Happy Birthday Bitcoin!

guerilla said:
I probably have 200 posts about Bitcoin on this forum. You can look them up with the Advanced search "bitcoin" and user = guerilla.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, I have read them. What do you have other then legal tender/taxes and volatility?

Do you have an option a decentralized currency can take to become legal tender and bypass early stage volatility? What is this 'good money' option you are hoping falls into your lap?

Why argue in a thread if you don't want to take the time to follow through..?

Anarchism is an ideal.

We don't have anarchism because of sucker/non-sucker dynamics.

That something will or will not happen isn't important. Causality is important. The Five Whys.
Click to expand...

Right. That's the point I'm making. It doesn't matter if you believe a decentralized currency will or will not succeed. It matters that it "should".

You can argue a decentralized currency will never succeed. Sure, possibly valid argument, maybe we will never see that day.

But if you're arguing bitcoin has flaws as a decentralized currency option, as in there could be a better way to run a decentralized currency, please state these flaws.

That's what I don't get about what you are arguing. I have no problem believing it's unlikely a decentralized currency will be able to displace the current system but I don't see the flaws bitcoin has as a decentralized option.
 


mattseh said:
Drawing a line of best fit and then using it to predict future performance is a sucker's game.
Click to expand...

And explained variation of 84% on what is supposed to be a currency is not exactly settin' the world on fire with stability. I just ran an OLS regression of the daily closing price (log form) of the NASDAQ Composite on time in days 11/9/2009 (day 1) to yesterday (day 1007) with a confidence interval of 95%

log(price) = 7.683 + 0.000494day

R-square = 0.8824

Just for kicks.
 
lukep said:
Interesting; some UT students have put together a logarithmic chart of the bitcoin price and it's actually a very steady,
predictable growth, possibly led that way by the predictable mining reward halvings and hash rate difficulty adjustments
built into the system:

GOYWUMo.png



Keep in mind, this chart doesn't say that BTC will be worth a million bucks in 2017; there is a limit of what the world economy
will allow for before that point, I'm sure.

But I'm betting that this limit is above $25,000/btc.
Click to expand...

The reason people take the logarithm of something is to make it linear. That's the whole point. Linear functions can be operated on. You can take any kind of complicated function, make it smooth, take the log, do some other shit and then you can make predictions but the interval on which these predictions hold is VERY SMALL
 
p0ck3taces said:
As far as I know, I have read them. What do you have other then legal tender/taxes and volatility?
Click to expand...
You wouldn't be asking this question if you had read them.

p0ck3taces said:
Do you have an option a decentralized currency can take to become legal tender and bypass early stage volatility? What is this 'good money' option you are hoping falls into your lap?
Click to expand...
You don't understand the problem. You, like Luke, think it can be solved technologically. Misses the point.

p0ck3taces said:
Why argue in a thread if you don't want to take the time to follow through..?
Click to expand...
What you really mean, is that you're too lazy to look up my old posts, so you want me to waste my time rehashing those old posts WHICH ARE PUBLIC AND ON RECORD HERE because you're not inclined to do any of the work yourself.

Go look up my posts, read them, then come back to me. It's all there. All you have to do is apply effort.

p0ck3taces said:
Right. That's the point I'm making. It doesn't matter if you believe a decentralized currency will or will not succeed. It matters that it "should".
Click to expand...
Should is a value judgment. I'm not interested in that nonsense.

p0ck3taces said:
You can argue a decentralized currency will never succeed.
Click to expand...
I have never argued that. Read my posts.

p0ck3taces said:
But if you're arguing bitcoin has flaws as a decentralized currency option, as in there could be a better way to run a decentralized currency, please state these flaws.
Click to expand...
Read my posts.

p0ck3taces said:
I don't see the flaws bitcoin has as a decentralized option.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should spend less time posting and more time thinking then. Begging people to give you the answers isn't making you any more intelligent.
 
Andrew Scherer said:
My best guess, AU guy running the site just ran off with them himself.
Click to expand...
That's what would happen in Eve. They are basically untraceable, so he has pretty much nothing to lose by doing this.

This is another minor issue with Bitcoin, there is zero accountability on transactions. Someone earlier was heralding the end of chargebacks, but chargebacks are a private arbitration mechanism for protecting transactions.

People underestimate how important a legal system is to establishing trust relationships.
 
guerilla said:
This is another minor issue with Bitcoin, there is zero accountability on transactions. Someone earlier was heralding the end of chargebacks, but chargebacks are a private arbitration mechanism for protecting transactions.

People underestimate how important a legal system is to establishing trust relationships.
Click to expand...

I don't see it as an issue at all. Big brands/stores aren't going to hurt their brand by scamming you; you have absolutely no reason to ever file a chargeback against Best Buy, Apple, etc.

If bitcoin becomes mainstream there will be countless intermediary services like PayPal that feature verification procedures. Sites like eBay with reviews/feedback on sellers, etc.

Now if you're still sitting on Tor trying to buy cocaine and you get scammed, then that's just too bad.

I can see it hurting affiliate marketing though. People will be scared to spend their bitcoins on non-reputable sites because they won't know if the site is a scam or not. I'm sure there will be a workaround for that though. Overall about 99% of chargebacks are fraud on the buyer's side anyway so abolishing them will certainly create more business spending and improve the overall economy.
 
People should look at bitcoin more like an API or an OS. It is an underlying OS like Linux. Linux by itself has lots of issues. There's no cool graphics, it's not user friendly, non-tech people can lose all their data, etc. But when people build upon Linux it becomes awesome. When people create Ubuntu on top of Linux it solves problems. When people build apps on top of Linux they solve problems. Linux can be customized and built on however people see fit.

The same goes for bitcoin. Bitcoin is Linux for currency. If people want to allow for chargebacks they can build that onto a layer on top of bitcoin. Bitcoin is simply the core, underlying OS that is open source and stable. Most things other currencies are doing right now can be built on top of bitcoin if necessary. It's up to the market to decide.
 
guerilla said:
That's what would happen in Eve. They are basically untraceable, so he has pretty much nothing to lose by doing this.

This is another minor issue with Bitcoin, there is zero accountability on transactions. Someone earlier was heralding the end of chargebacks, but chargebacks are a private arbitration mechanism for protecting transactions.

People underestimate how important a legal system is to establishing trust relationships.
Click to expand...

You can have escrow in neat ways with bitcoin, which kinda has similar uses to chargebacks. Multiple escrow companies could easily exist, even with multiple companies escrowing the same transaction.

Making it consumer-friendly is another matter.

lukep said:
Wow, I thought you understood the blockchain better than that. :eek:
Click to expand...

Accountability needs more than a computer generated base58 string. You need a decent amount of confidence in the identity and trustworthiness of the entity at the other end of the transaction.
 
o hai guyz said:
you have absolutely no reason to ever file a chargeback against Best Buy, Apple, etc.
Click to expand...
And yet it happens friend.

o hai guyz said:
If bitcoin becomes mainstream there will be countless intermediary services like PayPal that feature verification procedures. Sites like eBay with reviews/feedback on sellers, etc.
Click to expand...
Paypal handles legal tender. Huge difference from Bitcoin.

Let me tell you a little story. I play a game where it is very anarchistic. People are friends for 8 years. They meet each other IRL. They spend countless thousands of hours playing together. And they rip each other off when people least expect.

Trust systems have to be backed by consequences. Property rights systems don't work solely on trust, or no one would use escrow or write a contract.

o hai guyz said:
Overall about 99% of chargebacks are fraud on the buyer's side anyway so abolishing them will certainly create more business spending and improve the overall economy.
Click to expand...
This is untrue. Most chargebacks are due to unclear policies on the part of the seller and non-existent customer support. Businesses who do a good job with post sales support tend to have very low chargeback rates.
 
lukep said:
Wow, I thought you understood the blockchain better than that. :eek:
Click to expand...
Another clueless response, well done.

slayerment said:
If people want to allow for chargebacks they can build that onto a layer on top of bitcoin.
Click to expand...
You need support from the legal (state) infrastructure to support any property rights system, until there is no state, and you have an entire private legal system.

And you can't even think to have that stuff, until people reject the state. Which is why Bitcoin is just a sidebar. It doesn't address the fundamental issue that most people enjoy the state and see it as necessary. Talking about Bitcoin is like talking about your bad complexion when you're dying from liver cancer. It's superficial if your focus is libertarian anarchism.

mattseh said:
You can have escrow in neat ways with bitcoin, which kinda has similar uses to chargebacks. Multiple escrow companies could easily exist, even with multiple companies escrowing the same transaction.

Making it consumer-friendly is another matter.
Click to expand...
Without the capacity to form contracts enforced in court, this is almost impossible to do.

Now someone may choose to do it that way, but it will come with costs, and one thing I have learned about humans, is that they won't buy insurance (for example) then when they get in an accident, they will run to the biggest bully with a club (the state) and plead for relief. And because there is political capital in serving people who want state help, politicians will do so.

mattseh said:
Accountability needs more than a computer generated base58 string. You need a decent amount of confidence in the identity and trustworthiness of the entity at the other end of the transaction.
Click to expand...
And even with trust, someone can decide to betray you. If you gave me 10 BTC to hold onto, I would probably do it. If you gave me 100,000 BTC, you'd never hear from me again.
 
fantastic discourse on something the US government will swat like a gnat the instant it rises to blip status on its radar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom