11–20 of 103 posts
TL;DR: Man spends 5 minutes thinking about Bitcoin on a plane and comes to conclusions which may or may not be correct. Shares them with people because he is super duper important.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nouriel_Roubini
You can agree or disagree with his argument, but snidely dismissing him as someone without expertise who mistakenly thinks he is "super duper important" is silly.
Are all currencies ponzi games? Seems to me that the deciding factor is: what percentage of Bitcoin's transactions are actual transactions for actual goods and services vs. what percentage are transactions related to speculation on Bitcoin itself. That is very hard to measure, especially since at least a double-digit percentage of transactions belong to the illicit economy.
I'm just going to make this statement here on Monday, March 10th, 2014, that Bitcoin is going to fail within the next 2.5 years.
As mentioned in the link, Bitcoin certainly has tremendous value beyond simply making early adopters rich. If you don't believe it, I encourage you to listen to some of Andreas Antonopoulos' arguments about Bitcoin as a network vs Bitcoin as a currency. Bitcoin provides a vast number of benefits as a technology beyond simply being a "currency."
Which is the bigger Ponzi?
TL;DR: Man spends 5 minutes thinking about Bitcoin on a plane and comes to conclusions which may or may not be correct. Shares them with people because he is super duper important.
I'll just leave this here for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nouriel_Roubini You can agree or disagree with his argument, but snidely dismissing him as someone without expertise who mistakenly thinks he is "super duper important" is silly.
Judge what somebody says, not who he is.
TL;DR: Man spends 5 minutes thinking about Bitcoin on a plane and comes to conclusions which may or may not be correct. Shares them with people because he is super duper important.
I'll just leave this here for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nouriel_Roubini You can agree or disagree with his argument, but snidely dismissing him as someone without expertise who mistakenly thinks he is "super duper important" is silly.
As far as criticism of Bitcoin goes, this is about as superficial as it gets.
Might as well post my comment here as well... -- It would be great if economists started coming up with genuine criticism regarding Bitcoin, rather than obviously false statements, misunderstandings that have been corrected a million times before, and fallacious reasoning. I mean, virtually everything he said is explicitly listed on https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Myths – that’s how often these things have been brought up…
- Bitcoin is not a unit of account as no price of goods and services is set in Bitcoin unit nor it ever will.
- Bitcoin isn’t means of payment as few transactions in Bitcoin. And given its volatility all who accept it convert it right back into $/€/¥
- Bitcoin isn’t a store of value as little wealth is in Bitcoin and no assets in it
Am I missing something?