91–100 of 262 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are 21,000,000 BTC ever ever, you can't print more Untrue. More could easily be printed if that is what the leadership/community wanted.
Oh well if it's that simple then why has it been so hard just to do something as simple as increase the block size?
I don't really understand the upside to an FB stablecoin, but maybe I'm missing something. Why would I want FB to be the store of my money instead of FDIC-backed banks if the value and purchasing power is going to be identical?
If they can move your money cheaper than credit and debit card networks. That is the only part I'm interested in. Given they are partnered with PayPal though, I'm not hopeful on it being low fee.
If Facebook has fees that are less than industry standard I would be highly suspect of that payment method.
If it is pegged to USD, there is no investment potential. It is just as bad as cash. The idea behind bitcoin is that you don't need to rely on the US government for storing value. There are 21,000,000 BTC ever ever, you can't print more. That article did not address this at all. This is the most compelling reason to buy bitcoin.
> There are 21,000,000 BTC ever ever, you can't print more. I see you're unfamiliar with Bitcoin SV, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin 2, Bitcoin Segwit...
I can grasp the idea that Facebook would want to capture more payments like WeChat does; what I can't figure is how having their own cryptocurrency would add anything. Whom does it appeal to? I doubt Facebook wants the drug dealer/money launderer market segment for example. (I also doubt it'll be secure or anonymous enough to satisfy those people.) And it's no good for speculators, if it's pegged. Seems like at best…
1. Hype
2. It gives "credibility" to their currency
3. they can be regulated as a crypto-currency that way.
4. It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency.
5. It locks the users in to their partners because it's more friction to get money.
6. Easier to obtain the data on how users spend their money.
7. Easier to introduce new models based upon transactions/currency.
8. It can be given away for free easily.
If it is pegged to USD, there is no investment potential. It is just as bad as cash. The idea behind bitcoin is that you don't need to rely on the US government for storing value. There are 21,000,000 BTC ever ever, you can't print more. That article did not address this at all. This is the most compelling reason to buy bitcoin.
No one should have to buy Bitcoin when you can mine it, oh wait it's all being printed in warehouses owned by wealthy capital holders. Surely this is Satoshi's design goal. Also don't worry about the exchanges operating out of obscure off shore islands, they probably arn't operating fractional reserves.
There are plenty of exchanges in reliable jurisdictions (Coinbase, Bitstamp, etc.), why do a few shady ones matter?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are 21,000,000 BTC ever ever, you can't print more. I see you're unfamiliar with Bitcoin SV, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin 2, Bitcoin Segwit...
This is a really stupid thing to say. SV coins are SV coins, not BTC coins. Their chains don't interact and can't inflate each other, so pointing out that there are multiple blockchains doesn't make any sense.
It'd be like if counterfeit designer clothes were actually indistinguishable from the "real" ones, and arguably better made in some cases.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one should have to buy Bitcoin when you can mine it, oh wait it's all being printed in warehouses owned by wealthy capital holders. Surely this is Satoshi's design goal. Also don't worry about the exchanges operating out of obscure off shore islands, they probably arn't operating fractional reserves.
Miners have to sell their coin to remain profitable. This distributes the coin well, and ensures a highly liquid market. The largest brokerage is US-based (coinbase) and the largest exchange is Binance, which has most of its funds auditable on various blockchains. Also just hold your own keys if you're worried about it. The ability to opt-out of custodianship is kind of the point.
No, they don't. They just have to sell a notation in their database that a coin is owed to someone. This is what MtGox did, and it's what Coinbase still does. The trick is to maintain just enough coin to be able to transfer out coins on request (as MtGox tried to do), or to just claim that it will take a few days to process the transaction (as Coinbase does).
Binance, which has most of its funds auditable on various blockchains.
A company owned by Binance audited Binance's books. And posted the results of the audit online...but not the underlying data. This is useful from the POV of conducting a third-party audit...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's a great podcast on NPR's planet money if you want to learn more - https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/01/10/576879734/epis... You cannot just give me two anecdotes to defend one of the most inefficient systems in the US.
How is ACH "inefficient"? It's certainly slow, but speed and efficiency are not the same thing. It's far more efficient than bitcoin. It's a mainframe batch-processing system built in the 1970s, and it's mostly worked just fine for 40 years. That's pretty efficient!
The reason for Bitcoin’s design is precisely because a centralized/pegged alternative was tried and failed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecash Facebook’s currency is not a successor of Bitcoin, it’s an inferior reincarnation of a failed predecessor.
Not to mention that pegs always fail in the land of financial markets anyhow [1]. Interest rate pegs, currency pegs, pegs to commodities e.g. gold tend to collapse in the long run because they create a "perfect trade". When the value of two separate things eventually diverge due to external market forces, you can take advantage of the peg by trading the less valuable item for the more valuable item at the historical…
Assuming that Facebook is the sole issuer and redeemer of the coin, this is a nonissue. By backing the issued coin 1:1 with reserves according to the composition of the basket, Facebook can redeem any coins at face value. Hong Kong, for example, maintains a currency pegged to USD backed entirely with USD holdings.
As an aside, your source, armstrongeconomics.com, may not have the best credibility:
"In 1999, Japanese fraud investigators accused Armstrong of collecting money from Japanese investors, improperly commingling these funds with funds from other investors, and using the fresh money to cover losses he had incurred while trading. United States prosecutors called it a three-billion-dollar Ponzi scheme... Armstrong admitted to deceiving corporate investors and improperly commingling client funds—actions that according to prosecutors resulted in commodities losses of more than seven hundred million dollars—and was sentenced to five years in prison."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whether you consider it legitimate or not, Bitcoin Cash has about 4% of the value of BTC. Here’s my point. Is it theoretically possible for some group of people in the physical world to take actions so that what we generally call Bitcoin has 1 more coin? I strongly believe yes. So the world isn’t as black and white as some people like to say it is.
Just as the stock market can only have 1 AAPL ticker, there can only be 1 BTC. Is it possible that in the future that BTC can have a change in emission and cap? Yes. I don't agree with that part of the parents statement. But there is in no way for there to be more than 1 BTC chain.
However, at least in the US, a company is not allowed to choose a stock ticker already in use by a company publicly traded on a US exchange.