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

What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 86 posts

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#41

Post by ForHackernews »

brightball wrote: post #33
twblalock wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do people seem to assume that those most capable of implementing the cryptography, networking, or other code are also those most capable of understanding the economics of cryptocurrencies or determining their future? I guess I'll give the blunt answer: many proponents of cryptocurrency have views on economics, politics, society, law, and contracts that are ignorant of the way those things really work. Many real…

I've never used bitcoin but one of the core appeals as I understood it was mathematically limited supply to create an inflation proof currency. There seem to be lots of fluctuations in the price but eventually it hit a point of relative stability (in theory at least) with value that increases slightly relative the rate that the dollar inflates. If that's the case then it certainly does the job. There are a lot of peo…

> There are a lot of people out there who are very aware of how their saved money loses value and actively want an alternative that feels "safe".

Inflation-linked government bonds (e.g. https://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/products/prod_tips_glan...) are extremely safe, and specifically protect against value lost to inflation.

There are some problems solved by bitcoin, but needing a stable store of value certainly is not one of them.

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#42

Post by akira2501 »

brightball wrote: post #33
twblalock wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do people seem to assume that those most capable of implementing the cryptography, networking, or other code are also those most capable of understanding the economics of cryptocurrencies or determining their future? I guess I'll give the blunt answer: many proponents of cryptocurrency have views on economics, politics, society, law, and contracts that are ignorant of the way those things really work. Many real…

I've never used bitcoin but one of the core appeals as I understood it was mathematically limited supply to create an inflation proof currency. There seem to be lots of fluctuations in the price but eventually it hit a point of relative stability (in theory at least) with value that increases slightly relative the rate that the dollar inflates. If that's the case then it certainly does the job. There are a lot of peo…

> I understood it was mathematically limited supply to create an inflation proof currency.

Put money in wallet. Forget password. Destroy currency forever.

Not a well thought out ideal.

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#43

Post by slice_of_life »

twblalock wrote: post #31
beaner wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just seems like part of an evolutionary process. Very rarely is software released where version 1.0 is perfect. Maybe if government currencies allowed for these things, they would also be better by now. This is part of the reason why bitcoin remains highly speculative. People point this out like it's a bad thing - the only people who have it are just investors, speculating. But this is part of the process that bootst…

> Just seems like part of an evolutionary process. Very rarely is software released where version 1.0 is perfect. Maybe if government currencies allowed for these things, they would also be better by now. Let's use the US dollar as an example. In what ways do you think it could be improved if people could fork it?

> In what ways do you think it could be improved if people could fork it?

What follows a fork is a competing variant. From a consumer's vantage point, this is almost always good. More competition creates such a great incentive structure that usually(but not always) serves the customer well.

However, the if you look at it from the vantage point of a stakeholder such as an active developer, speculator or an investor, then a fork seems unquestionably detrimental. You'd want a monopoly in this case.

In what may seem to many as a severe case of cognitive dissonance, I'd submit that both of these scenarios are useful and that the only caveat is that they apply at different stages of an endeavor's development i.e. in the early years when a product is nascent, I think competition is actually good. By giving consumers choice, the best product naturally rises to the top. In later years when a product/market is mature, I personally don't mind a monopoly because it grants advantages of scale that would otherwise not be available to a smaller outfit.

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#44

Post by thinbeige »

sametmax wrote: post #6

"What did X ever do for us?" is the standard catch phrase of this guy in any pirate movie wanting to take command of the ship. It's not the words of somebody who wants to help anybody, just somebody wanting the power.

Such a good methaphor.

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#45

Post by SomeStupidPoint »

petertodd wrote: post #30
hendzen wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peter, You just cherry picked one (minor) point from each article, and then used an argument against those points to claim that both articles are incorrect in full . I think that is a dishonest form of argument. Furthermore, it's worth disclosing your own personal dislike of Mike Hearn - you guys have spent a huge amount of time attacking one another... so I'm inclined to discount any of your statements on him.

We seem to have a fundamentally different outlook on this. First of all, I'm busy - I'm not going to do a point-by-point takedown of the article if I can avoid it. Secondly, if you can show an author clearly lied about anything - and I think I have clearly shown that - it immediately calls into question the value of the rest of the work. That saves time and effort for the reader, in much the same way that showing a s…

> That saves time and effort for the reader, in much the same way that showing a single step in a math proof is wrong is an efficient way of rebutting an entire work.

This isn't actually how mathematics functions as a profession: small technical faults are routinely pointed out without discrediting the bulk of the work and at times, major works are submitted without all the technical details actually being accounted for.

Mathematicians are capable of understanding the main thrust of a work without getting bogged down in technicalities, and usually try to "ironman" the work -- seeing the main thrust in the best light possible, rather than the worst. (In contrast to "strawman".)

> Secondly, in claiming I have a personal dislike of Hearn, you're actually making a clear ad-hominem attack. My personal feelings are irrelevant to whether or not Hearn's arguments are correct.

It actually is relevant, considering that you "refuted" Hearn's arguments through the flimsiest of means -- pointing out a small flaw and saying he's not technically correct -- without every addressing the core part.

The heuristic of personal bias is a fine way to assess the genuineness with which you presented a heuristic argument (since you didn't address the core points), and assess if we want to take your heuristic point at face value. It's anything but an ad hominem to provide a reason you might be trying to present a faulty heuristic in response to you presenting a heuristic argument.

So... since you were wrong on both points here, we should discount the entirety of your posts on this topic -- at least, by your (poor) logic.

(I don't actually have any opinion on the topic, but your reasoning here is bad.)

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#46

Post by vertex-four »

wmf wrote: post #35
icebraining wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not, though; the developers can write the code, but they can't force people to upgrade.

They can withhold features that people want by refusing to code them, which is what one of the controversies is about.

But other people can code them, and people as a whole can choose what software they want to run?

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#47

Post by elmar »

twblalock wrote: post #37
brightball wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never used bitcoin but one of the core appeals as I understood it was mathematically limited supply to create an inflation proof currency. There seem to be lots of fluctuations in the price but eventually it hit a point of relative stability (in theory at least) with value that increases slightly relative the rate that the dollar inflates. If that's the case then it certainly does the job. There are a lot of peo…

The cap on mining is actually a good example of an inflexible technical solution for a problem that is better solved through flexible governance. There are several problems with it: Inflation can be a good thing. It can be used to combat deflation, and the absence of inflation can lead to stagnation via the paradox of thrift. There are certain central bank policies that encourage inflation and are known to work prett…

I have replied to a similar thread on HN recently here is the link.

Inflation the Hidden Tax

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14828655

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#48

Post by x1798DE »

akira2501 wrote: post #42
brightball wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never used bitcoin but one of the core appeals as I understood it was mathematically limited supply to create an inflation proof currency. There seem to be lots of fluctuations in the price but eventually it hit a point of relative stability (in theory at least) with value that increases slightly relative the rate that the dollar inflates. If that's the case then it certainly does the job. There are a lot of peo…

> I understood it was mathematically limited supply to create an inflation proof currency. Put money in wallet. Forget password. Destroy currency forever. Not a well thought out ideal.

That would cause deflation, not inflation.

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#49

Post by jnordwick »

beaner wrote: post #20
jnordwick wrote: post #7

Why do people seem to assume that those most capable of implementing the cryptography, networking, or other code are also those most capable of understanding the economics of cryptocurrencies or determining their future? Most of the arguments against the core team revolve around the economics and future of the coin, but the tech team seems to think that somehow their coding experience gives them insight into that. Bi…

Can you explain what a "long term counteract" is and how it relates to a currency's inflation rate?

With the fixed supply you have three problems:

1. The value (not necessarily price) of the currency will fluctuate wildly since they money supply cannot grow and shrink along with demand for it. The fixed supply will make these swings even wilder.

2. In a currency which is constantly deflating at say 3% a year, you would never want to take a loan unless you can cover that 3% plus any other return on capital you require. You're going to be paying back BTC that is going to be more expensive every year passing. Imagine a 5 year contract for 10 BTC a year. The next year is it 10.3 BTC (deflation adjusted). And at year five you are paying back BTC worth 11.6 BTC.

3. If you are on the other side, any counter party (default) risk is also huge since you are losing an asset that you could have held on to for zero risk and still gained 3% a year.

To enter a contract you need a stable currency. It is like building a house with a yardstick that keeps getting longer and longer. And it is very difficult to figure out what the value and exchange rate of BTC will be in a year from now, much less longer.

Re: What did Bitcoin Core contributors ever do for us?

#50

Post by mikeash »

elmar wrote: post #47
twblalock wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cap on mining is actually a good example of an inflexible technical solution for a problem that is better solved through flexible governance. There are several problems with it: Inflation can be a good thing. It can be used to combat deflation, and the absence of inflation can lead to stagnation via the paradox of thrift. There are certain central bank policies that encourage inflation and are known to work prett…

I have replied to a similar thread on HN recently here is the link. Inflation the Hidden Tax https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14828655

I don't understand what the big deal is there. I can understand it in a hyperinflation situation, but when inflation is ~2%, surely this hidden tax is insignificant compared to the more visible, explicit taxes?
Post reply on HN