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

The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 327 posts

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#311

Post by scotty79 »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #136
metalliqaz wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a very difficult time separating "true" libertarians with members of libertarian parties. Like people don't readily give up how pragmatic they are. On one end, there seem to be people who really yearn for pure individual freedom with no government at all. I'm pretty sure that was tried for the first 50,000 years of humanity and the results are well documented. (spoiler, for populations larger than ~100 people,…

I consider myself a pragmatic libertarian, which off the top of my head basically means that: 1. I believe very strongly in the sovereignty of the individual. 2. I prefer more open and incentive-driven markets. 3. I’m skeptical of governments, particularly large and powerful ones, because they’re inefficient, rely on coercion, and are too tempting as prizes to be captured for power, prestige, and wealth. However, the…

> I believe very strongly in the sovereignty of the individual.

You should be very interested then where your sovereignty comes from. At the moment it comes from having above yourself an entity so powerful that you and others around you (that are 10 times, 100, 1000 times as powerful as you) are equally insignificant and uninteresting as long as you pay your dues and don't make a fuss, ie don't try to overtake one another in violent way (even in some non-violent ways that in the past proved bothersome for the overlord so they were forbidden).

The world is full of military technology that just invites anyone with a goal to put the finger on the trigger. So far best invention to control this state of affairs is to have the most dangerous weaponary in hands of just few actors preferably with non-overlapping geographical zones of interest.

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#312

Post by jrjf940 »

clarkmoody wrote: post #135
sevensor wrote: post #28

It's interesting to see how this is playing out. Libertarians have long argued that government-issued fiat currency is a tool of state oppression. Now we have a real-world experiment demonstrating on a grand scale what happens when you create a currency by consensual fiat. I'd be interested to hear what libertarians think about this: Is Bitcoin truly the kind of currency libertarians have been advocating? Have I misc…

Government-issued currencies usually come with legal tender laws and citizens are required to pay taxes using the government money. Since taxes are not voluntary, this creates built-in demand for the fiat money. The creators of alternative competitor-money are punished as well. The libertarian position is that human interactions should be voluntary, so the coercion problem is where libertarians find issue first. A si…

does libertarianism have any tenets other than "human interactions should be voluntary"?

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#313

Post by adjkant »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #255
adjkant wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you're being creative enough with your slicing. Consider what happens when 90% of the primary world currency ends up concentrated with a few thousand - 100K people in the tech world and if that's really any sort of upside for the world.

First of all, I don't think 90% will get concentrated between just 100K people by the time cryptocurrencies actually do take over (and they will, in some form). And then I don't mind money being more concentrated among tech people, they are generally more rational and tend to spend on important things.

We're on track for that concentration right now.

> I don't mind money being more concentrated among tech people, they are generally more rational and tend to spend on important things.

Yeah, I don't but that at all either. Even so, you are basically advocating for an oligarchy led by tech and removing autonomy from everyone else in the world. That's a terrible dystopia.

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#314

Post by mbrock »

paulgb wrote: post #275
mbrock wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multiple competing privately issued currencies is also a trope of libertarianism; people refer a lot to Hayek's The Denationalization of Money .

I've written about why I think this is a disingenuous comparison: https://paulbutler.org/archives/stop-dragging-hayek-into-bit...

I don't claim that Bitcoin is a winner according to the criteria set out by Hayek, in fact it's obviously problematic as a unit of account as you explain.

The various decentralized stablecoin projects (disclaimer: I'm involved with one of them, MakerDAO) attempt to create competitive currency as laid out by Hayek, using collateralization and continual supply/demand tweaks to encourage a stable market price.

From that perspective, Bitcoin is indeed more like a trailblazer and a collectible precious metal, and not a serious contender for actual currency status. Still, it seems to have an important role in the ecosystem of denationalized currency.

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#315

Post by _Tev »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #298
vidarh wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By "nationalized", I mean where the state owns and employs a significant portion of the healthcare resources and personnel, as opposed to just paying for it. In that case the NHS is a lot less nationalized than you might think: a huge proportion of NHS services are provided by private firms under NHS contracts. > Really? Then I think you've misunderstood my positions and you might want to try another read through m…

Because the prospect of "US conditions" is terrifying, to the point that "US conditions" is actually a term used in politics in some European countries used to scare voters with the thought of what happens if you let the right wing run rampant over public services. Sounds like garden variety ignorance.

Can be applied to your posts as well.

I liked the way conversation started, but this is pointless.

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#316

Post by _Tev »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #266
Nursie wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I personally don’t understand how anyone who thinks the government is awesome This is where I think some libertarians wander off from what those largely in favour of state actually think. I think a lot of people would agree there's a lot wrong with government, but most would also rather have one. They just want one that's run better. Your libertarianism seems quite pragmatic and I personally sympathise with the id…

I think a lot of people would agree there's a lot wrong with government, but most would also rather have one. I would argue that most libertarians aren't anarchists, but it's a popular strawman tactic from those arguing against it (particularly on the left). It's almost a cliche: "You know where is a libertarian paradise with no government? Somalia! Hurr durr!" I think we all agree that government has problems. Liber…

The more / less government is false dichotomy. That's why leftists make jokes about you, even smart-sounding libertarians like you always make these stupid black / white statements.

Universal healthcare being one example (at least our system seems simpler than your deductible / premium / medicare / medicaid / etc. chaos), UBI being another.

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#317

Post by ryanwaggoner »

_Tev wrote: post #316
ryanwaggoner wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of people would agree there's a lot wrong with government, but most would also rather have one. I would argue that most libertarians aren't anarchists, but it's a popular strawman tactic from those arguing against it (particularly on the left). It's almost a cliche: "You know where is a libertarian paradise with no government? Somalia! Hurr durr!" I think we all agree that government has problems. Liber…

The more / less government is false dichotomy. That's why leftists make jokes about you, even smart-sounding libertarians like you always make these stupid black / white statements. Universal healthcare being one example (at least our system seems simpler than your deductible / premium / medicare / medicaid / etc. chaos), UBI being another.

More / less is a spectrum, so by definition it can’t be a dichotomy :)

Also, don’t know what “our system” or “your chaos” refers to, but if it’s the setup for another screed about how universal healthcare is superior to the current US system, save the wear and tear on your keyboard. I’ve heard it many times and I agree.

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#318

Post by _Tev »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #317
_Tev wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more / less government is false dichotomy. That's why leftists make jokes about you, even smart-sounding libertarians like you always make these stupid black / white statements. Universal healthcare being one example (at least our system seems simpler than your deductible / premium / medicare / medicaid / etc. chaos), UBI being another.

More / less is a spectrum, so by definition it can’t be a dichotomy :) Also, don’t know what “our system” or “your chaos” refers to, but if it’s the setup for another screed about how universal healthcare is superior to the current US system, save the wear and tear on your keyboard. I’ve heard it many times and I agree.

You are right, not a dichotomy. But main point stands - it is useless metric.

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#319

Post by knieveltech »

celdon25 wrote: post #134
knieveltech wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You assert there are conditions under which the oligarchs would relinquish some portion of their holdings voluntarily?

If the holdings were devalued on the market, does that qualify as involuntary relinquishment?

Maybe? What did you have in mind?

Re: The Bitcoin Whales: 1,000 People Who Own 40 Percent of the Market

#320

Post by knocte »

knocte wrote: post #159
simias wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Deflation means that the rich will get richer >Wrong. Rich people don't have money, they have holdings. Most of the holdings that rich people nowadays have are not money. Isn't one reason for not hoarding cash (and instead investing it in various holdings, stock market, etc...) is that money loses value? If I was a millionaire in dollars I definitely wouldn't keep that on my bank account, slowly having it lose its…

> If I was a millionaire in BTC I'd have a hardware wallet with my secret keys in a safe and that's about it. Lending or investing your BTC would always make you net more than just hoarding it (at least when all prices are denominated in BTC already). > Sure, but conversely I can tell you that the people who don't save money are overwhelmingly poor. For a big chunk of humanity saving money is a luxury. True, I didn't…

> Wrong, 2 links:

One link more:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T0OUIW89II

Post reply on HN