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

141–150 of 280 posts

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

#141

Post by keiferski »

jsiepkes wrote: post #136
keiferski wrote: post #124

How does the saying go? First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. After that, they fight you. Finally, you win. When a significant portion of established powers start claiming that new threat to power is (insert hyperbolic word here), I’d say we are on step 3 of the above process. Bitcoin has a lot of issues, but cryptocurrency/blockchain in general are real, useful technologies. Don’t let the prevalence of scam…

> but cryptocurrency/blockchain in general are real, useful technologies. Whats the last time you bought anything (besides other coins) with cryptocurrency?

I’m guessing you’re from a country with a reliable banking system and without rapid inflation.

In places where this doesn’t exist, crypto is a miracle.

Beyond that, crypto has existed for about a decade now. It’s absolutely absurd to claim that it’s “not useful” because it hasn’t been widely adopted by everyday merchants. Traditional currency has a ten-thousand year head start. Perhaps we can be patient?

And that’s not even including all of the other use cases blockchain has.

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

#142

Post by gruez »

bronzeage wrote: post #75

The real issue with Bitcoin is tether. Tether printing is practically responsible for almost all the gains in Bitcoin. Just look at Tether volume versus Bitcoin volume and tell me you trust bitcoins valuation when it's backed by make belief tethers. 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 Bi…

>Just look at Tether volume versus Bitcoin volume and tell me you trust bitcoins valuation when it's backed by make belief tethers.

That's consistent with tether being "printed" (ie. issued without dollars backing them), but it's also consistent with dollar inflows to bitcoin exchanges that use tether. Without further evidence that's not indicative of anything.

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

#143

Post by adventured »

calsy wrote: post #109
maxqin1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and yes. But, if Berkshire wanted to they could pump BTC to new heights and undoubtedly make a profit.

If they could undoubtedly make a profit, why haven't they done so. What investment firm would miss making a profit on a sure thing?

Buffett and Berkshire in fact have a long history of intentionally not always seeking the maximization of profit. Read Lowenstein's Buffett: The Making of an American Capitalist for several examples.

Berkshire is not an "investment firm" (although that may have been an accurate description 40 or 50 years ago). And they operate almost solely by the dictate of Buffett, not by theroetical shareholder demand for optimizing for max profit. That means they operate by parameters that Buffett deems prudent. Berkshire for example could have been deep into the supposed sure thing of the real-estate bubble circa 2005, instead they were one of the few mega corporations on the planet almost entirely insulated from it (so much so they were the ones doing the bailing out of other large corporations). That philosophy is the same reason why Berkshire might choose to pass on a supposed sure thing in crypto today: they don't like the risk; others may see a sure thing, they're skeptical (for better or worse).

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

#144

Post by whywhywhywhy »

rjmunro wrote: post #84
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"?

If it's a leasehold, you don't really own anything, you're basically just renting with more security.

Even freeholds sometimes you don't really own the land, just again renting it extremely long term.

1 bitcoin will always be worth 1 bitcoin and there will only ever be 21 million of them.

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

#146

Post by Chris2048 »

reedf1 wrote: post #7

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.

extremis? And the petrodollar is useful to slavers, murderers and colonialists; Show me a currency-issuing superpower with no blood on its hands.

Much like piracy prevented the most deranged attempts of the copyright industry - cyber-currency may put limits on state seizures and overtaxing.

At least for now BTC isn't anonymous (leaves a public paper trail) so it's not so perfect for crime. And an anonymous currency will still be liable at the entry/exit points.

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

#147

Post by adventured »

elliekelly wrote: post #127
calsy wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they could undoubtedly make a profit, why haven't they done so. What investment firm would miss making a profit on a sure thing?

One that has a long and storied history of only investing their money in productive assets. Buffet doesn’t even buy gold.

Buffett isn't entirely adverse to metals such as gold, the reason he doesn't buy gold is he doesn't think it's often undervalued.

His history with silver for example:

"Warren Buffett made an unusual move in 1997 when he bought 111 million ounces, or nearly 3,500 tons, of silver. The famed investor's purchase helped make Thomas Kaplan a billionaire."

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/warren-buffe...

https://seekingalpha.com/article/376711-evidence-that-warren...

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

#148

Post by dcolkitt »

scoopertrooper wrote: post #130
dcolkitt wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The primary use case of Bitcoin is to evade governments control over capital. Sometimes that’s good (governments disgorging kidnappers of their ransom). Sometimes that’s bad (Nazis seizing wealth of targeted groups). Sometimes it depends on your perspective (governments preventing the trade in illicit drugs). Overall how you feel about this in aggregate will depend on how comfortable you are with government power. Le…

> It’s the same reason I support the Second Amendment [...] would make things a hell of a lot harder for any would be tyrants. Yet, somehow the rest of the democratic world spins around just fine without millions of semi-automatic weapons sloshing about.

Most of the democratic world fell under fascist and/or Marxist-Leninist totalitarian regimes within living memory.

There’s only four independent democracies uninterrupted over the past century. Two have widespread civilian firearm ownership.

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

#150

Post by stepanhruda »

dcolkitt wrote: post #107
maxqin1 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

The primary use case of Bitcoin is to evade governments control over capital. Sometimes that’s good (governments disgorging kidnappers of their ransom). Sometimes that’s bad (Nazis seizing wealth of targeted groups). Sometimes it depends on your perspective (governments preventing the trade in illicit drugs). Overall how you feel about this in aggregate will depend on how comfortable you are with government power. Le…

You… really think a tyrant would fail because of a bunch of armed general population? The make or break is having public support, a bunch of people armed with guns don’t make a difference - maybe they would when the amendment was written, but the efficiency gap between a person with a gun vs US military has increased 1000x.
Post reply on HN