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

Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

yanisvaroufakis.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 95 posts

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#61

Post by kerkeslager »

VikingCoder wrote: post #15
kerkeslager wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lightning has nothing to do with holding and transporting Bitcoin. Holding Bitcoin is literally free. Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting.

> Holding Bitcoin is literally free. Interesting claim. How do you secure it, back it up, and bequeath it to people on your passing? Don't those things cost time and actual money?

Secure it on a piece of paper in a locked box.

Back it up on a second piece of paper in a second locked box, kept in a second location.

Put both locked boxes in your will.

In response to the tornado link you've been spamming: obviously there are limitations to any security system. None of your proposed security systems particularly secure you against government agents beating you with a rubber hose until you hand over your wallet password, but I think we can agree that a reasonable level of security doesn't have to worry about that or two simultaneous tornadoes at different locations.

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#62

Post by pamicel »

nknealk wrote: post #23

Bitcoin presumes (1) everyone owns a computer (or a smartphone/similar) and (2) everyone has network connectivity all the time. Without these two things, one cannot transact. There are huge swaths of the world where this isn't true. Short of making computing devices and internet connectivity human rights, these assumptions compound existing inequalities.

A coin or a bank note are far from being non-technologies, and the logistics to getting them to where they are needed are underrated.

Connectivity and devices are not that big of a leap forward from there and seeing how hungry western and Asian businesses are to open new markets in underserved areas, it’s unlikely lack of connectivity itself will further inequalities. Not for long anyways.

The need for powerful computing gear could, maybe, if there is any advantage to being part of the mining network...

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#63

Post by wmf »

ianmobbs wrote: post #49
wmf wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could always issue "paper" bills that are denominated/backed by BTC. Such currency wouldn't have all the benefits of Bitcoin but it wouldn't be worse (from a coiner's perspective) than existing paper money that people are using today.

Who is the one backing those paper bills? This brings back centralized banking, which is what most folks in favor of replacing fiat currency with Bitcoin are working away from

Yes, there would be a centralized entity printing and custodying the BTC behind the bills, but all paper money today is also controlled by centralized entities. So in this scenario, digital BTC would be "real Bitcoin" and paper BTC would be "Bitcoin light".

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#64

Post by wmf »

Melting_Harps wrote: post #60
einpoklum wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bitcoin is an anarcho-capitalist tool. s/tool/ponzi scheme/... or in other words - I am entirely unconvinced that bitcoin has a positive short-term effect. Most of what happens with BitCoin is people buying it in exchange for fiat currency, a bunch of speculation, and mining (if that's not mostly over). I don't see it empowering workers' movements.

Then your view(s) is solely fixed on those who benefit from this exclusionary Monetary System, go ask people who don't have access to bank accounts or are undocumented how horribly they are treated and marginalized then come back and see what is and isn't a ponzi scheme. See how many people are unfairly targeted by the State(s) with policies like Operation Chokepoint in the US, though similar laws exists in other pla…

The unofficial economy would benefit far far more from a stablecoin than deflationary BTC.

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#65

Post by Melting_Harps »

kerkeslager wrote: post #59
Melting_Harps wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting. On-chain? No, that may have been true in the early days (pre 2013?) but a tx fee has to be included unless you want your money held in the mempool. You may get lucky if it has high days destroyed, but that's not really a risk you want to take unless you care about the funds and want to eventually have to resort to a CPFP tx. I did a…

> > Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting. > On-chain? Nope. > I'm not going to read his article Which makes you willfully unqualified to hold an opinion on his article.

> Which makes you willfully unqualified to hold an opinion on his article.

That may be, but I bet I have better understanding of what his character is better than you as I was in Europe in that time helping understand what was occurring with the Euro crises, and if that is his premise for why Bitcoin shouldn't be used by Socialists, he is right and should stop exploring it as an avenue. I'll just point at Maduro's failed plan to show why it doesn't matter anyway.

> > Transporting Bitcoin can also be free, depending on what you mean by transporting.

> On-chain?

> Nope.

I'll indulge you, go on explain...

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#66

Post by kerkeslager »

einpoklum wrote: post #57
kerkeslager wrote: post #34

Of course Bitcoin is not a socialist's ally in the long run . It's fundamentally a way to get government out of money, which is exactly the opposite of socialism. Bitcoin is an anarcho- capitalist tool. The article rightly notes that the ability to print money is relevant here, but I think they could have expressed it in simpler terms. In short: printing money is always a redistribution of wealth. If you print a mill…

> Bitcoin is an anarcho-capitalist tool. s/tool/ponzi scheme/... or in other words - I am entirely unconvinced that bitcoin has a positive short-term effect. Most of what happens with BitCoin is people buying it in exchange for fiat currency, a bunch of speculation, and mining (if that's not mostly over). I don't see it empowering workers' movements.

> s/tool/ponzi scheme/

This weakens the rest of your argument. Bitcoin obviously isn't a Ponzi scheme. If speaking to an uninformed audience, this could be a good-enough approximation, but when speaking to an informed audience, a cheap shot like this just makes you seem uninformed (which you clearly aren't, based on the rest of your post).

> I am entirely unconvinced that bitcoin has a positive short-term effect. Most of what happens with BitCoin is people buying it in exchange for fiat currency, a bunch of speculation, and mining (if that's not mostly over). I don't see it empowering workers' movements.

On the whole, I agree with you on this, and I hope there's nothing in my previous post which makes it seem otherwise.

However, as with any large complex system, there are local effects, and the situation is not as simple as you're making it seem.

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#67

Post by kerkeslager »

wmf wrote: post #64
Melting_Harps wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then your view(s) is solely fixed on those who benefit from this exclusionary Monetary System, go ask people who don't have access to bank accounts or are undocumented how horribly they are treated and marginalized then come back and see what is and isn't a ponzi scheme. See how many people are unfairly targeted by the State(s) with policies like Operation Chokepoint in the US, though similar laws exists in other pla…

The unofficial economy would benefit far far more from a stablecoin than deflationary BTC.

True, but in the situations the comment you're responding to mentions, a stable coin is not an option. Deflationary BTC is superior to having your funds seized.

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#68

Post by Melting_Harps »

wmf wrote: post #64
Melting_Harps wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then your view(s) is solely fixed on those who benefit from this exclusionary Monetary System, go ask people who don't have access to bank accounts or are undocumented how horribly they are treated and marginalized then come back and see what is and isn't a ponzi scheme. See how many people are unfairly targeted by the State(s) with policies like Operation Chokepoint in the US, though similar laws exists in other pla…

The unofficial economy would benefit far far more from a stablecoin than deflationary BTC.

> The unofficial economy would benefit far far more from a stablecoin

That's right... Because tether has proven that so well, hasn't it? By the way, Bitcoin will remain inflationary until the last one is mined 2140, as it continues to approximately discover the entire 21 million into existence until then. Which is long after you or I will be around, be even then you can create a form of colored coin derivative backed by other more stable assets (wheat, pork bellies?) now if you wanted to.

I thought stablecoins may have had some limited utility, but I feel they're just re-creating the same problem by using the same tools that fiat does and further convoluting it by attaching the Cryptocurrency Brand over it. I'm not impressed by it nor would I think people who are marginalized would want to rely on yet another centralized system for their existence.

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#69

Post by wmf »

Melting_Harps wrote: post #68
wmf wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unofficial economy would benefit far far more from a stablecoin than deflationary BTC.

> The unofficial economy would benefit far far more from a stablecoin That's right... Because tether has proven that so well, hasn't it? By the way, Bitcoin will remain inflationary until the last one is mined 2140, as it continues to approximately discover the entire 21 million into existence until then. Which is long after you or I will be around, be even then you can create a form of colored coin derivative backed…

I think Tether should be destroyed, but it has never had a 60% drop. Decentralized stablecoins should be even better.

BTC suffers from price deflation which is what everyone means by deflation.

Re: Why Bitcoin is not a socialist’s ally

#70

Post by panarky »

nerfhammer wrote: post #28
yalogin wrote: post #8

For me Bitcoin further exacerbates the already terrible distribution of wealth in our world. BTC is purely a play for the "rich" folks. I say "rich" because it needs not just tech access and disposable money barriers but also has the additional tech knowledge barrier to it.

it's not just knowledge and tech, a deflationary currency multiplies existing wealth at no risk while also multiplying the value of debts.

Varoufakis only examines two scenarios: (1) Economy remains capitalist and Bitcoin replaces national currencies, or (2) capitalism is replaced with socialism.

Each scenario has such a vanishingly small likelihood that it seems pedantic to debate them.

A more likely scenario is that we retain market economies and national currencies, with more or less corruption, more or less rule of law and more or less authoritarianism. Bitcoin would still exist but it wouldn't replace national currencies.

It seems that during periods of more corruption, less rule of law and more authoritarianism, we'll see more use of state power to debase national currencies for the benefit of the clique currently in power, with financial repression and confiscation for political adversaries and those not in the clique.

During times like this, an asset that is independent of the clique, digital, borderless, and difficult to detect, debase or confiscate might be a more secure way to protect the savings of the little guy and the big guy alike.

Post reply on HN