The Guns of Bitcoin (2017) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#61

Post by Sschellbach » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:29 PM UTC

akavi wrote: post #57

coinward wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What inflation in early march are you referring to? From my view the fixed supply growth and production from new blocks went right on schedule. Nothing unexpected

The price in bitcoin of a basket of actual consumable goods went up significantly (ie, BTC's dollar value tanked). How is that not inflation? Or are you claiming that was not "unpredictable"?

You are pointing to price volatility. The comment is talking about inflation. Price discovery occurs in all markets with varying degrees of volatility. Speculative bubbles, crashes, etc result occur when new information causes price discovery. Its an ongoing process in an ever-changing world. Inflation is specifically price increases from change in the amount of money in a system. The delta in money supply for Bitcoin is entirely predictable and that was the claim

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#62

Post by keymone » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:29 PM UTC

WorldMaker wrote: post #58

seibelj wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fixed supply is the most interesting aspect. There could be an extremely huge gold deposit, or someone could figure out how to extract it from the ocean efficiently, or an asteroid / planet made of gold discovered and mined. But there will never be more bitcoin. More bitcoin would just fork the chain, and it wouldn't be bitcoin anymore.

Forks are so easy in practice though that it seems magic/wishful thinking to assume there's anything particularly special about one branch's artificial scarcity. It seems axiomatic that in using a tree-based structure branches should be the natural and expected state and pretending the other branches don't exist is a fascinating strategy that I just have a rough time thinking holds over the long term, especially when…

Fork of bitcoin is not bitcoin. Only 21 million bitcoin will ever exist and that’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. Whether that 21 million bitcoin branch will remain the dominant in terms of use and hashpower is under question, but there will only ever be 21 million bitcoin.

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#63

Post by Sschellbach » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:29 PM UTC

notahacker wrote: post #53

akavi wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like bitcoin experienced a whole lot of unexpected inflation in early March this year. And fall of last year. And November 2018. And January 2018. And... well, you get the picture. Bitcoin guarantees the supply remains fixed. But inflation is also a function of demand, and that is well outside its control.

Indeed it's the exact opposite: as the supply of the dollar is a function of its demand [at an interest rate which can be varied if an inflation target is expected to be missed] its inflation is almost entirely predictable. cf BTC, which predicts zero inflation but has experienced more diminution in purchasing power since late 2018 than the dollar has seen in decades.

The supply of dollars is a function of the monetary policy. Are you suggesting you can predict what M2 will be in 5 years, or even 6 months? Please share your expectation.

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#64

Post by tripletao » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:29 PM UTC

scottmsul wrote: post #18

What's going to stop me from using bitcoin for everything, and then exchanging some into dollars at the last second to pay my taxes?

Nothing, but if I earn $1 on January 1 and anticipate 30% tax on that due April 15, saving $0.30 guarantees that I can pay that debt. If I earn 1 mBTC on January 1 and save 0.3 mBTC, then that might be worth much more or less than my tax liability come April 15.

The tax argument for the value of USD is because people have future debts denominated in USD (taxes), and they become aware of the amount of those debts in USD before those debts are due. If those people want an asset perfectly matched to that future liability, then they want USD. The demand is from that saving period, not the actual payment (which you correctly note is brief, just however long the transaction would take). Most discussions either express this distinction unclearly or miss it altogether, including the linked article.

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#65

Post by shpongled » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:30 PM UTC

coinward wrote: post #24

louwrentius wrote: post #9

I would like to see a total ban/block of any kind of cryptocurrency articles on HN. I'm happy to include my own, if that's what it takes. https://louwrentius.com/cryptocurrencies-are-detrimental-to-...

you want to censor discussion around a promising technology. why?

The idea of something being outside the control of the Nanny state terrifies them. One of his primary arguments is that cryptocurrencies "facilitate crime".

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#66

Post by Sschellbach » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:32 PM UTC

WorldMaker wrote: post #60

inscionent wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have guns and a yearly budget of US$1.2 billion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRS_Criminal_Investigation

They are notorious for "always" catching their criminals, too. Local law enforcement of many stripes in multiple states tried to catch Capone, but in the end it was the Revenuers that caught Capone on tax evasion.

For every Capone there are thousands of people you never heard of successfully evading taxes

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#67

Post by LgWoodenBadger » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:33 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #20

tossAfterUsing wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pine floors are terrible to maintain though. 'cut off your nose to spite the king'

>Pine floors are terrible to maintain though. Why? Is it the sap?

Pine is a very soft wood. Some you can dent with a pencil.

Our dining table was like that when I was a kid. You could see all sorts of writing in it from too much pencil pressure when doing homework.

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#68

Post by Sschellbach » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:35 PM UTC

beachjpg wrote: post #42

coinward wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you want to censor discussion around a promising technology. why?

Bitcoin is not really liked on HN. I'm guessing most of the older HN guys don't seem really interested in the tech or is terrified by the price action, perhaps

I'm on HN. I like Bitcoin. Surely, I am not alone

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#69

Post by monokh » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:40 PM UTC

wslh wrote: post #46

monokh wrote: post #17

The common mistake is to try to compare Bitcoin to a predefined experience of money. Bitcoin's value is multifaceted. From a very simplistic perspective, it can be compared to gold. Things get more interesting when you value aspects such as it being: - Fully digital - Verifiable by the common individual - Sent and received with no interference from third parties - Free from supply emission increases or control Each o…

> From a very simplistic perspective, it can be compared to gold. It is indeed very simplistic to compare it to gold and this is sadly part of the Bitcoin narrative. Gold has a recognition as an store of value based on its network effects while Bitcoin network effect is pretty low in comparison. We can imagine than if a Bitcoin2 is created with similar economic properties and gain more traction it will automatically…

What you describe is exactly the property of Bitcoin. Have a look at how many forks have tried to create "Bitcoin2". Some even with overwhelming support from powerful actors. If they fail like they have during Bitcoin's infancy, later on they have no chance.

Re: The Guns of Bitcoin (2017)

#70

Post by notahacker » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 7:41 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #3

> What makes dollars valuable is that the government wants them back. Very common misconception. Dollars have value because there is demand for them (governments, other governments, other people and institutions). Bitcoin also has value because there is demand for it. As does your house, expensive art, etc. Why does anything have value? Because someone else will pay your for it. I can say my pencil is worth $1 billio…

> Why does anything have value? Because someone else will pay your for it.

Sure, but there is a reason why dollars will have value in future: the quantity of outstanding dollar-denominated debt and future tax liabilities vastly exceeds the number of dollars in circulation. As people will need to have dollars for future repayments in future, you won't have trouble finding people to execute a trade of dollars you have for things you want. The [central] banking system can also vary the amount of dollars in circulation to link the supply of a currency on a given day to its demand and keep prices in line.

Conversely there's little reason to believe that anybody will need most of the Bitcoin in circulation in future [very little BTC denominated debt, and all other payments or speculative holding can be made with other currencies, crypto or otherwise], and no other stabilising mechanism. So whilst you can say your BTC is worth at least what you paid for it, it really isn't unless you're lucky enough to find someone else to offload it to.