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

191–200 of 280 posts

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

#191

Post by rdsubhas »

keiferski wrote: post #141
jsiepkes wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 n…

That doesn't answer the question though. Parent asked:

> Whats the last time you bought anything (besides other coins) with cryptocurrency?

Edit: phrasing

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

#192

Post by jl2718 »

maxqin1 wrote: post #112
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. Having a bunch of people run around with guns probably doesn’t help much today, and may even have ongoing social costs. But it would make things a hell of a lot harder for any would be tyrants. That’s a civilizational insurance policy worth paying. And how'd that work out for you guys on January 6th?

It worked out horribly. They were shot, prosecuted, embarrassed, fired from their jobs, and forever surveilled and hunted by the entire domestic apparatus.

Your othering use of ‘you guys’ suggests a derogatory view of this event, but your suggestion of its applicability to the text implies that it was a failed protest against ‘would be tyrants’. So it’s a little confusing ideologically, but your rational point is spot on. The notion of any kind of physical power held by citizens over the government was overwhelmingly refuted. Any weakness shown by lack of enforcement against the prior summer of violence, was shown to be fully at their discretion. Absolute physical power. No more delusions.

But we’re talking about crypto here, and the international response to this has apparently been an unprecedented wave of panic crypto buying, or equivalently, state fiat selling. Imagine what they must think. I believe the markets; not the ‘official’ sources, not the press, and definitely not social media.

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

#193

Post by koonsolo »

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?

Bitcoins use-case right now seems to be a "store of value", or in other words, a hedge against inflation.

As a short-term store, the price fluctuation is too big. But as a long-term store... Haven't seen a better one up until this point.

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

#194

Post by keiferski »

rdsubhas wrote: post #191
keiferski wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 n…

That doesn't answer the question though. Parent asked: > Whats the last time you bought anything (besides other coins) with cryptocurrency? Edit: phrasing

I only just bought my first crypto about a month ago. Since then I have used some to buy some domain names and a cup of coffee.

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

#195

Post by mumblemumble »

ragnese wrote: post #72
jl6 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't disagree about weighing pros and cons, of course. But I think that bitcoin advocates would argue that the bitcoin has the same "non-infringing uses that benefit people" and that it's simply a matter of time/popularity until the proportion of "good" uses vs. "bad" uses is similar to the dollar. Not saying that it's true, necessarily. Just that the current balance isn't the end game and it's not totally fair to…

I don't find that they do.

The things that make cash useful for money laundering and black market purchases also make it easy for me to quickly, and without unnecessary ceremony, drop a few dollars in a tip jar, give some money to a panhandler, split the bill at a restaurant, chip in to an office gift pool, pay my kids an allowance, envelope budget, buy ice cream from an ice cream truck, etc. etc. etc.

Bitcoin in particular fails miserably at these sorts of use cases because nobody wants to sit around waiting 10 minutes for a transaction to confirm over a $2 soft serve.

Crypto in general fail because they're complicated and fiddly to work with. This creates way, way too much friction these sorts of casual transactions, and effectively shuts out people who aren't technically sophisticated enough to feel comfortable messing around with this stuff.

That isn't to say that crypto doesn't work as a store of wealth. But, as a circulating, everyday currency, it seems to be stuck in the same situation that Linux on the Desktop has been for the past couple decades: for a variety of reasons, some of them very good and no real fault of its own, per se, the community just doesn't seem to be capable of sorting out the UX.

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

#196

Post by smt88 »

Chris2048 wrote: post #189
smt88 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dollars are inflationary and therefore primarily currency, not assets. They're also far more useful, so people are likely to only pay the massive crypto tax (exchange fee, loss of liquidity) if they need to be outside of a legal system. Also, is it "in extremis"? It seems like the vast majority of transactions of crypto are for ransomware, contraband (guns, drugs, humans), or exchange between speculators.

> the vast majority of transactions Are transactions relevant though? A lot of BTC is just being held, presumably for the sake of future popularity. You could see BTC investment as a bet on the future of BTC as a normal/common currency.

> You could see BTC investment as a bet on the future of BTC as a normal/common currency.

Yes, I totally agree. The question is: what has to happen before it's a common currency?

See my other comment for my thoughts on this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27104956

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

#197

Post by tromp »

maxqin1 wrote: post #190
tromp wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I buy the stock in order to hold it for 30 years, doesn't that reduce liquidity?

No, because your holding increases the price until someone else decides it's time to tell. In other words, the lack of liquidity increases price. Regarding your original question, that increase is GOOD for the company because it can raise more money for selling the same amount of stock.

You cannot argue that buying raises the price and selling drops it, since every trade has a buyer and s seller.

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

#198

Post by smt88 »

jl2718 wrote: post #122
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…

Nobody does, but it’s a possibility, and we’re hoping that self-sovereign money makes for a more peaceful transition in those places. If it’s total chaos, the criminals will have total control. We have seen this many times. To see why people buy it, understand their fear of what might happen to them if they don’t.

> To see why people buy it, understand their fear of what might happen to them if they don’t.

Yes, I totally understand it. My opposition to crypto speculation is as follows:

1) Investments can be a self-fulfilling prophecy if extremely powerful/wealthy people are involved. If you bet on an outcome and also have the power to create it, can we really trust you not to do that?

See also: Peter Thiel buying property in NZ to prepare for societal collapse, even as he worked for the previous presidential administration.

2) This one is just personal to me -- if crypto becomes an important alternative to USD fiat, the world has likely collapsed and I'll probably either be dead or ready to die.

It's hard to overstate the consequences of the US collapsing, considering the enormous amount of military power that our country has.

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

#199

Post by smt88 »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #89
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.

> It's not going to become the currency of a failed state, there are far more power efficient and opaque ways of doing things.

It's already being used as a proxy for USD in some failed states (which is exactly what every stablecoin's value proposition would be). It's certainly not widespread, but it makes sense in a society where you don't actually need/want to convert to fiat to transact.

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

#200

Post by koonsolo »

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…

First up, there is no worldwide currency. It would be nice in an internet world, to have a worldwide currency.

Next, decentralization is awesome.

You can always claim that any improvement is the proof of a failed earlier system.

If the success of crypto means the system has failed, maybe you should blame the problem and not the solution.

Post reply on HN