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

The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 405 posts

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#351

Post by [deleted] »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #304
ryanmonroe wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it only looks pretty to you if you're into that type of thing. I don't think it would be hard to find people who don't think gold jewelry looks good. My point is that the utility is entirely dependent on the subjective experience of the user.

There's plenty of stuff more expensive than gold, the reason gold is used is because it's shiny-bling. People in the past have traded using seeds as fiat, but they wore shiny or coloured things like shells, polished stones, polished metals. Human vision is attracted to shiny and brightly coloured artefacts, it's not entirely subjective. This is why you can trick a child to accept a shiny coin in exchange for a high v…

[deleted]

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#352

Post by a_tractor »

algo646464 wrote: post #253
theseatoms wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A deflationary currency regime would raises the bar for both investment and consumption. Investors would be choosier about speculative opportunities because the yield on the risk-free asset would be much, much higher. Consumers would still buy essentials, but they'd be extremely incentivized to hold currency rather than spend it. Regardless of whether or not a deflationary end-state is better or worse, it seems non-c…

> Investors would be choosier about speculative opportunities because the yield on the risk-free asset would be much, much higher. It won't help how choosy investors are, or how well the economy performs. The money supply is fixed. So for someone to make 120 bitcoins from an investment of 100 bitcoins, someone else has to lose 20 bitcoins, which would be other investors, or the public (workers / consumers).

Are you saying that with an inflationary system, where the money supply is not fixed, for someone to make 120 dollars from 100, the 20 extra dollars comes from.... where? Thin air?

The alternative to inflationary currency is not zero-sum. For someone to make 120 bitcoins from an investment of 100 bitcoins, that investment would have to actually produce 20 bitcoins of value, and that person has to get people to pay the higher price for something he has improved or created with it. That is the whole idea. Its how most economies worked up until 1913 or so. We built civilization without "inflation."

Anyway, I would say it is less about deflationary vs inflationary, and more about transparency of control (even if automated) of the money supply, a movement away from usury and debt based fiat (which would be a return to a value based system), and finally, decentralization of value exchange.

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#353

Post by sudomake »

netsharc wrote: post #238
spookthesunset wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bitcoin is beyond blockchain, companies have built products to trade BTC instantly, free, using the infrastructure already existing If bitcoin is "beyond blockchain", than what is it? Just a table of transactions in a Real Database™? If yes, whats the point? You've just layered a very bank-sounding, very-centralized construct on top of your space-age "trustless" decentralized blockchain. How is it at all revolution…

Re the cult thing: I read an eye-opening paragraph about it somewhere. Basically, yeah, if you've invested in it, you have to either fool everyone else to buying into your cult, so the price will rise and future-you can cash-out and make a profit, or more likely, you're trying to convince yourself that past-you wasn't an idiot that just burned a lot of money. Or worse, you've convinced yourself that the USD will turn…

This is why I think that the buttcoin subreddit is one of the better places to learn and have an honest discussion about bitcoin. Sure,its not that main purpose of that subreddit and there there is still some bias, but the bias is nothing compared to the alteratives

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#354

Post by blueprint »

acdha wrote: post #347
blueprint wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe try Googling for once

This is not an effective way to convince someone you know what you’re talking about.

I'm not interested in you right now. Why do you keep replying to me? Is this really appropriate for HN? I have to use these replies preciously.

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#355

Post by a_tractor »

UncleMeat wrote: post #317
hisabness wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think you're arguing semantics. if most people dont view the forked chain as valid and prefer the original, then a new bitcoin isn't created per se.

That's why BTC's value went down when BCH forked, right? Even a moderately successful fork will hurt BTC's value.

You mean when it dropped $400 for a few days before starting its bull run to $19,000??

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#356

Post by acdha »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #307
acdha wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone choose to do that without some huge advantage to make up for the risks? The only reason seems to be ideological commitment and that doesn’t seem like an especially large market.

You can have the contract in local currency, eg $, convert at the moment of payment and reduce the risk considerably.

From a business perspective, what value does using Bitcoin add at that point other than the time delay, exchange and transaction fees?

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#357

Post by [deleted] »

clarkmoody wrote: post #220
unit91 wrote: post #71

This kind of debate by selective vocabulary is frustrating. If a poor or middle class person sits on the cash he has, he's "saving". If a wealthy person sits on the cash he has, he's "hoarding". Regardless of the topic at hand, let's be consistent enough in our terms to think and discuss the issues fairly and clearly without all the pejorative terms. If we have to resort to name-calling, we might not have a very good…

patriot insurrectionist freedom fighter terrorist interrogation torture free trader smuggler saver hoarder We've been conditioned to respond to certain words in very specific ways. Politicians and media know this and will always use it to their advantage.

[deleted]

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#358

Post by jpadkins »

nerfhammer wrote: post #332
jpadkins wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have taken econ 101, this wasn't covered. Deflation via credit default has shown to be harmful to wider economy 2x times in US history (monetary shocks). I am not aware of any conclusive study that a deflationary currency is bad for investment and progress. The easy counterpoint is Gold, which is often deflationary (when economic growth outpaces gold mining). We have had 10k years of investment that have shown your…

> Inflationary fiat or credit based currency is a relatively new invention (1972 in the US) The dollar has been fiat since the 1930s. The gold standard from 1933-1972 was essentially in name only.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system

45-72 was bretton woods era which was still fixed price to gold.

It was only after 1972 that the value was allowed to be free floating, not tied to an amount of gold https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_shock

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#359

Post by ericb »

chriswarbo wrote: post #335
mkirklions wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are payment processors/banks bad again? 2FA > a piece of paper under my bed. But also I keep my bitcoin in lots of places, a few bucks in coinbase for free transactions is like keeping cash in my wallet.

> Why are payment processors/banks bad again? It's a matter of opinion. However, the only reason for bitcoin to exist is to avoid banks and payment processors. Hence it's illogical to make heavy use of coinbase/etc. regardless of what opinion you have. Bitcoin has many downsides (volatility, no recourse, vast energy usage, paranoid wallet security, high fees, long confirmation time, etc.) and one upside (no need to t…

> However, the only reason for bitcoin to exist is to avoid banks and payment processors.

Not true. If your purpose is holding inflation-resistant money, payment processors and bitcoin banks may be perfectly ok.

Re: The Wealthy Are Hoarding $10B of Bitcoin in Bunkers

#360

Post by proofofmoon »

spookthesunset wrote: post #133
mkirklions wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speak for yourself. I use bitcoin all the time for payments. Peer to peer using coinbase(email) for free and instant to friends. Shift card for free and instant at merchants. Bitcoin is beyond blockchain, companies have built products to trade BTC instantly, free, using the infrastructure already existing. The transaction time 'problem' doesnt really exist if you are into crypto, you know how to use it. And I dont tr…

> Bitcoin is beyond blockchain, companies have built products to trade BTC instantly, free, using the infrastructure already existing If bitcoin is "beyond blockchain", than what is it? Just a table of transactions in a Real Database™? If yes, whats the point? You've just layered a very bank-sounding, very-centralized construct on top of your space-age "trustless" decentralized blockchain. How is it at all revolution…

Fiat money loses purchasing power by design. This rate has accelerated when governments need to raise money. They have been seized overnight.

In 2020, Bitcoin will inflate slower than most fiat currencies. The culture enforces that this rate will not increase arbitrarily. Storing it in a digital safe you control will prevent seizures.

Are fiat people living in a cult or can they present arguments in good faith?

Post reply on HN