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

Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 164 posts

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#151

Post by captn3m0 »

bassdropvroom wrote: post #49

I still don't understand this mindset of Bitcoin becoming the future of money. It isn't. It never was meant to be, and it never advertised itself as such. Bitcoin solves the issue of trust. Bitocin itself will never work as a currency that governments can rely. First reason for that is that governments want control over their money. There has to be a central authority for multiple reasons. Banks need bailing out? As…

From the Bitcoin paper[0]:

Abstract:

>A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution

Conclusion:

>We have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust.

[0]: https://www.coinbase.com/bitcoin.pdf

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#152

Post by xiphias2 »

mpfundstein wrote: post #110
samatman wrote: post #47

Is it? Let's check back in ten years. I don't know that Bitcoin-as-in-BTC will be 'the future of money' by then, but I would bet that money will continue to look more like Bitcoin than it does like today's dollar. Like it or not, and I know a lot of you don't, cryptocurrencies aren't censorable (governments can't stop you from sending or receiving them), are hard to seize, and can't just be inflated away from storing…

> but I would bet that money will continue to look more like Bitcoin than it does like today's dollar. so not Bitcoin. Thats the authors point. > Like it or not, and I know a lot of you don't, cryptocurrencies aren't censorable (governments can't stop you from sending or receiving them), are hard to seize, and can't just be inflated away from storing value. These are attractive properties to a lot of people. I agree.…

Netherlands have one of the lowest capital gain taxes for Bitcoin, so there isn't any real need to hide it there.

I'm in Hungary where people preferred to move to other countries (like Malta at 0%) to realize their capital gains than to pay 28%, but finally the government decreases it to 15%, which is a fair deal between a country and its citisens.

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#153

Post by eli »

alwillis wrote: post #150
eli wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but those are not Bitcoin and very close to nobody uses them for payments anyway

1. Nothing could be more wrong; bitcoin is bitcoin whether it’s on the base layer or Lightning Network. Full stop. 2. There are over 10,000 lightning nodes with nearly $70 million in liquidity where payments occur everyday: https://1ml.com/

You cannot argue that “Bitcoin is money” if, in order to do any of the money stuff, you need to add something that is explicitly “off chain.” Bitcoin itself plainly can’t do it and LN could just as well be a layer on top of anything else. It’s main purpose is to make Bitcoin seem like it could be useful some day.

And yet we’re years in and virtually no one uses LN as money despite lots of people having a vested interest in making it seem viable. I’m sure some people trade it back and forth but nobody is buying goods and services with it outside of as a gimmick.

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#154

Post by stopyellingatme »

bassdropvroom wrote: post #49

I still don't understand this mindset of Bitcoin becoming the future of money. It isn't. It never was meant to be, and it never advertised itself as such. Bitcoin solves the issue of trust. Bitocin itself will never work as a currency that governments can rely. First reason for that is that governments want control over their money. There has to be a central authority for multiple reasons. Banks need bailing out? As…

Seems to be unpopular but I agree. If Bitcoin “wins” then what will it be denominated in? Will we go to the barter system? I just can’t see it replacing the USD. (Been in crypto since 2012)

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#155

Post by bassdropvroom »

elliekelly wrote: post #60
bassdropvroom wrote: post #49

I still don't understand this mindset of Bitcoin becoming the future of money. It isn't. It never was meant to be, and it never advertised itself as such. Bitcoin solves the issue of trust. Bitocin itself will never work as a currency that governments can rely. First reason for that is that governments want control over their money. There has to be a central authority for multiple reasons. Banks need bailing out? As…

If bitcoin truly solved the issue of trust there would be no need for all of the various intermediaries who have popped up to insert themselves into the transactions. Also, there wouldn’t be nearly as many scams.

In reality though, those intermediaries make use of Bitcoin easier. They are not a requirement. I can buy Bitcoin from individuals directly providing I can find one who wants something to trade for it and I have a way of delivering the goods. I can also send my Bitcoins to individuals without any intermediary. All I need is the official Bitcoin application on my computer. No need for any intermediaries.

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#156

Post by bassdropvroom »

alwillis wrote: post #143
bassdropvroom wrote: post #49

I still don't understand this mindset of Bitcoin becoming the future of money. It isn't. It never was meant to be, and it never advertised itself as such. Bitcoin solves the issue of trust. Bitocin itself will never work as a currency that governments can rely. First reason for that is that governments want control over their money. There has to be a central authority for multiple reasons. Banks need bailing out? As…

Bitcoin Obsoletes All Other Money: https://unchained-capital.com/blog/bitcoin-obsoletes-all-oth...

It really won't. It will make money obsolete if/when governments are okay with not having control of their currency. No sane government will do that, especially not the likes of the UK, US and EU.

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#157

Post by bassdropvroom »

captn3m0 wrote: post #151
bassdropvroom wrote: post #49

I still don't understand this mindset of Bitcoin becoming the future of money. It isn't. It never was meant to be, and it never advertised itself as such. Bitcoin solves the issue of trust. Bitocin itself will never work as a currency that governments can rely. First reason for that is that governments want control over their money. There has to be a central authority for multiple reasons. Banks need bailing out? As…

From the Bitcoin paper[0]: Abstract: >A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution Conclusion: >We have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust. [0]: https://www.coinbase.com/bitcoin.pdf

So that's exactly what I said. Bitcoin solves the issue of trust. I do not have to trust that someone really has the money they say do, because Bitcoin will refuse to allow them to spend such money.

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#158

Post by joeblau »

karlosos wrote: post #130
joeblau wrote: post #42

Go to the git repo on GitHub, check out the code, go to the first commit, and see how many times the word “Poker” is in the code base. Bitcoin was simply designed to be an in game currency for a poker game, but the narrative has been co-opted by so many people that it’s become something else.

I have located the first commit in the bitcoin/bitcoin repo on GitHub [1]. However, there is no single occurrence of "Poker". In the original-bitcoin repo I've found CPokerLobbyDialogBase class [2]. So I can partially confirm your theory. According to bitcoin.com in the early stages of the project there was an idea for implementing on-chain poker game [3]. > Bitcoin was simply designed to be an in game currency for a…

Look at this batch of function handlers[1]. Why does it have functions named "Deal Hand" "Fold" "Call" "Leave Table" etc... ?

This thing was clearly a poker game that was co-opted by a ton of narrative changes into what it is now. I'm not saying that the co-opting and narrative changes are bad because I think the underlying function of trestles digital uniqueness is brilliant, but looking at the code tells a different story than what a lot of people would have you believe.

[1] - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/4405b78d6059e536c369...

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#159

Post by jfengel »

alwillis wrote: post #133
garrickvanburen wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently used this analogy to describe why I’m bearish on crypto. When Netscape Navigator was released, it was clear and obvious this was the future (and if anything, underpromised based on where we are today). Within 4years of Navigators release, I was making my fulltime living building websites. The iPhone was another immediate “this is obviously the future” technology. 13 years into Bitcoin, it’s still not obvio…

13 years into Bitcoin, it’s still not obvious. It's pretty damn obvious once you objectively look at the shit show the fiat currency system has become. It should be pretty obvious that people who work all of their lives can't retire with the money they've saved because their money loses (according to CPI) 2% per year. Instead they have to risk their savings in the stock market or some other investment--remember savin…

It just means that they can't retire solely on the money they get for having money in the first place.

With 2% inflation and a 1% money market, you're losing a net of 1% per year. If you were handed a million bucks at 25 and sat on it until 65, you'd still have an inflation-adjusted value of $669k.

That's not the difference between retirement and non-retirement. It's the difference between a luxurious retirement and a less-luxurious retirement, or a retirement at 70 rather than 65.

That money will continue to deflate, and if you live for another 40 years, it becomes a mere half-million at the end. That would give you $11k a year to live on -- not great, but again, you're talking about four decades of no work. That's a lot to ask.

That's not fun, of course, but it's not supposed to be fun. "I was handed a million dollars and therefore deserve to have it exponentially accumulate value for no work or risk" is fun, but it's not a fundamental right.

If you put earn more money than you need and stick it in the bank, you can retire. Inflation means that you need a little more money, which you can get either by working longer, or using your money to improve the economy as a whole by investment. More risk means bigger rewards. Zero risk means a net loss, as punishment for keeping your money out of circulation.

The point is that exponential growth is powerful, but even exponents of multiples of 10 don't do all that much when the base rate is 1%. It's only the difference between retirement and non-retirement for a relatively small sliver.

The real problem with non-retirement is that many people can't put away anything. They live hand-to-mouth for their entire careers, with every incoming dollar accounted for. For them, inflation isn't an issue because they have $0.

Worrying about inflation is a great privilege for those who have cash and would prefer it to become more cash for free, with no effort or risk. Instead, the economy demands they take risks rather than sitting on their money -- with the goal of some of it ending up in the form of jobs for those who don't have that cash sitting around.

Re: Bitcoin is failing at becoming the future of money

#160

Post by marcosdumay »

colordrops wrote: post #78
marcosdumay wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it doesn't. It replaces a fuzzy set of middleman with another. And there isn't enough attention to the Bitcoin governance to make it better than the government-based system. Cryptocoin people don't even want to discuss governance, because they like to believe there's nothing to govern and nobody governing.

That isn't really a fair representation. The amount of leeway to affect policy and transactions on a blockchain by whomever you think these middlemen are is negligible compared to things like stocks and bank accounts. No middle man can stop you from sending BTC to someone in Asia. No middleman can force your transaction to take 5 days. No middleman can stop your transaction. No middleman can stop transactions at nigh…

Hum... Yeah, the different middleman come with different problems, not the same ones.

We don't have much clarity on what those new problems are (we know very few of them), but what is perfectly clear is that every interested party is actively avoiding creating some mechanism for solving them.

Post reply on HN