Ending Bitcoin Support

Post by JumpCrisscross » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 9:07 PM UTC

Jommi wrote: post #338

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we see a widely traded and daily useful crypto-currency in use for general goods and services, we'll see a deleveraging of the banking system Based on what? Cryptocurrency markets went from zero to doing practically every financial fraud, scam and deception in the book in a matter of months. Excessive leverage? See Tether. Ponzi scheme? See Bitconnect. Backroom dealing to help the well connected? See Ethereum. B…

Not sure what is your point, could you open a bit?

Post by banku_brougham » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 9:10 PM UTC

masklinn wrote: post #184

emodendroket wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, people could also stop thinking gold is worth much. Maybe a modern-day alchemist finally figures out the formula. I don't know. Probably far less likely than the Bitcoin scenarios though.

> To be fair, people could also stop thinking gold is worth much. They've already noted that: > people's perception of its value will change But as they say, a gold bar will remain a gold bar, until and unless it is actively destroyed. Not so for bitcoins, which only remain so as long as they're actively maintained (not just individual coins but the mining networks which allows the creation of new transactions)

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 9:11 PM UTC

smallnamespace wrote: post #319

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the problem with regulating anonymous transactions is you don't know who's doing them Every government has departments of agents adept at tracing cash transactions. Bitcoin offers the advantage of total transactional transparency. Shady wallet? Trace back until you find a known wallet. An exchange, vendor, et cetera . Subpoena, find their counterparty, rinse and repeat. Best case: you find your guy. Consolation: mo…

Of course with enough effort and investment you can probably stop many things, the point is whether the increasing marginal costs of enforcement are worth it to the government and society. By that same argument, the US could round up every illegal immigrant and deport them, or every casual drug user and lock them up for life. We don't do that because it'd be ruinously expensive (not to mention immoral) and transform…

Post by speeq » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 9:12 PM UTC

Mithorium wrote: post #221

doomslice wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if XLM was not intended to be used for direct payments, is there anything that actually prevents it from being used for it? From everything I see, it actually seems like a pretty good candidate for actual spending.

Well, if people decide to use it that way nobody can stop them. In my opinion, that would be an inefficient way of using the network, since if you pay with XLM today you need to first buy some, taking a loss on the conversion since you have to go through either eth or btc, then the payee needs to sell it (again with another intermediate currency) to get the money to pay their operating costs, and they'll likely charg…

Post by wtetzner » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 9:13 PM UTC

noir_lord wrote: post #201

nxsynonym wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a ridiculous example, of course. But it's something. Not to mention the actual real applications that were mentioned above. The point is - crypto-currencies are fairy dust. There is nothing real or tangible about them.

> The point is - crypto-currencies are fairy dust. There is nothing real or tangible about them. Most money in circulation is 0/1's on hard drives. I'm bearish on cryptocurrencies because frankly the entire thing is hilarious but modern currencies aren't entirely dissimilar.