71–80 of 280 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn’t that the same for gold? That it’s for speculation? Or stocks.
Gold has a practical application creating demand, in addition to it being a speculative product. I guess you could argue the same for BTC in that you can put short messages in it, but I don't think that's a very valuable thing to have.
The context of the quote: > I don’t welcome a currency that’s so useful to kidnappers and extortionists and so forth... So, I think I should say modestly that the whole damn development is disgusting and contrary to the interest of civilization. I find it strange to criticize an asset for how it gets used in extremis. I feel like the same criticism could be levied against the dollar.
For any thing that has both positive uses and negative uses, it seems reasonable to weigh the positives against the negatives. The dollar has substantial non-infringing uses that benefit people. Bitcoin less so, and particularly when weighed against the great harms (environmental or criminal) that Bitcoin brings, I don’t find the criticism baseless.
Not saying that it's true, necessarily. Just that the current balance isn't the end game and it's not totally fair to criticize a brand new tech/tool/whatever against well-established and well-optimized status quo.
The context of the quote: > I don’t welcome a currency that’s so useful to kidnappers and extortionists and so forth... So, I think I should say modestly that the whole damn development is disgusting and contrary to the interest of civilization. I find it strange to criticize an asset for how it gets used in extremis. I feel like the same criticism could be levied against the dollar.
Except the primary use of the dollar is good. The same can't be said about the primary use for Bitcoin (which is, at best, speculation).
> Warren Buffett: "I knew there’d be a question on bitcoin or crypto and I thought to myself, well, I watch these politicians dodge questions all the time … The truth is, I’m going to dodge that question. Because the truth is, we’ve probably got hundreds of thousands of people that are watching this that own bitcoin. And we’ve probably got two people that are short. So, we’ve got a choice of making 400,000 people mad…
It's very interesting, actually. I interpreted as "Bitcoin is bad but the cult of Bitcoin is nuts so we have to be careful about what we say." What's more interesting is how the Bitcoin investor club is managing to delude themselves even with inputs from real proven financiers.
When you can print make belief dollars, in volumes that were never proven to exist, and pretend trading them for Bitcoin is the same as trading dollars, then of course Bitcoin can arbitrarily rise. The scale of the scam is huge and regulators completely miss it.
The day regulators finally ban tether (because printing dollars should be illegal), you're going to see Bitcoin crash spectacularly. The reason Bitcoin defies all expectations is because it was never supported by real dollars.
> Warren Buffett: "I knew there’d be a question on bitcoin or crypto and I thought to myself, well, I watch these politicians dodge questions all the time … The truth is, I’m going to dodge that question. Because the truth is, we’ve probably got hundreds of thousands of people that are watching this that own bitcoin. And we’ve probably got two people that are short. So, we’ve got a choice of making 400,000 people mad…
Crypto will be valuable as long as we as a society think it's so and have the infrastructure to support it. If we enter a nuclear winter, out goes the crypto market, and we'll be left exchanging copper pieces.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and yes. But, if Berkshire wanted to they could pump BTC to new heights and undoubtedly make a profit.
Doubt they are rich enough to corner the BTC market if that is what you are suggesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and yes. But, if Berkshire wanted to they could pump BTC to new heights and undoubtedly make a profit.
Doubt they are rich enough to corner the BTC market if that is what you are suggesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and yes. But, if Berkshire wanted to they could pump BTC to new heights and undoubtedly make a profit.
Doubt they are rich enough to corner the BTC market if that is what you are suggesting.
Berkshire buying bitcoin would definitely make me buy more bitcoin.
The context of the quote: > I don’t welcome a currency that’s so useful to kidnappers and extortionists and so forth... So, I think I should say modestly that the whole damn development is disgusting and contrary to the interest of civilization. I find it strange to criticize an asset for how it gets used in extremis. I feel like the same criticism could be levied against the dollar.
For any thing that has both positive uses and negative uses, it seems reasonable to weigh the positives against the negatives. The dollar has substantial non-infringing uses that benefit people. Bitcoin less so, and particularly when weighed against the great harms (environmental or criminal) that Bitcoin brings, I don’t find the criticism baseless.
All the negative stuff was going to happen anyway - including energy waste. Humans waste a lot of energy. Wikileaks on the other hand would have folded like an origami in any pre-cryptocurrency era.
This is the sort of press freedom that humanity has been longing for since ... I don't know. The birth of the press. It is really hard to financially abuse the truth out of conversation now. Which is part of why the blowback is so panicked.
Edit for spite: "contrary to the interest of civilisation" is the sound of a wealthy man who is friends with wealthy men who are terrified of what an organisation like Wikileaks could uncover.