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

Why Bitcoin Matters

mobile.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 268 posts

Re: Why Bitcoin Matters

#201

Post by Renaud »

chaz wrote: post #45
pmorici wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, there are other things about Bitcoin that are highly desirable from a merchant's perspective even ignoring fees. 1. There are no unilateral charge backs with Bitcoin and 2. You don't have to worry about keeping sensitive customer information safe. It is impossible for you as a merchant to be responsible for fraud against your customers due to stolen credit card numbers if they are using Bitcoin. It has the same p…

But why would I want Bitcoin as a consumer? I want chargebacks if the merchant screws me over, I get a rebate/miles/points with every purchase, and some cards offer warranties and return protection. AmEx does a pretty good job at flagging fraudulent activity, and I'm off the hook for any related charges. Plus, there's still a risk of losing Bitcoin. The right bug/malware/vulnerability on my laptop or my smartphone ca…

Not everyone has -or can have- a credit card.

Bitcoin also allows anyone to accept payment which could vastly increase the range of products and services available: we can imagine that a lot of individuals and small businesses who do not have access to credit card payments will be able to offer their services and get paid.

Re: Why Bitcoin Matters

#202

Post by dllthomas »

oafitupa wrote: post #198
dllthomas wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those that come to mind have anything to do with support of the currency, so far as I can tell. You will have to be substantially more specific.

Lybia, Iran and Iraq. This topic comes up every day, and every day someone who doesn't know history will show "skepticism". I don't have a copy/pasteable text in hand, and I'm not gonna write one from scratch. Just learn some history please, for the sake of mankind.

Please explain how any of those were actions taken in support of a strong dollar, as opposed to in support of particular economic interests otherwise.

Re: Why Bitcoin Matters

#204

Post by plock »

lectrick wrote: post #199
plock wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>All that barrel does is stop counterfeiters and tax evaders. Neither of those things are "intrinsic value". If anything can be said to have 'intrinsic value', being free from prosecution is surely one of those things. Dollars can buy you freedom from prosecution for non-payment of taxes. That's a lot closer to 'intrinsic value' than anything bitcoin can put up.

If your argument is that I'd have to convert bitcoin to dollars in order to pay taxes, that's a nonargument. I am sure they would take Bitcoin directly if pressed. Just ask the FBI, who is now in possession of the largest bitcoin cache on the planet... I suppose you think they're just going to erase all of them because, you know, they're not "backed" by anything?

>If your argument is that I'd have to convert bitcoin to dollars in order to pay taxes, that's a nonargument.

It's not a 'nonargument'. It's true, and very relevant.

>I am sure they would take Bitcoin directly if pressed.

That's speculation. You have no reason to believe they'd accept bitcoin. As of right now, they do not. That's all we have to go on.

>Just ask the FBI, who is now in possession of the largest bitcoin cache on the planet... I suppose you think they're just going to erase all of them because, you know, they're not "backed" by anything?

Is there a reason for making this absurd strawman? Where has anyone ever suggested that people should erase their bitcoins because they're not backed by anything?

Re: Why Bitcoin Matters

#205

Post by plock »

ye wrote: post #106
mgulaid wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the bottom line argument is that when everyone gets paid in the same currency, the exchange fees go away. This can happen with US $ or Yan.

But transfer fees and payment fees won't go away with fiat. Credit card fees eat into many businesses' profit margins, especially the ones with low margins. And that's not the only Bitcoin's advantage.

In exchange for not having transfer fees, you get no protection against fraud or theft. Not such a great 'advantage' for the average person, is it? Oh, I know, you can use escrow and other services to guard against that. But guess what? They're not free!

Re: Why Bitcoin Matters

#206

Post by guscost »

wmf wrote: post #177
guscost wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you say to the idea that Bitcoin is backed by established laws of math and economics?

If a currency is "backed" by something, it means the issuer is willing to exchange it for another resource, usually at a fixed ratio. For example, a gold-backed dollar (when they used to exist) could be exchanged for a certain weight of gold. There is no such thing for Bitcoin.

Bitcoins can be exchanged for the ability to add a new transaction to the blockchain, at the very least. It might be abstract and of questionable value but there is certainly such a thing.

And this is getting a bit whimsical, but why is the gold valuable?

Re: Why Bitcoin Matters

#207

Post by panabee »

this may be a stupid question, but how does the cap of 21 million coins affect bitcoin? does it not matter because each bitcoin is infinitely divisible?

Re: Why Bitcoin Matters

#209

Post by guscost »

dragonwriter wrote: post #186
guscost wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you say to the idea that Bitcoin is backed by established laws of math and economics?

About that idea, I say that its false, and relies on misunderstanding of at least what "backed by" means for a currency, and probably a strained view of what are "established laws" of economics, as well.

Can a government "back" currency by deeming it to be valuable, without offering to exchange it for a store of value?

If not, saying that Bitcoin is "not even backed" by fiat is meaningless. If so, we are using "backed" in the wrong sense.

Re: Why Bitcoin Matters

#210

Post by infinii »

plock wrote: post #79
ye wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does dollar have an intrinsic value? Actually, can you even define "intrinsic value" without going in circles or defining it simply as current value?

If we take 'intrinsic value' to mean 'having some use other than to simply trade away again to someone else, or being backed by something with intrinsic value', then the dollar has intrinsic value in that it is backed by freedom from being prosecuted by the US government for non-payment of taxes.

The topic of debate is whether bitcoins have intrinsic value. Taxes are not the deciding criteria here. If the government did away with taxes, currencies (whether it be USD, Euro, BTC, etc) would still have value as an instrument used in barter.
Post reply on HN