Live data from Hacker News

The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

b.qr.ae

171–180 of 324 posts

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#171
I've only recently begun paying attention to Bitcoin, and am still evaluating. Have yet to read the technical details, for instance. So I have nothing to say on the validity of the technology. However I can offer some comments from a political perspective.

I find the timing of Bitcoin's appearance rather interesting. Here we are, entering into a whole mess of interconnected monetary crises - * Crisis of confidence in the ubiquitous fiat currency systems, with ALL the world's currencies in an inflationary race to the bottom. A race that will very likely blow up into hyperinflation on the way to demonetization, followed by some as-yet unknown replacement monetary system. * Crisis of legitimacy of the US Federal Reserve Bank. Which is neither federal, or a reserve, or really even a bank. It's actually a cartel of private bankers; many would say a criminal cartel. * An ongoing raging battle between fiat currency in general (unbacked by anything other than 'faith') vs traditional stores of wealth - gold and silver. The forward trenches of this battle lie in the bullion vaults of COMEX and the LBMA, and the bullion holdings of the SLV and GLD funds. Right now, the Silver Liberation Army fights to expose the current economic order as the paper illusion it certainly is. When COMEX inevitably defaults (because they have less than one hundredth the actual metal they should have to back all the paper silver and gold they have sold over the years to suppress precious metals prices), then silver and gold will suddenly resume their rightfull place as the only reliable, inviolable store of value. And thus actual currency, or backing for currency.

Now, there's a method for manipulation of mass psychology called 'well poisoning'. It goes like this. If you are in a position of power and control, and you become aware of a concept or information that if it became widely accepted could threaten your position, you 'poison the well' from which that concept could rise into public awareness. You do this by introducing very similar concepts, but all with fatal attachments or flaws. This conditions people to automatically reject anything in that whole class of concepts. For example, if you know someone has gone to Kenya and obtained a copy of a genuine birth certificate of interest, you whip up a series of obviously faked 'Kenyan birth certificates' and saturate the opposition media with them. Result: no one wants to look at any more damned fake birth certificates, especially not one that's being offered on ebay. Heck, a while later you can even officially release your own grossly fake certificate, and still no one pays attention!

So, supposing you are the rulers of the global fiat monetary/banking system, and being able to print as much of that virtual funny money as you like is working very nicely for you. Then a small problem arises, as the fundamental systemic instability of 'never enough money to pay it all back plus interest' has unprotected sex with assorted hideous creatures from the banking black lagoon (derivatives, credit default swaps, collateralised debt obligations, mortgage/title/MERS nightmare.) All of a sudden you are up to your ears in Hellspawn like massive naked short positions on precious metals, PIIGS running wild and Vikings seeking banker blood, mark-to-market guillotines, the head of the august International Maid Fxckers organization casting aspersions about the gold in Fort Knox (or not), and your global reserve currency about to go pooof!

What to do, what to do?

Worst of all, there's this damned idea of a non-fiat currency raising its head again. Curses, you thought you had that one permanently dead, thanks to that fast deal you did back in 1913, after a private chat among friends on Jekyll Island. And why _shouldn't_ your banks create the national currency and lend it at interest to governments and the peasants? Stupid idea that Constitutional rubbish, about the government issuing silver money, interest free. Ugh! Where's the profit in that? Not to mention the inability to steal virtually everything over time via inflation and unpayable compounding interest on the entire monetary base.

However... you and your banking mates haven't quite finished God's Work of stealing absolutely all assets from everyone else. Needs a bit more time. But here's this bloody idea of a specie-based currency popping up again all over. States declaring silver coins valid as money, what next FFS! Time for some well poisoning! And fast!

What you (as an Elite banker) want to do, is set up something that is going to badly burn all the early adopters of alternate currency. Something that will make them wish they'd never seen or heard or even dreamed of anything but nice safe paper dollars. Distract them asap from any thoughts of buying (shudder) actual physical silver and gold. Definitely you want to minimize the numbers of these ... financial terrorists ... who end up holding an ounce of physical silver or gold in their hand for the first time and having that no-return moment of 'AH HA!' where they suddenly, at gut level understand what _real_ money is.

Also preferably something that will brand them on the forehead as currency outlaws, all the better to round them up and send to the camps if it comes to that.

Enter, stage left... Bitcoin. Riding in to save the day.

I don't think so.

There are a few other concerns I have, besides the awfully suspicious coincidence of timing. Firstly, there's this thing about digital patterns and copyright, intellectual property rights and so on. I'm solidly in the camp that says you can't own information, and efforts to legally enforce ownership of information are fundamentally incompatible with deep principles of the Universe. Data is like Time, Matter, Energy and Space - it's a component of reality, with its own unalterable properties. One of those properties is that it can be duplicated indefinitely, without data loss. It can also be very easily destroyed, leaving nothing. It's a huge topic of course, with sub-issues like secrets, lies vs truth, cryptography, the difference between data and knowledge, the philosophy of data/knowledge sharing and its social benefits, etc.

But as it relates to Bitcoin, I find myself very, very uncomfortable with the concept of founding a medium of exchange on pure data - both infinitely copyable, and utterly ephemeral. Regardless of the soundness of the cryptographic methods, it sounds to me like asking for trouble. And that trouble might possibly have been intended from the start. It might hurt, a lot. Particularly if it's the fiat-banker ancien régime holding the other end of the cane, and it's you with your Patriot Act pants around your ankles.

Then there's a few more practical matters, that one shouldn't overlook these days.

* How do you bury Bitcoins in your backyard or out in the bush somewhere? (Silver & gold - no problem.)

* More to the point, even if you can somehow bury them, how will they be any use when someone digs them up in 10, 50 or 200 years? (Silver and gold - no problem!)

* When the police, BATF and FBI break down your door without a warrant, trash your place and take your computer, do your Bitcoins go with it? Ditto for burglars without badges and guns. (Silver and gold - at least you have some chance of hiding them.)

* TSA, airports, laptops and latex gloves. Where do Bitcoins go in this scene?

* Is it possible to melt down Bitcoins and cast bullets from them, and does Bitcoin ammo work against zombies, vampires and other flesh eating ravenous menaces?

* That '21 million Bitcoins max' figure. What?! Regardless of how that limit is set, and how dollar-Bitcoin exchange rates are determined, that figure tells me this was never intended to be a real currency, not even for one small nation. Less than one Bitcoin per person? Huh? Bitcoin was clearly designed as a 'crippleware demo', as opposed to a workable system. But a demo of what? Of pain-bringing, I suspect. (Silver and gold - there's enough to serve as a global currency. That there are two kinds, with about a 17:1 natural abundance ratio helps a lot too.)

* Quantum computers. Are now commercially available. How will this affect Bitcoin?

* Wishful thinking. Yes, we the people of the world do desperately need some medium of exchange that isn't owned by the banker and government flesh eating monsters. It would be great if it had all the good features of Bitcoin - electronic, anonymous, untraceable, unstoppable, untaxable transactions.

This doesn't mean we should leap joyfully at Bitcoin. Take a very close look, for strings, hooks, bear traps, punji-pits, etc. It's a mean world, and there are powerful, wiley forces who'll do anything, ANYTHING to preserve the existing fiat banking system a while longer.

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#172

The current design of Bitcoin is obviously not correct for the long term, and I am sure it will be supplanted by more evolved crypto-currency systems. There is absolutely nothing preventing people from taking the open-source code and creating an alternative "Bittoken" currency which changes problematic design elements such as the minting/issuance model. Given the rewards that have already accrued to Bitcoin early ado…

>Most problems with the critiques of Bitcoin like those in the linked Quora post is that they are debunking a straw man - the idea that Bitcoin is intended as a universal replacement for all other currency systems. By those standards of course it will fail.

Bitcoin is supposed to be a currency. That means that it's supposed to be effectively the same thing as USD or the Euro. It's not supposed to replace any other currency, it just needs to be able to do everything that any other currency can(except pay taxes). The problem is that it doesn't do that right now, and I don't see any way of making it actually work. To actually be a useful currency, people need to be able use it on everything, otherwise it's just a proxy for a "real" currency with an added gambling element.

Right now, it's basically the same thing as paypal or Google Checkout-something that people use to buy things online. By that standard, it's not even decentralized anymore, because everyone gets their BTC from MtGox, and they have to keep logs of all their transactions.

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#173
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin looks nothing like a pyramid scheme. There is a relationship between the value of a bitcoin and the demand, but that's true for any product.

Bitcoin looks exactly like a pyramid scheme from a money-transfer point of view. Money gets shifted from gullible suckers to the folks who invent the scheme, until one day you run out of people willing to sign on for the scheme, at which point everything collapses and the late adopters are left holding the bag. It's kinda sad. I think when it happens I'll make like edw519 and self-publish a book "The Best Of Hugh3" i…

You don't appear to understand how Bitcoin works. Money does not shift from new investors to the creators of Bitcoin. I'm not quite sure what confusion of ideas lead you to believe this.

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#174

Hi, I'm Adam, I wrote this answer on Quora. Against my better judgement, I'm going to wade in here and make a couple of clarifying points. 1 - Scam. I regret using the word "scam" in my answer, because I think it overshadows the broader point I was making about Bitcoin's severe structural design flaws. After watching the community react to this debate, I'm pretty confident that the average bitcoin supporter is not in…

Regarding your third point, the order book for the most popular Bitcoin exchange (Mt. Gox) is available [1]. Looking at the data, it seems there's actually quite a bit of liquidity bidding 7-10 USD and asking 10-13 USD per Bitcoin. It's only about 10,000 or 20,000 Bitcoin of depth on each side, so you can estimate the impact of buying or selling 15,000 USD worth of Bitcoin on the market. Of course, it might move less if you 1) consider using a dark pool of liquidity for a "large" trade, 2) add one or more limit orders to the order book (instead of using market orders), and 3) consider the fact that the order book gets "replenished" as trades come in.

[1] http://mtgox.com/code/data/getDepth.php

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#175
post #153
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A government collects taxes from all the businesses and people in a given country, which is huge in terms of being able to provide value. Bitcoin has no such thing.

Having access to more wealth gives people more faith that the government will be around a long time, will not do crazy things with the currency. That's not the same thing as the currency having more intrinsic value. (Also, it would not seem to make sense to talk about backing a currency with taxes denominated in that same currency, would it? But I'm unclear what you meant by "provide value".) (What I've heard about b…

[deleted]

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Bitcoins are being suggested as an alternative to fiat money. However, given their current rate of appreciation, Bitcoins are actually an investment , not a currency . What is their inherent value, then? Commodities (whether precious or industrial) can be used in production or for luxury goods. Equities generate profits, which are subsequently shared with investors. What do Bitcoins do? Nothing.

What do Bitcoins do? Nothing. That's not true. Bitcoins can be securely transferred between accounts without the need for a centralized broker. That's not "nothing".

So their unique value comes from private transactions...but there's only a finite supply of bitcoins? How many of these transactions can actually occur in 2013-2014, when every bitcoin has been mined and their value is skyrocketing?

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looked at in another way, think of Bitcoin as something more like MMORPG loot. If people are willing to spend vast amounts of "real money" on items for their WoW character, spending that money on Bitcoins instead makes it seem like a sane investment rather than just flushing it away. What is the intrinsic value of Bitcoins, then? That people are willing to spend money on Bitcoins? As an investment vehicle these are t…

>Bitcoins have no intrinsic value. Part of the value is in their utility as an anonymous currency: try taxing the guy that's paid in Bitcoins. Another part is the integrity of the currency: the currency is backed by math, rather than men, and not subject to hyperinflation resulting from corruption (i.e. the US Fed can create money out of thin air, but there is no authority that can create Bitcoins out of thin air: th…

> Part of the value is in their utility as an anonymous currency: try taxing the guy that's paid in Bitcoins.

Easy - I collect taxes at the point where physical goods are exchanged for bitcoins or are used to deliver products.

If you can't use bitcoins for food, housing, netaccess, or energy....

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#178
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While attacks against the basic building blocks of cryptosystems (like the SHA256 hash or AES block cipher) are rare, the protocols built upon those blocks can be independently vulnerable. Take the Needham-Schroeder public key protocol from 1979, for example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Needham-Schroeder_protocol#The_... . It's simple and "obviously" foolproof, but a vulnerability was published in 1995, 16 years lat…

Such switch happened once. It was found, that due to overflow, someone issued a lot of bitcoins to themselves in the block. During several hours was released a new client, which ignored flawed blockchain. When most people moved to a new client, the new blockchain overcame the exploited one. Though it was when bitcoin wasn't popular.

I was (and still am) a bitcoin user during this period, it was managed relatively easily and quickly; major miners updated their clients and within a few hours, the competing blockchain had died off.

This would likely be even easier to accomplish today; as things currently stand, all mining pools and groups have a vested interest in maintaining the integrity of the blockchain.

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#179

Hi, I'm Adam, I wrote this answer on Quora. Against my better judgement, I'm going to wade in here and make a couple of clarifying points. 1 - Scam. I regret using the word "scam" in my answer, because I think it overshadows the broader point I was making about Bitcoin's severe structural design flaws. After watching the community react to this debate, I'm pretty confident that the average bitcoin supporter is not in…

Thanks for posting here and on Quora. As someone with an economics background, it's nice to hear a sane explanation based on fundamental theory. I'm just surprised people aren't considering Bitcoins from a supply-demand standpoint. Why purchase Bitcoins in the long run unless you're laundering money or hiding from the government?

I second the comment about the explanation. It was the best explanation of Bitcoins I've seen (even if it's trying to show that's it's flawed.)

Re: The Quora post that killed Bitcoins. Please discuss if his arguments are valid.

#180
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for posting here and on Quora. As someone with an economics background, it's nice to hear a sane explanation based on fundamental theory. I'm just surprised people aren't considering Bitcoins from a supply-demand standpoint. Why purchase Bitcoins in the long run unless you're laundering money or hiding from the government?

> Why purchase Bitcoins in the long run unless you're laundering money or hiding from the government? That's kind of odd to say-- couldn't you say the same thing about doing cash-only transactions? There's also the hope that you can "hide" from corporations/bad-people and make transactions that don't require you to provide information that can be used for identity theft, marketing, etc. Just typing in a unique 1-time…

That's kind of odd to say-- couldn't you say the same thing about doing cash-only transactions?

Yeah, I added that modifier after thinking some more. People are really interested in bitcoins as a "private" currency, and cash would accomplish the same thing. Large cash transactions raise flags, though.

Still, bitcoins are a bad alternative to popular currency for a number of reasons Adam mentions. An e-currency without a finite supply would be an interesting exercise.

Post reply on HN