Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
bitcoinbulletin.com
Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
1–10 of 108 posts
Re: Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
#2This current debacle shows that economists and hackers look at bitcoin from completely different perspectives.
The rant was based mostly on issues of economy disregarding the technical side completely. This response to the rant however disregards the economical side of the rant almost entirely. It's sad to see two groups of smart individuals talk completely past each other.
Re: Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
#3I don't like how people get defensive around capitalism; "our ideas are not at odds with capitalism", ok, so what if they were? If an idea is at odds with capitalism, that doesn't necessarily make it a bad idea.
For instance, I think the idea of free software (RMS style) really is at odds with capitalism; but so what? This is not a good reason to agree or disagree with the idea.
Re: Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
#4This current debacle shows that economists and hackers look at bitcoin from completely different perspectives. The rant was based mostly on issues of economy disregarding the technical side completely. This response to the rant however disregards the economical side of the rant almost entirely. It's sad to see two groups of smart individuals talk completely past each other.
I wouldn't put "economists" on the same intelligence level with "hackers".
Most economists -- I wouldn't trust. In a similar way that I wouldn't trust most politicians.
Re: Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
#5I don't like how people get defensive around capitalism; "our ideas are not at odds with capitalism", ok, so what if they were? If an idea is at odds with capitalism, that doesn't necessarily make it a bad idea. For instance, I think the idea of free software (RMS style) really is at odds with capitalism; but so what? This is not a good reason to agree or disagree with the idea.
Free software isn't at odds with capitalism. In fact, right of property is what makes free software possible (otherwise you couldn't enforce any free software license).
Re: Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
#6This current debacle shows that economists and hackers look at bitcoin from completely different perspectives. The rant was based mostly on issues of economy disregarding the technical side completely. This response to the rant however disregards the economical side of the rant almost entirely. It's sad to see two groups of smart individuals talk completely past each other.
I don't think the guy who ranted about bitcoin using the gold standard is an economist because from reading what he writes it's clear he had no clue of what he was talking about.
Re: Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
#7I don't like how people get defensive around capitalism; "our ideas are not at odds with capitalism", ok, so what if they were? If an idea is at odds with capitalism, that doesn't necessarily make it a bad idea. For instance, I think the idea of free software (RMS style) really is at odds with capitalism; but so what? This is not a good reason to agree or disagree with the idea.
Your viewpoint is only sensible if one is neutral or negative toward capitalism and assumes everyone else must be as well. If you think capitalism is a good thing, then of course something being at odds with it is problematic.
Re: Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
#8I don't like how people get defensive around capitalism; "our ideas are not at odds with capitalism", ok, so what if they were? If an idea is at odds with capitalism, that doesn't necessarily make it a bad idea. For instance, I think the idea of free software (RMS style) really is at odds with capitalism; but so what? This is not a good reason to agree or disagree with the idea.
Free software isn't at odds with capitalism (you don't have to extract monetary profit from everything you do in capitalism). Neither is bitcoin. Government-controlled paper money, on the other hand, definitely is at odds with free market.
Re: Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
#9All economies are built on some combination of trust, fakery, coercion and hard work. The underlying rationale of a currency backed by "real material" is that it can be trusted to last. It can be trusted more than any government. Governments can fall quickly.
Bitcoin hasn't proven itself to the degree of gold. It doesn't necessarily have to, though. It just has to look _better_ than alternatives, within some useful timeframe of economic activity(i.e. more than a year or two, but probably less than a century). And, as the original author wrote, it might fall apart suddenly, but then it is basically the same risk as a government-backed currency.
Re: Bitcoin money ≠ the Gold Standard.
#10I don't like how people get defensive around capitalism; "our ideas are not at odds with capitalism", ok, so what if they were? If an idea is at odds with capitalism, that doesn't necessarily make it a bad idea. For instance, I think the idea of free software (RMS style) really is at odds with capitalism; but so what? This is not a good reason to agree or disagree with the idea.
Free software isn't at odds with capitalism. In fact, right of property is what makes free software possible (otherwise you couldn't enforce any free software license).
GPL is a hack; its existence is not an approval of the system in any way, shape or form.
That's not the point though.
Whether Free Software is at odds (or not) with capitalism shouldn't matter at all in any intelligent discussion.