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

Bitcoin Is Time

dergigi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

991–1000 of 1001 posts

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#991

Post by ajarmst »

tim333 wrote: post #985
ajarmst wrote: post #958

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but that would also apply if what I had was a used car, rather than bitcoin or gold, etc. The requirement for intermediate conversion to another currency in order to realize value implies that bitcoin isn’t (at least yet) a currency (even in the case where foreign currency isn’t local currency, there is a context where it is currency: that foreign country). I can also buy milk by exchanging my car for local curr…

I'm not sure replacing local currency in the corner shop was ever an objective of bitcoin. For it's actual objective of uncensorable money transfers over the internet it kind of works. I get the tulip thing but there are over 14,400 hectares of farmland growing tulips today. Something being overpriced at some point is not the same as it being useless.

Good points. Thanks. This isn’t really my area (I start to glaze over around when ‘fiat’ is the main topic), so I’m sure I’m ignorant of some subtleties.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#992

Post by noxer »

capableweb wrote: post #990
mortehu wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how this prevents forks? An example of a fork would be someone creating a new client that rejects transactions from old clients.

What exactly is the "threat" of forks? Being able to fork the network is often seen as a feature, not a issue. If you're building a decentralized network, you sometimes have to have consensus when doing upgrades globally. This is in reality a fork but everyone agrees to keep with one of them. Those who don't agree, can continue running the other one if they feel like it.

unwanted/unplanned forking is a "threat" in the sense that it causes uncertainty. Idk about this specific project and how they handle this but for example the XRPL has amendments which come with software update but are not enabled they are open to votes. Each amendment must constantly get over 80% positive votes for 2 weeks to be accepted. The validator nodes who voted against it are overruled by this they must install the latest version to be able to vote on the amendment therefore they do have the code and if the consensus is to enable the new code their node will do so. This prevents forking.

Intentional forking as a feature is ofc still possible. Validators owner who disagree with an amendment to the point that if it is accepted they would want to stay on the "old chain" and thus fork it, can simply remove the "yes" votes from their validator list essentially ignoring their votes and thus separate from each other. By the time one cluster enabled an amendment and the separated cluster does not, a fork happens*. This requires some kind of coordination and is unlikely to happen unexpected. A largely unpopular amendment would simply not reach the 80%. And one that reached 80% is unlikely to be consider so bad by the remaining 20% that they would want to fork. But the possibility is there it just never happened in the 8+ years its running.

*ofc it would also go the other way around. An amendment that wont reach 80% could also cause a cluster to intentionally separate and enable it there which would also case a fork.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#993

Post by happyconcepts »

gamblor956 wrote: post #752
cwkoss wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The housing market (and luxury vehicle market) on the Pacific coast of America would beg to differ

The housing market in California is direct proof of the success of China's capital controls. Capital outflow from China to the West Coast dropped over 90% after Xi introduced capital controls. When I was still in consulting, I had dozens of clients whose projects were killed when their Chinese investors could no longer get their money out of China to invest. A billion building sits unfinished across the street from S…

>Capital outflow from China to the West Coast dropped over 90% after Xi introduced capital controls.

Big claim. Source?

Its non-Chinese foreigners getting deals in LA now that China is sandbagged. If you don't see all the other foreign money buying LA then I am not surprised you are no longer a consultant.

Lastly what do you think of US capital controls such as OFAC?

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#994

Post by flurben »

neilwilson wrote: post #913
flurben wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If left to its own devices the market rate would be driven down towards zero. How do you figure?

Banks can't get rid of reserves at the central bank in aggregate. They can only get rid of them to other banks. So there is no need for the central bank to pay them. Since there are always more reserves than required, and no alternative source of interest, the inter bank rate would be driven to zero by supply and demand. That's then the 'market rate'. You can't hold reserves so the bank can charge you extra for borro…

ok. it seems our differences here are more in definitions and semantics

I interpret the phrase 'left to their own devices' to mean that there is no central bank and therefore reserves are as a concept are null and void, which then also nullify the concept of a federal funds rate, which would upend the concept of the federal funds rate being 'the market rate' in the first place.

I'll take your word for it about the mechanics of what happens to inter-bank rates under different reserve mechanisms, perhaps they would be driven to zero for the reasons you outlined.

However I'm unclear on what the macroeconomic ramifications would be of letting a small group of banks dictate the federal funds rate; I believe the purpose of this system is to achieve a congressional directive regarding price stability and labor utilization.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#995

Post by ric2b »

arcticbull wrote: post #688
chordalkeyboard wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are modern solutions to transportation that are superior to cars, like rail, frequent busses, and bike infrastructure, Bicycles are nice but have lower capacity for cargo and passengers; mass transit is less flexible. So they aren’t strictly superior. > Bitcoin does not solve any problem that any other transaction network technology can't solve, How else do you propose to have a distributed ledger that is res…

> Bicycles are nice but have lower capacity for cargo and passengers; mass transit is less flexible. So they aren’t strictly superior. Mass transit in much of the world is perfectly acceptable. You build cities around transit, walking and biking instead of giant chasms between buildings. This is not a problem that exists in Europe. You don't have to get rid of all cars, just most of them. And the best way to start is…

> So long as wages keep pace with inflation, which they do, this is not an issue.

Lots of workers don't get inflation adjustments to their wages. And even if they do, you'll still lose money because a larger share of your income will go to taxes unless the tax brackets are adjusted for inflation very frequently, which they're not.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#996

Post by danlugo92 »

zepto wrote: post #945
danlugo92 wrote: post #918

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to localbitcoins, $235 million was traded in 2018 alone in Venezuela, that's a lot for such an small economy. It's solving /some/ problems, for /some/ people, maybe businessmen that create jobs or wealth even.

> It's solving /some/ problems, for /some/ people, maybe businessmen that create jobs or wealth even. Sure, but by that logic, selling crack cocaine solves some problems for some people, maybe businessmen that create jobs or even wealth.

Such an apt analogy of course...

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#997

Post by dang »

Tenal wrote: post #557
fwiwm2c wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You won't. This is why Bitcoin is valuable since it has stood the test of time and has gained more acceptability. Nanos and other nonsense coins are just trying to attack the emperor in the hope that they come close to it and thus make the speculators a lot of money.

It's weird how hard you go against literally anything except Bitcoin because of your rabid obsession with whatever paltry sum of money you've made over this one dated technologically is. You're literally like a cancer-ridden coal miner coughing his last lung to keep the mines open. Good riddance.

I missed this at the time, but this sort of personal attack is absolutely not ok on HN and will get you banned for obvious reasons. You've unfortunately been breaking the site guidelines in a bunch of your other comments too.

Would you mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart? We'd be grateful.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#998

Post by jquery »

ryandrake wrote: post #832
hannasanarion wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, which is why I didn't say anything about horses. Opposition to cars, like opposition to bitcoin, isn't rustic ludditism. There are modern solutions to transportation that are superior to cars, like rail, frequent busses, and bike infrastructure, but lose out in funding and hype because they're not prestigious and utopian like cars are. Likewise, Bitcoin does not solve any problem that any other transaction netwo…

I need to haul an old kitchen oven to my dad's house so he can cook dinner, since his failed. Dad lives deep in the mountains at the end of a dirt road, far from any train station. I've got a 20 foot fishing boat sitting in my backyard. I want to take it out on the lake. I'd like to visit my in-laws who live on a farm in a rural town without bus service, 200 miles away. The temperature is a few degrees above freezing…

The question to ask, is why your dad and in-laws live so far away from civilization. Probably because cars make it convenient. No matter the weather (excepting extreme conditions) they are not far from any of the comforts of civilization and benefits of dense living. In a way, their relationship to density is parasitic… they receive a great deal (electrification, roads, security, plus many other benefits) and pay relative pittances. Even their votes tend to count for a great deal more than urban votes (which perhaps explains the large benefits they receive).

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#999

Post by jquery »

andrepd wrote: post #944
ryandrake wrote: post #832

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I need to haul an old kitchen oven to my dad's house so he can cook dinner, since his failed. Dad lives deep in the mountains at the end of a dirt road, far from any train station. I've got a 20 foot fishing boat sitting in my backyard. I want to take it out on the lake. I'd like to visit my in-laws who live on a farm in a rural town without bus service, 200 miles away. The temperature is a few degrees above freezing…

The vast majority of trips in a car aren't for transportation of kitchen ovens to houses deep in the mountains at the end of a dirt road guarded by an eldritch Being.

It’s a huge luxury to be able to live like that and still have access to modern amenities. These people usually don’t appreciate how much their lifestyle is subsidized, largely because their votes can be worth 25-30x as much as an urban voter.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#1000

Post by blobster »

moralsupply wrote: post #756
blobster wrote: post #745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're predicting >12% yearly inflation? That seems like a pretty bold prediction. I'm curious if you have any sources that would back your prediction.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL

Would you be willing to bet on it? I'd love some easy money.
Post reply on HN