Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

blog.evergreengavekal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 280 posts

Re: Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

#81

Post by ragnese »

robjan wrote: post #44
dsco wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t that the same for gold? That it’s for speculation? Or stocks.

Stocks represent an ownership in a company. They can be speculated on but that's not the primary purpose.

I very much disagree. How many people with 401ks and/or other retirement vehicles actually know what companies they "own"? How many of them vote? How many of them actually have enough of the right kinds of shares to vote?

To say that stocks are about owning a company in practice is the same as saying bitcoin is just money like the dollar. It's true in theory, but it's not the practical reality of this moment in history.

Re: Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

#82

Post by Applejinx »

sixQuarks wrote: post #47
read_if_gay_ wrote: post #15

> 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 front page because most of HN hates Bitcoin and it makes them feel better

If, indeed, bitcoin is inimical to civilization, then HN is smart and prescient to hate it. That would be a plausible interpretation if you figure that the HN crowd are smarter and more capable of thinking through problems than the average bear.

Perhaps if you don't agree, you should be listening :)

Re: Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

#83

Post by disruptalot »

maxqin1 wrote: post #9

Working together is in the best interest of humans. Humans require trust to operate. A system designed around mistrust is inherently against our nature.

It's not designed around mistrust, it's designed to not require trust. There's a big difference.

Why would you want trust where it's not needed? Trust is a barrier, not a feature.

Re: Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

#84

Post by rjmunro »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #46

If the ability for normal people of every background and income to build wealth and savings wasn't being eroded at every step, maybe we wouldn't need it. Your savings are eroded by inflation, even if you own a property you're usually just renting the land it's on long term and taxed more for even having the audacity to buy property to begin with. The more you pick away at the fabric the more everything feels like a s…

Why is buying companies and property (or small parts of them, i.e. stocks) not a "real store of value"?

Re: Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

#85

Post by maxqin1 »

sschueller wrote: post #63
maxqin1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was the last time you tried to move a million in cash? It's not that easy...

1 bundle of 1,000 CHF (1,112.51 USD) notes is 100,000 CHF which is only 1cm thick [1]. So 10 would be 10cm which easily fits in a small bag. [1] https://www.bielertagblatt.ch/nachrichten/wirtschaft/eine-mi...

Thanks for the tip!

Re: Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

#86

Post by SXX »

xwdv wrote: post #38

One of the shocking things is how much cryptocurrency has poisoned the minds of youth who see it as their easy path to riches. Young people simply don’t want to work anymore, everyone is planning to retire very soon and a job is only a temporary inconvenience while they wait for their crypto coins to moon in value and make them millionaires set for life. The truth is while many people did get very rich getting in ear…

   "The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

Re: Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

#87

Post by passtheglass »

sschueller wrote: post #36
guerrilla wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He probably does. In Sweden, everything is going cashless in the name of convenience and cracking down on tax avoidance.

The big tax avoiders don't horde cash.

It's for people who take cash in hand.

Re: Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

#89

Post by Synaesthesia »

smt88 wrote: post #10

If you think of all investments as a bet, what are you betting on when you buy crypto? In my opinion, you're betting that crypto will be useful as an exchange of value, which means the people exchanging it are either: A) criminals or B) living in a failed state. Personally, if crypto becomes so widely used that it justifies its market caps, that means a lot of states have failed, and I don't want to live in (or bet o…

Crypto right now is more like something people are speculating on, but it's like a collectible piece of art or something. It's cool as an idea, but that's about it. It's not going to become the currency of a failed state, there are far more power efficient and opaque ways of doing things.

Basically states print money anyway, and just hand it to the banks.

Re: Berkshire: Bitcoin is ‘contrary to the interest of civilization.’

#90

Post by bidirectional »

makach wrote: post #43

Heck. I am not a fan of bitcoin but I think that statement is flawed. The technology is young and developing. Instead of killing it/or wanting it dead, work with its potential.

As someone without much knowledge of the area, is it developing? Bitcoin seems very staid and featureless compared to something like Ethereum, does it deserve to have the biggest market cap just because it was first?

Also is it wise to advocate for a future where the richest people in the world will just be whoever hung out on the right forums in 2011? At least the current occupants of the Forbes list mainly built companies.

Post reply on HN