

avc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 199 posts

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#51

Post by stcredzero »

steve19 wrote: post #47
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #30

Back in 2009 when I was getting into bitcoin, it was widely described as a "stateless currency" and not just an alternative to Visa or credit cards. Having a background in economics, bitcoin looked to me like a truly revolutionary technology and if it was adopted en masse would change politics forever. The problem however is that a nation's currency is arguably the primary source of it's sovereignty. Whomever control…

> nation's currency is arguably the primary source of it's sovereignty Not really. Many countries do not mint their own currency, and other mint currency but peg its value to another. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_substitution What constitutes sovereignty is complex. It mostly comes down either legal recognition of sovereignty (de jure) or physical/guns on the ground control (de facto). https://en.wikipedia.…

It mostly comes down either legal recognition of sovereignty (de jure) or physical/guns on the ground control (de facto).

It usually comes down to the latter. De jure sovereignty without physical control gets overrun by de facto.

I wonder if either Japan or China would grant de jure sovereignty to a seasteading platform anchored to that sinking island both of them want so badly? Then the new nation could grant their supporter some economic rights in exchange for military support.

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#52

Post by slg »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #30

Back in 2009 when I was getting into bitcoin, it was widely described as a "stateless currency" and not just an alternative to Visa or credit cards. Having a background in economics, bitcoin looked to me like a truly revolutionary technology and if it was adopted en masse would change politics forever. The problem however is that a nation's currency is arguably the primary source of it's sovereignty. Whomever control…

As someone with an economics background, I'm surprised you think the biggest problem is the statelessness of Bitcoin. The biggest economic problem to me has always been an unintelligent control of the money supply. You can criticize some of the actions that many central banks do to manipulate the economy, but I have a hard time buying the answer to bad management is no management.

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#53

Post by shawn-furyan »

witty_username wrote: post #17
gtrubetskoy wrote: post #14

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if this was a stock or some other security, and I somehow had influence over how it is managed thus what I said could affect its value, declaring it "dead" (or soon to be worthless) AND holding interest in it (long or short) - would be criminal in most countries.

Then this would be illegal (the website owners have a short in Herbalife). http://www.factsaboutherbalife.com/ I think as long as you disclose your position in the stock/security, you can say whatever you want.

Indeed. People who specialize in shorting stocks, bonds, etc. live on the cycle of finding dirt through thorough private research, shorting the stock, and then publicizing the dirt.

This is actually one of the mechanisms that Efficient Market Theory relies upon for disseminating market information. If you could only benefit from assets increasing in value, then there would mostly be negative incentive for anyone to try to expose companies that are weaker than the market assumes them to be.

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#54

Post by omegaham »

kang wrote: post #31
yc1010 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the problem is THAT DISCUSSION OF SOLUTIONS to bitcoin issues are being censored, with key people being banned from the usual discussion forums A decentralized currency where the development, mining and discussion is controlled by less than a dozen people which is a joke

It is irrational to complain about censorship in a private location.

Depends on why you're complaining about censorship. If you're talking about some God-given right to free expression, sure, complaining about censorship is ridiculous. But if you're talking about what's best for a community, complaining about censorship is a good way to motivate change. People start asking, "Why, exactly, are we censoring these viewpoints? Is it for a good reason, e.g. preventing trolls from taking over discourse, or is it for a stupid or even malicious reason?" Stuff like that is what gets rid of toxic leadership. On the Internet, it usually manifests itself in all of the high-quality folks going elsewhere.

Basically, relatively few people have a problem with the idea of censorship; a certain amount of moderation is necessary on an Internet forum to prevent shitposting. What people are decrying is misguided, stupid, and / or malicious censorship - either due to juvenile power games on the part of the moderators, or due to an external agenda that said moderators are pushing.

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#55

Post by AndrewKemendo »

steve19 wrote: post #47
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #30

Back in 2009 when I was getting into bitcoin, it was widely described as a "stateless currency" and not just an alternative to Visa or credit cards. Having a background in economics, bitcoin looked to me like a truly revolutionary technology and if it was adopted en masse would change politics forever. The problem however is that a nation's currency is arguably the primary source of it's sovereignty. Whomever control…

> nation's currency is arguably the primary source of it's sovereignty Not really. Many countries do not mint their own currency, and other mint currency but peg its value to another. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_substitution What constitutes sovereignty is complex. It mostly comes down either legal recognition of sovereignty (de jure) or physical/guns on the ground control (de facto). https://en.wikipedia.…

There is a massive difference between a currency peg and citizens using another nation's currency for transactions. In the former case the state still controls the currency and it's distribution, the latter they are completely divorced.

and yes sovereignty is of course complex, but if you can't control how your economy runs then you can't control your nation. Forcefully seizing notes or issuing new currencies is hallmark of a power transfer.

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#56

Post by gavazzy »

slg wrote: post #52
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #30

Back in 2009 when I was getting into bitcoin, it was widely described as a "stateless currency" and not just an alternative to Visa or credit cards. Having a background in economics, bitcoin looked to me like a truly revolutionary technology and if it was adopted en masse would change politics forever. The problem however is that a nation's currency is arguably the primary source of it's sovereignty. Whomever control…

As someone with an economics background, I'm surprised you think the biggest problem is the statelessness of Bitcoin. The biggest economic problem to me has always been an unintelligent control of the money supply. You can criticize some of the actions that many central banks do to manipulate the economy, but I have a hard time buying the answer to bad management is no management.

It's all about trade-offs. Bitcoin may have trouble competing against a "stable" currency like USD or EUR, but would have a huge benefit over a heavily manipulated one like in Venezuela, where inflation sits at ~60%.

If Bitcoin could become stable, then it would offer the freedom of converting wages into a more stable form. A Venezuelan would expect the purchasing power of today's wages to be 4% lower in just one month!

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#57

Post by supster »

slg wrote: post #52
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #30

Back in 2009 when I was getting into bitcoin, it was widely described as a "stateless currency" and not just an alternative to Visa or credit cards. Having a background in economics, bitcoin looked to me like a truly revolutionary technology and if it was adopted en masse would change politics forever. The problem however is that a nation's currency is arguably the primary source of it's sovereignty. Whomever control…

As someone with an economics background, I'm surprised you think the biggest problem is the statelessness of Bitcoin. The biggest economic problem to me has always been an unintelligent control of the money supply. You can criticize some of the actions that many central banks do to manipulate the economy, but I have a hard time buying the answer to bad management is no management.

The money supply is fixed to 21 million. Fortunately, the coins are basically infinitely divisible, so as the coins become more valuable (assuming over the long run that coins are used for larger and larger amounts of commerce rather than speculation), small transactions simply happen at smaller units. In other words the system is steadily deflationary instead of the highly volatile inflationary system we currently have with fiat currencies.

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#58

Post by jsprogrammer »

slg wrote: post #52
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #30

Back in 2009 when I was getting into bitcoin, it was widely described as a "stateless currency" and not just an alternative to Visa or credit cards. Having a background in economics, bitcoin looked to me like a truly revolutionary technology and if it was adopted en masse would change politics forever. The problem however is that a nation's currency is arguably the primary source of it's sovereignty. Whomever control…

As someone with an economics background, I'm surprised you think the biggest problem is the statelessness of Bitcoin. The biggest economic problem to me has always been an unintelligent control of the money supply. You can criticize some of the actions that many central banks do to manipulate the economy, but I have a hard time buying the answer to bad management is no management.

>You can criticize some of the actions that many central banks do to manipulate the economy, but I have a hard time buying the answer to bad management is no management.

Why is active, central, management necessary?

>The biggest economic problem to me has always been an unintelligent control of the money supply.

The Bitcoin paper [0] lays down the rules of control and many have been able to follow it; In what way is that unintelligent?

[0] https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#59

Post by AndrewKemendo »

slg wrote: post #52
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #30

Back in 2009 when I was getting into bitcoin, it was widely described as a "stateless currency" and not just an alternative to Visa or credit cards. Having a background in economics, bitcoin looked to me like a truly revolutionary technology and if it was adopted en masse would change politics forever. The problem however is that a nation's currency is arguably the primary source of it's sovereignty. Whomever control…

As someone with an economics background, I'm surprised you think the biggest problem is the statelessness of Bitcoin. The biggest economic problem to me has always been an unintelligent control of the money supply. You can criticize some of the actions that many central banks do to manipulate the economy, but I have a hard time buying the answer to bad management is no management.

>I'm surprised you think the biggest problem is the statelessness of Bitcoin.

In fact it's the opposite I think that's its biggest strength.

If no one else sees it that way however, then it will not live up to it's potential because there is no reason for them to move over to it. Adopting bitcoin is a political decision because money is as equally political as it is economic.

It's super complex because the vast majority of people have no clue the power and complexity that sits behind the money they hold in their hands. They just see it as the next bag of groceries, or electricity payment.

Re: Bitcoin Is Dead, Long Live Bitcoin

#60

Post by aurelius12 »

wmf wrote: post #19
manyoso wrote: post #2

This is interesting to me because it presents the blockchain size dispute in a way that seems much more sympathetic to the "no, we shouldn't increase the blockchain size" crowd than Mike Hearn's essay. Is it really true that the people who are objecting to increasing the blockchain size see Bitcoin turning into a reserve "currency" to hold wealth instead of a liquid currency used to make real time transactions? Is th…

I would put it in a slightly different way: Everyone wants "Visa" functionality, but there is a debate about whether the solution is a one-layer system where base Bitcoin provides transaction throughput or a two-layer system where transaction throughput is provided by a separate layer on top of Bitcoin.

The trouble is that Visa functionality already exists and it already works really, really well for both consumers and merchants.
Post reply on HN