Jump to content

Tim Hortons and Bitcoin Megathread


Pignog
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 11/27/2017 at 12:41 PM, Silo said:

Gee, only if I had two-hundred+ bucks just laying around.

In this world I've found that you can only have one of two things lying around: money, or your ass.

 

Incidentally, I haven't been to Canada yet :( Maybe spring when flowers bloom in Niagara.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rassah Hello Rassah, me Rev here, I have a few VERY important questions to ask you. Firstly and most importantly, are you a bitcoin millionaire!? Secondly and second most importantly, how to I turn my fake money into REAL money? Because I might like to do so one day when bitcoin starts to collapse. Yours sincerely, Rev.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dr. Doggo said:

man I wish I knew how to get into bitcoin and also have a timemachine to go back to when they were just electric zimbabwean dollars

i could put down a few hundred and come back to 2017 and trade it for truckloads of real money and gold

Investing in anything does tend to seem easy of one could only tell their past selves what to do.

But really, right now Bitcoin is in a state of out of control deflation proving how useless it could be as a currency.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AshleyAshes said:

Investing in anything does tend to seem easy of one could only tell their past selves what to do.

But really, right now Bitcoin is in a state of out of control deflation proving how useless it could be as a currency.

I'll just wait til it crashes horribly and laugh at all its users and secretly buy some

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2017 at 9:37 AM, Dr. Doggo said:

man I wish I knew how to get into bitcoin and also have a timemachine to go back to when they were just electric zimbabwean dollars

i could put down a few hundred and come back to 2017 and trade it for truckloads of real money and gold

Lots of those who bought near the beginning when it was worth pennies, traded it for real money and gold at the ridiculously high price of $10. Or at $100. Or at $1000. Everyone kept thinking the price was really high and selling it, and then the price just kept going up. So a lot of early investors aren't millionaires, they sold way early. And the very few who are "true believers" who think it will take over the dollar will never sell.

 

I do love deflationary currencies so much more than inflationary ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

Lots of those who bought near the beginning when it was worth pennies, traded it for real money and gold at the ridiculously high price of $10. Or at $100. Or at $1000. Everyone kept thinking the price was really high and selling it, and then the price just kept going up. So a lot of early investors aren't millionaires, they sold way early. And the very few who are "true believers" who think it will take over the dollar will never sell.

 

I do love deflationary currencies so much more than inflationary ones.

Ah yes, the age-old question of when to exit a speculative frenzy that's entirely dependent on bigger fools coming in from elsewhere.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/16/2017 at 1:39 AM, WileyWarWeasel said:

Ah yes, the age-old question of when to exit a speculative frenzy that's entirely dependent on bigger fools coming in from elsewhere.

That question doesn't apply when the end game is the exit option itself being destroyed. And it's not even about the money.

This guy gets it! http://www.neonnettle.com/news/3368-keanu-reeves-bitcoin-will-destroy-the-global-elite-give-power-back-to-people

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

That question doesn't apply when the end game is the exit option itself being destroyed. And it's not even about the money.

This guy gets it! http://www.neonnettle.com/news/3368-keanu-reeves-bitcoin-will-destroy-the-global-elite-give-power-back-to-people

Not sure I trust a source listed on Wikipedia's list of "fake news" sites. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites

Apparently other sites are reporting the quotes as fake too. https://www.gossipcop.com/keanu-reeves-bitcoin-destroy-global-elite-fake-news/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rassah said:

That question doesn't apply when the end game is the exit option itself being destroyed. And it's not even about the money.

This guy gets it! http://www.neonnettle.com/news/3368-keanu-reeves-bitcoin-will-destroy-the-global-elite-give-power-back-to-people

Bitcoin is a fraction of the currency being circulated throughout the world yet its transaction costs have already gone from a fraction of a cent to $20, and transaction times can be as high as a day.

Barely anyone accepts Bitcoin as payment, the only real reason there is so much interest at the moment from "investors" is because they see it as a fast way to get other currency by relying on the bigger fools principle.

All it would take to bring down bitcoin is for it to be made illegal and a few high profile arrests and show trials to be conducted (perhaps a terrorist attack that involved using bitcoin to buy certain products would be a suitable catalyst). A few criminals and idealists might cling to it afterward but it would be swept from the mainstream.

The only reason the central banks don't bother doing anything (overt) about it is because it is insignificant in the grand scheme of things, and if it gives some people hope for the time being than why not let it go for a while longer.

Here's a handy visualization. It's from the beginning of November but even with it's increased market capitalization since then bitcoin is still a speck.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-03/all-worlds-money-and-markets-one-visualization

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Bitcoin is a fraction of the currency being circulated throughout the world yet its transaction costs have already gone from a fraction of a cent to $20, and transaction times can be as high as a day.

As it is now, yeah. But there are other things, like Lightning Network, being developed on top of it that will allow the entire world's population to transact for almost free, with bitcoin just being the underlying settlement layer. You'll still be trading bitcoin, but you won't need to settle on the network itself unless there's an issue of some sort. It's already in beta testing and hopefully will be out this year.

9 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Barely anyone accepts Bitcoin as payment, the only real reason there is so much interest at the moment from "investors" is because they see it as a fast way to get other currency by relying on the bigger fools principle.

Actually the reason there is so much interest (and why literally billions of dollars poured into it over the last few months) is because institutional investors and funds are finally able to invest in it. They hold it to diversify, and to hedge against falls in currency and the market.

9 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

All it would take to bring down bitcoin is for it to be made illegal and a few high profile arrests and show trials to be conducted 

It's already illegal in a few countries, and a few arrests have already been made. But bitcoin just ended up going higher in price in those countries, because people think if the government wants to block this money, there's probably something to it (it's a threat to government money). Incidentally, file sharing of movies and music has been made illegal and people have been arrested, but it didn't stop people from using a good technology.

9 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

A few criminals and idealists might cling to it afterward but it would be swept from the mainstream.

Don't forget the super rich and corporations that want to hide their money in virtual offshore accounts, and people politically persecuted who want to make sure their money isn't seized.

9 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

The only reason the central banks don't bother doing anything (overt) about it is because it is insignificant in the grand scheme of things, 

Actually it's because they can't do anything about it. They released a paper stating they believe it's a dire threat a year or two ago, but if they were to buy it up to try to control it, they could risk raising the price higher and starting a speciative attack on their own currencies, which would wipe them out (description of a speciative attack http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/speculative-attack/)

Sure it's small right now, but that just means it has a whole lot more to grow.

Btw, I think you mentioned something like this to me back when bitcoin was maybe $10 or $100?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the part where, after years of trying to get everyone to believe that Bitcoin will be THE way to engage in transactions, Rassah now has to argue that the OTHER thing that will run on top of Bitcoin will in fact be the the really REAL way to engage in transactions.  I look forward to finding out out what Plan C is.

In related news, TimBits continue to be purchasable without painfully high transsaction fees and the expansion of the TimBit network into the European Union continues where those Limey's probably call them 'Thomas' Cake Rounds' or something.:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/12/08/tim-hortons-glasgow_a_23301514/

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rassah said:

As it is now, yeah. But there are other things, like Lightning Network, being developed on top of it that will allow the entire world's population to transact for almost free, with bitcoin just being the underlying settlement layer. You'll still be trading bitcoin, but you won't need to settle on the network itself unless there's an issue of some sort. It's already in beta testing and hopefully will be out this year.

Funny, because Bitcoin held similar promises and look how it turned out.

 

2 hours ago, Rassah said:

Actually the reason there is so much interest (and why literally billions of dollars poured into it over the last few months) is because institutional investors and funds are finally able to invest in it. They hold it to diversify, and to hedge against falls in currency and the market.

They're still relying on the bigger fool's principle, and with institutes being able to invest there are a greater number of bigger fools now ;)

2 hours ago, Rassah said:

It's already illegal in a few countries, and a few arrests have already been made. But bitcoin just ended up going higher in price in those countries, because people think if the government wants to block this money, there's probably something to it (it's a threat to government money). Incidentally, file sharing of movies and music has been made illegal and people have been arrested, but it didn't stop people from using a good technology.

Actually it's the central bank's money, and in most countries (Australia, US, UK, Canada, Japan, etc) the central bank is privately owned and operated.

That is an interesting point, though intelligence agencies (at least in the advanced countries) could easily track transactions at least at the currency exchanges themselves then pass that info to the authorities for a massive crackdown if need be (along with maybe running some stories about bitcoin financing terrorism). The reason that they choose to not do so then must be that bitcoin, like file sharing is not seen as a major threat.

2 hours ago, Rassah said:

Don't forget the super rich and corporations that want to hide their money in virtual offshore accounts, and people politically persecuted who want to make sure their money isn't seized.

Those aren't mainstream uses of the money, and rich/corps already use various mechanisms for storing their money in offshore accounts in sovereign currency.

2 hours ago, Rassah said:

Actually it's because they can't do anything about it. They released a paper stating they believe it's a dire threat a year or two ago, but if they were to buy it up to try to control it, they could risk raising the price higher and starting a speciative attack on their own currencies, which would wipe them out (description of a speciative attack http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/speculative-attack/)

They may publicly state that it's a menace, but they are no fools. They have access to far more detailed financial data than what I have shown you and they would be far more acutely aware of how insignificant the currency is.

Also they wouldn't print and shove their own money into bitcoin, they have other means at their disposal as mentioned previously they just choose not to use them.

2 hours ago, Rassah said:

Sure it's small right now, but that just means it has a whole lot more to grow.

You can say that about literally any small thing.

4 hours ago, Rassah said:

Btw, I think you mentioned something like this to me back when bitcoin was maybe $10 or $100?

I think it was around a thousand last time we talked about bitcoin, and while it has grown it is still a speck. Also it's amusing that we keep talking about bitcoin's worth by continuously comparing it to USD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Think it was around a thousand last time we talked about bitcoin, and while it has grown it is still a speck. Also it's amusing that we keep talking about bitcoin's worth by continuously comparing it to USD.

That part is always great.  Bitcoin is never seen as having any value other than the amount of other currencies it can buy.  I get paid in Canadian Dollars and I'm not running around saying 'Wow, my Paycheque is now equal to X amount of Euro!'   I can instead think of my income directly as the amount of housing, food or luxuries it can buy me... You know, USEFUL things, the things I actually use CURRENCY for.  Bitcoin is never worth anything meaningful', it's only every worth 'X amount of USD (Or other currency)'. 

Even when Rassah wants to brag about the value of BitCoin he only ever does so by comparing to US dollars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2017 at 12:57 AM, Rassah said:

That question doesn't apply when the end game is the exit option itself being destroyed. And it's not even about the money.

This guy gets it! http://www.neonnettle.com/news/3368-keanu-reeves-bitcoin-will-destroy-the-global-elite-give-power-back-to-people

Quote

Tech guru John McAfee even went as far to say that if the value doesn't reach $1million by the year 2020, then he will "eat his own penis on live TV."
 

.... Seems legit.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Funny, because Bitcoin held similar promises and look how it turned out.

Oh, Lightning Network is Bitcoin. It's just tech that runs on top of it to optimize the transactions. But it's still in beta, and will need wallets that support this new transaction type.

Quote

They're still relying on the bigger fool's principle, and with institutes being able to invest there are a greater number of bigger fools now ;)

Yes, but that's ALL money.

Quote

Actually it's the central bank's money, and in most countries (Australia, US, UK, Canada, Japan, etc) the central bank is privately owned and operated.

Not exactly, but kinda? Governments still control and regulate it. In some countries they run the banks.

Quote

That is an interesting point, though intelligence agencies (at least in the advanced countries) could easily track transactions at least at the currency exchanges themselves then pass that info to the authorities for a massive crackdown if need be (along with maybe running some stories about bitcoin financing terrorism). 

Transactions can't be easily tracked, no. There are already ways to hide them, and Lightning will support onion routing like Tor, with another tech called confidential transactions hiding the actual amounts being sent. So tracking will be pretty impossible on the chain. As for exchanges, they're all over the world. I already use international ones that don't really report to our government.

Quote

Thereason that they choose to not do so then must be that bitcoin, like file sharing is not seen as a major threat.

Actually it's because they know there are dozens of other currencies that are even more private, and they understand that if they block or track bitcoin, something else will come up to replace it and make it harder. I heard politicians at the hearing literally say that they learned their lesson with Napster, where they cracked does on it, only for it to be replaced with more anonymous and decentralized sharing methods.

Quote

and rich/corps already use various mechanisms for storing their money in offshore accounts in sovereign currency.

Don't forget how much of the world's wealth is owned by the rich, and while yes, they use other methods, the crackdown in Switzerland proved that no offshore bank hiding place is safe.

Quote

They may publicly state that it's a menace, but they are no fools. They have access to far more detailed financial data than what I have shown you and they would be far more acutely aware of how insignificant the currency is.

Except they do understand it, and you don't, so they do know it's a threat. It's small now, but they're concerned about the potential.

Quote

You can say that about literally any small thing.

Not really. Not everything has a potential to grow, or has grown so much. Bitcoin is already bigger than a lot top US corporations, and even bigger than a lot of countries' entire currency amounts at this point, so I wouldn't really call it small. Check the list here http://www.cryptocurrencyprices.net/cryptocurrency_vs_country_gdp.php

Quote

I think it was around a thousand last time we talked about bitcoin, and while it has grown it is still a speck. 

Last time, yeah. First time was. Few years ago.

Quote

Alsoit's amusing that we keep talking about bitcoin's worth by continuously comparing it to USD.

I can compare it to CAD, or RUB, or YEN if you'd prefer? Or I can compare it to value of real things. When I first mentioned it, you could use a bitcoin to buy a fast food meal, or dinner at a nice restaurant. A year ago you could buy a nice phone. Today you can buy a car with one. Incidentally, I bought all those with bitcoin before 😏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Rassah said:

I can compare it to CAD, or RUB, or YEN if you'd prefer? Or I can compare it to value of real things.

I don't think he gets it guys.

Actually, I wonder if he really can equate the value of bitcoin against everyday objects without FIRST converting it to another currency and then equating THAT to the value of most 'real things'.

Like, I certainly don't need to convert $1000 CAD to USD before I can instantly think 'About one month's rent or mortgage for a lot of middle class individuals, of course depending on region and size.' or in my case 'Groceries for 3+ months'.  For a stretch at work there was 2.5x pay rate incentive due to deadlines.  I remember hearing a few discuss that they were making 'Basically one brand new AAA game per hour'.  Cause that's what we can do with actual currency, the currency we use in our every day lives, we know it's value in what it can do for us without needing to translate it to another currency first.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Rassah said:

Oh, Lightning Network is Bitcoin. It's just tech that runs on top of it to optimize the transactions. But it's still in beta, and will need wallets that support this new transaction type.

You're still shifting the goal posts; bitcoin in its original incarnation was supposed to be the fast and cheap decentralized way of transferring funds. Now that it's not we have to rely on some crap on top of it to supposedly make it cheaper. Just like @AshleyAshes I'm now curious to see what Plan C will be.

18 minutes ago, Rassah said:

Yes, but that's ALL money.

Yes it is, and like any good pyramid scheme it will continue to work while suckers bring in money from the outside as bitcoin is rarely used for actually buying things.

19 minutes ago, Rassah said:

Not exactly, but kinda? Governments still control and regulate it. In some countries they run the banks.

No, look at the structure and mandate of the central banks in countries like the USA. They are 100% privately owned and operated. In regions like USA and EU they are even immune to investigation and prosecution, all in the name of "independence" of course.

23 minutes ago, Rassah said:

As for exchanges, they're all over the world. I already use international ones that don't really report to our government.

Was talking mostly about exchanges, and in case if you haven't noticed intelligence agencies don't need others to report to them in order to extract information ;)

It is possible to crack encryption with powerful enough supercomputers, which funnily enough are what NSA has.

24 minutes ago, Rassah said:

Actually it's because they know there are dozens of other currencies that are even more private, and they understand that if they block or track bitcoin, something else will come up to replace it and make it harder. I heard politicians at the hearing literally say that they learned their lesson with Napster, where they cracked does on it, only for it to be replaced with more anonymous and decentralized sharing methods.

The protocols for bit torrent and other file sharing methods are well known, and you're saying that intelligence agencies using billions of dollars worth of equipment and some of the finest minds that money can buy can't go after them?

At worst (for them), it would create a virtual arms race between anonymizing methods and cracking/surveillance methods.

Also just because they're not cracking down on the current services such as bitcoin and bittorrent doesn't mean they aren't quietly tracking them.

40 minutes ago, Rassah said:

Don't forget how much of the world's wealth is owned by the rich, and while yes, they use other methods, the crackdown in Switzerland proved that no offshore bank hiding place is safe.

A few fish get caught and the rest get away scott free, I guess it's better than nothing?

41 minutes ago, Rassah said:

Except they do understand it, and you don't, so they do know it's a threat. It's small now, but they're concerned about the potential.

Why would they publicly acknowledge it as a threat in the first case if it was one they (according to you) could do nothing about? Wouldn't that simply encourage other people to take it up who wouldn't otherwise which would be contrary to the central bank's aims?

Remember that central banks like any other significant organization have any statements go through their PR department to make sure it's fit for public consumption before uttering a single word. This is why I personally like to look at the actions of an individual or group rather than their cheap words which is what you are focusing on.

Bitcoin has been around for almost 10 years, and from a currency no one uses it has become a currency that no one uses except as a get rich quick scheme. Whatever potential it has remains just that, potential. Hardly anyone accepts it as payment and some that did accept it before no longer do (such as Steam). The Fed Reserve and other central banks are aware of this fact.

57 minutes ago, Rassah said:

Not really. Not everything has a potential to grow, or has grown so much. Bitcoin is already bigger than a lot top US corporations, and even bigger than a lot of countries' entire currency amounts at this point, so I wouldn't really call it small. Check the list here http://www.cryptocurrencyprices.net/cryptocurrency_vs_country_gdp.php

Bitcoin is still a speck: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-03/all-worlds-money-and-markets-one-visualization
Unlike the majority of companies and countries, bitcoin doesn't even produce anything. As currency it's rarely used to actually buy anything. Even with its tiny size (that funnily enough has to be compared to real currencies to assess its value) it still has horrendous transaction costs (about $20) and times (up to a day).

The only thing propping up this digital token platform are bigger fools coming in hoping that even bigger fools will come in to buy their tokens with sovereign currency. For a pyramid scheme it is of impressive size, but it remains a pyramid scheme.

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

Last time, yeah. First time was. Few years ago.

And would you look at that, it's grown but in the global scale of things it's a speck (one that's not even good for everyday transactions if you could find a place that accepts it as payment).
 

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

I can compare it to CAD, or RUB, or YEN if you'd prefer? Or I can compare it to value of real things. When I first mentioned it, you could use a bitcoin to buy a fast food meal, or dinner at a nice restaurant. A year ago you could buy a nice phone. Today you can buy a car with one. Incidentally, I bought all those with bitcoin before 😏

So if you go out of your way you can find some place that accepts it. The vast, vast majority of places don't including utilities and landlords to name a few. Still not sure why you'd want to buy things with it given its volatility, transaction times and transaction costs that are as much as a meal themselves. See Ashley's response for more detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

You're still shifting the goal posts; bitcoin in its original incarnation was supposed to be the fast and cheap decentralized way of transferring funds. Now that it's not we have to rely on some crap on top of it to supposedly make it cheaper.

I'm not actually. Like I said, this is still bitcoin. Think of it like specialized wallet software that sends bitcoin transactions in a unique more economical way. Or like the internet being a supposed way to change how we communicate, but that bottom TCP/IP layer requiring other things on top of it, like HTTP and other protocols, for it to be useful. Bitcoin is still the TCP/IP.

Quote

like any good pyramid scheme it will continue to work while suckers bring in money from the outside as bitcoin is rarely used for actually buying things.

And again, this can be said about all money too. USD and CAD are just a pyramid scheme too, which only continue to work while suckers bring in money/value from the outside. Both will also collapse as soon as there are no more suckers to accept it, since both are also not actually supported by anything but a lot of suckers thinking they have value. Yes, bitcoin is rarely used for actually buying things compared to other currencies, for now. What's to stop it from being used more frequently when it's a much cheaper transaction network and a much more secure store of value than most other currencies in the world?

Quote

No, look at the structure and mandate of the central banks in countries like the USA.

Where the head of the bank is appointed by government, and government both protects the currency against counterfeiting, and somewhat insures it against loss.

Quote

It is possible to crack encryption with powerful enough supercomputers, which funnily enough are what NSA has.

No it's not. There's encryption and hashing that can't be cracked by any supercomputer, such as what NSA and the world's banking system (and bitcoin) uses, for instance.

Quote

you're saying that intelligence agencies using billions of dollars worth of equipment and some of the finest minds that money can buy can't go after them?

Right, because see next part

Quote

At worst (for them), it would create a virtual arms race between anonymizing methods and cracking/surveillance methods.

this is exactly what happens, and millions of dollars worth of investigating new cracking methods are countered with an almost free amount of extra code added to exponentially increase cracking difficulty. Not to mention that due to the decentralized nature, instead of spending millions to go after a single everything worth hundreds of millions, you'll be spending millions to go after each single individual who is the end may only be worth a few thousand.

Quote

Also just because they're not cracking down on the current services such as bitcoin and bittorrent doesn't mean they aren't quietly tracking them.

Oh, of course they're tracking. But it gets harder and harder to track over time. Bitcoin already obfuscates ownership, where after every transaction it's less and less certain whether the remaining money belongs to the original owner, or to someone else. Add onion routing and amount obfuscation, and tracking becomes impossible.

Quote

Why would they publicly acknowledge it as a threat in the first case if it was one they (according to you) could do nothing about?

Found the details of that. In 2015 the IMF issued a warning to governments that if a bitcoin speculative attack were to happen, it doesn't have enough currency reserves to counter such an attack. As for why, maybe so banks and governments would be aware of this threat, and either figure out how to counter it, or prepare for it? Some countries are actually embracing bitcoin in hopes that doing so will put them at the forefront of being the new financial capital of the world.

Quote

This is why I personally like to look at the actions of an individual or group rather than their cheap words which is what you are focusing on.

Well, so far individual bankers have been trashing it, calling it worthless, a scam, a bubble, or even suggesting governments should ban it. And then some have been busted for actually investing in it at the same time.

Quote

Bitcoin has been around for almost 10 years, and from a currency no one uses

Why do you say no one uses it? Isn't holding currency as a means of storing liquid wealth a way of using currency? That not a lot of places accept it doesn't detract from the fact that a lot of people are using it to send money to each other, or are using it to secure what they already own from their own government's much worse currency.

Quote

Bitcoin is still a speck:

... yeah, so? It was a spec when all of it was worth $1 million. It's still a spec now that it's worth $280 billion. But so are a lot of other world's currencies and major companies. So, not sure what you're trying to prove.

Quote

Unlike the majority of companies and countries, bitcoin doesn't even produce anything.

Yeah it does. It produces the same service as a federal reserve, as a bank, as money transmitters like PayPal and Western Union, as a stock brokerage and title companies, etc. 

Quote

The only thing propping up this digital token platform are bigger fools coming in hoping that even bigger fools will come in to buy their tokens with sovereign currency. 

Again, no different from dollars or any other currency.

Quote

For a pyramid scheme it is of impressive size, but it remains a pyramid scheme.

Just like every other currency. Except in the case of inflationary government currencies, there's actually someone at the top who gets newly printed money who ends up profiting off of all the other fools. At least bitcoin equalizes income inequality in some way.

Quote

And would you look at that, it's grown but in the global scale of things it's a speck

Again, what's your point? At the rate it's growing, it may end up eclipsing the dollar in a decade or two.

Quote

So if you go out of your way you can find some place that accepts it. The vast, vast majority of places don't including utilities and landlords to name a few. 

Again, "for now," and that's not much of an argument. Look at gold, which was our currency for thousands of years. Almost no one accepts it. But countries and wealthy individuals use it to store and transfer value, and gold obviously has value. So, is gold a pyramid scheme that is only supported by fools too? (technically yes, yes it is)

Quote

Still not sure why you'd want to buy things with it given its volatility, transaction times and transaction costs that are as much as a meal themselves.

Because when you hold dollars you are guaranteed to lose value and when you hold bitcoin you are almost guaranteed to gain it, so you would hold bitcoin and have no choice but to spend it. And because when it costs $0.01 to buy something, and the transaction is instant and completely anonymous, it's a better method of buying than any other currency. (See earlier mention of Lightning Network)

Quote

See Ashley's response for more detail.

Ashley is still on my block list, so no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

I'm not actually. Like I said, this is still bitcoin. Think of it like specialized wallet software that sends bitcoin transactions in a unique more economical way.

Yes you are. Bitcoin itself was supposed to be the fast and cheap way to transfer funds, not this additional stuff. That was the original promise. Since that turned out to be a lie (and bitcoin isn't even that big) you're now trying to sell a different snake oil.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

And again, this can be said about all money too. USD and CAD are just a pyramid scheme too, which only continue to work while suckers bring in money/value from the outside. Both will also collapse as soon as there are no more suckers to accept it, since both are also not actually supported by anything but a lot of suckers thinking they have value. Yes, bitcoin is rarely used for actually buying things compared to other currencies, for now. What's to stop it from being used more frequently when it's a much cheaper transaction network and a much more secure store of value than most other currencies in the world?

Bitcoin has been around for almost a decade and hardly anyone uses it as actual currency. Even at its insignificant size the transaction costs and time are horrible. Time and again all I'm seeing from you are a bunch of promises.

You are partially correct about the other currencies, however at the very least they are more widely accepted, less volatile and with much faster and cheaper transaction costs.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Where the head of the bank is appointed by government, and government both protects the currency against counterfeiting, and somewhat insures it against loss.

The head is appointed yes, but the central bank conducts its own affairs as it sees fit and is not subject to government oversight (apart from the occasional cursory report).

From the horse's mouth:

https://www.stlouisfed.org/in-plain-english/who-owns-the-federal-reserve-banks

"The Federal Reserve Banks are not a part of the federal government, but they exist because of an act of Congress. Their purpose is to serve the public. So is the Fed private or public?

The answer is both. While the Board of Governors is an independent government agency, the Federal Reserve Banks are set up like private corporations. Member banks hold stock in the Federal Reserve Banks and earn dividends. Holding this stock does not carry with it the control and financial interest given to holders of common stock in for-profit organizations. The stock may not be sold or pledged as collateral for loans. Member banks also appoint six of the nine members of each Bank's board of directors."

As for the chair's role?

https://www.stlouisfed.org/in-plain-english/chair-of-the-federal-reserve-board

"The Chair reports twice a year to Congress on the Fed's monetary policy objectives, testifies before Congress on numerous other issues, and meets periodically with the secretary of the Treasury. Other Board of Governors officials are also called to testify before Congress, and they maintain regular contact with other government organizations as well."

While this is a visible role, it's clear that the chair is meant to serve as more of a bridge between the government and the Federal Reserve.

Admittedly the Fed and the government are quite enmeshed, however it is still an EDIT: independently operated private entity with more direct links to its member banks than anything else. The Chair and Vice Chair are merely public-facing positions.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

No it's not. There's encryption and hashing that can't be cracked by any supercomputer. Ones that NSA and the world's banking system (and bitcoin) uses, for instance.

Fine, I was hasty in saying that. However there are still security holes that can be exploited, such as the devices involved and the exchanges.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

his is exactly what happens, and millions of dollars worth of investigating new cracking methods are countered with an almost free amount of extra code to exponentially increase cracking difficulty. Not to mention that due to the decentralized nature, you'll be spending millions of dollars to go after each of the millions of users individually, instead of after a single wealthy entity, and thus will lever recover the amount you spent to go after them. (I.e. instead of spending a million to bust a $100mil organization, you'll spend a million to bust someone for maybe a few thousand $$)

Ah now we're starting to get to some good points, however the weak points can still be exploited or shut down (ie the exchanges).

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Oh, of course they're tracking. But it gets harder and harder to track over time. Bitcoin itself obfuscates ownership. I spend it once, and create two new outputs, one to the merchant, one back to me. You have a 50/50 chance of guessing which is mine. Next time I spend, I create two new ones again, and your chances are now 1/4. Every time I spend, trackers have less and less chance to guess which is still my money.

They don't need to track every bitcoin transaction, they can just pay attention to the currency conversions at the exchanges.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Found the details of that. In 2015 the IMF issued a warning to governments that if a bitcoin speculative attack were to happen, it doesn't have enough currency reserves to counter such an attack. As for why, maybe so banks and governments would be aware of this threat, and either figure out how to counter it, or prepare for it? Some countries are actually embracing bitcoin in hopes that doing so will put them at the forefront of being the new financial capital of the world.

It's just as well that cryptocurrencies are an insignificant part of the global financial system. The IMF could have just as easily have issued that warning privately to governments, yet they engaged in public hand-wringing rather unnecessarily. As for some countries embracing it, that makes some sense if your own currency is so much worse and you're desperate.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Well, so far individual bankers have been trashing it, calling it worthless, a scam, a bubble, or even asking governments to ban it. And then some have been busted for actually investing in it at the same time.

I never said that bankers weren't duplicitous and some wouldn't try to get some extra money on the side ;)

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Why do you say no one uses it? Isn't holding currency as a means of storing liquid wealth a way if using currency? That not a lot of places accept it doesn't detract from the fact that a lot of people are using it to send money to each other, or are using it to secure what they already own from their own government's much worse currency.

What I mean is that almost no one uses it for everyday transactions.

It's only real worth is in people's agreement to exchange it for "real" sovereign currency.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

.. yeah, so? It was a spec when it all of it was worth $1 million. It's still a spec now that it's worth $280 billion. But so are a lot of other world's currencies and major companies. So, not sure what you're trying to prove.

I could ask you the same question. Forgive me but your writings seem to imply that bitcoin is a worldwide phenomenon that's poised the sweep away the old financial order.

The numbers do not bear this out. I'm not trying to prove this, the figures I've provided previously are clear proof.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Yeah it does. It produces the same service as a federal reserve, as a bank, as money transmitters like PayPal and Western Union, as a stock brokerage and title companies, etc. 

Actually it's not even good as a currency for transactions (ie high transaction costs, daily volatility and transaction times).

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Again, no different from dollars or any other currency.

See previous response.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Just like every other currency. Except in the case of inflationary government currencies, there's actually someone at the top who gets newly printed money who ends up profiting off of all the other fools.

At least the underlined part is correct. What a pity that bitcoin is regarded as the main alternative given its issues.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Again, what's your point? At the rate it's growing, it may end to eclipsing the dollar in a decade or two.

I'm sure that plenty of people thought the same thing during similar manias like the Dutch Tulip mania, the excessive lending during the roaring 20s and the dot com bubble.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Again, "for now," and that's not much of an argument.

It's been around for almost a decade, and transaction costs and times have shot up. You're basically saying to have faith in a currency system that gets worse as it scales up for any uses outside of trading for sovereign currency.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Look at gold, which was our currency for thousands of years. Almost no one accepts it. But countries and wealthy individuals use it to store and transfer value, and gold obviously has value. So, is gold a pyramid scheme that is only supported by fools too? (technically yes, yes it is)

Gold is a tangible material that has uses outside of being a store of value. Bitcoin does not.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Because when it costs $0.01 to buy something, and the transaction is instant and completely anonymous, it's a better method of buying than any other currency? (See earlier mention of Lightning Network)

That's what you're promising, that's not what is actually being delivered.

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

Ashley is still on my block list, so no

Here is her response:

On 12/20/2017 at 12:56 PM, AshleyAshes said:

I like the part where, after years of trying to get everyone to believe that Bitcoin will be THE way to engage in transactions, Rassah now has to argue that the OTHER thing that will run on top of Bitcoin will in fact be the the really REAL way to engage in transactions.  I look forward to finding out out what Plan C is.

Unblock her, you might learn a thing or two. I'll admit I've learned a thing or two from her and you ;)

5 hours ago, Rassah said:

By the way, is a 1,688% increase over the last year, and a 3,877% over the last two, really considered terrible volatility? 

I'm talking about daily volatility, since, you know, you're claiming that bitcoin is supposed to be usable as an actual currency (yes currencies are supposed to be involved in transactions)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Here is her response:

I'm not on his block list.  It's not only made extra effort to reply to me while constantly claiming I'm blocked, saying he see's my posts as notifications but that he can't see them directly and he's actually accidentally directly and fully quoted me directly on at least one occasion.

He's doing that Internet Teen 'I'm going to loudly declare that I've blocked you but not block you because I can't stand not knowing what you say about me' thing. ...And executing it rather poorly. :P 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Yes you are. Bitcoin itself was supposed to be the fast and cheap way to transfer funds, not this additional stuff. 

This IS bitcoin itself.

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Bitcoin has been around for almost a decade and hardly anyone uses it as actual currency.

Only a few million people at this point...

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Time and again all I'm seeing from you are a bunch of promises.

I promised that it would grow in adoption and value. As far back as when it was $5. And then what happened?

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

So is the Fed private or public?

The answer is both.

Right, which is what I said, and regardless of so is in charge, who claims to back the currency, and who passes laws banning bitcoin, when bitcoin gets banned, that usually leads to less trust in the government/central bank currency and more people moving their money out into bitcoin to keep it safe. See: China, Russia, Venezuela, Argentina.

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

there are still security holes that can be exploited

Of course. Everything has security holes, and those security holes get patched all the time.

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

however the weak points can still be exploited or shut down (ie the exchanges).

True, in the short term. In the long term they won't matter. In Venezuela where bitcoin is illegal, people don't use exchanges, they just trade currency in person or use it to buy food and goods directly. 

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

The IMF could have just as easily have issued that warning privately to governments

Maybe the world isn't as conspiratorial as you think?

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

As for some countries embracing it, that makes some sense if your own currency is so much worse and you're desperate.

Or if you understand what this technology means, and expect that it will continue to explode as it has been, and you can become the new Switzerland. You seriously think Bitcoin has no future? Even with $260 billion worth of vested interest in seeing it keep going? (That's bigger than Citibank, Boeing, and all of New Zealand)

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

What I mean is that almost no one uses it for everyday transactions.

It's only real worth is in people's agreement to exchange it for "real" sovereign currency.

A lot of things that have value and use don't get used for everyday transactions. And what's wrong with being able to be converted into another currency, especially when that's almost any currency in the world? Doesn't that just make the exchange easier?

 

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Forgive me but your writings seem to imply that bitcoin is a worldwide phenomenon that's poised the sweep away the old financial order.

It is

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

The numbers do not bear this out. I'm not trying to prove this, the figures I've provided previously are clear proof.

Your figures show a fixed point in time. Yes, if you look at that, and assume that's all it will ever be, that's the conclusion you'd come to. If you look at the trend, where it seems to grow by 5x a year on average, you have $260bil this year, $1 trillion next year, then $5tril, then $25tril, and in a few years it's worth more than all dollars. Even if it just doubles every year, it can reach that goal pretty quickly.

I mean, you could point to the numbers that there were 16 million internet users in 1995, and claim that internet is an insignificant spec that isn't going anywhere (Paul Krugman actually did just that in 1998), but you'd obviously be wrong.

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Actually it's not even good as a currency for transactions (ie high transaction costs, daily volatility and transaction times).

See costs and times to send an international wire, and this demo of the new tech I mentioned 

 

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

I'm sure that plenty of people thought the same thing during similar manias like the Dutch Tulip mania, the excessive lending during the roaring 20s and the dot com bubble.

Dutch tulip mania was made up (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/there-never-was-real-tulip-fever-180964915/), the Roaring 20's was a product of USD being printed like crazy by the Federal Reserve to "stimulate" the economy in the same way we had QE recently, which is a problem bitcoin actually solves, and the dot com bubble is a great example, since bitcoin also had and will have a few mania bubbles and crashes, but like the internet, is expected to continue to grow.

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

It's been around for almost a decade, and transaction costs and times have shot up

Well, yes, because it had a fixed limit on how much volume it could process, and that fixed limit wasn't actually hit until just a year ago. The tech to fix it was in the works for the last three years. It just didn't come out in time, with this sudden unexpected interest.

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Gold is a tangible material that has uses outside of being a store of value. Bitcoin does not.

Tangibility doesn't give something value, and money shouldn't have any uses outside of just storing and moving value, because those outside uses can unnecessarily distort its value. Imagine if we used bags or rice (like China did once), and there was a famine where we ended up eating our money. No outside uses is a good thing.

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

That's what you're promising

 

No it's not. See above video. It's also what I'm building, right now.

 

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Here is her response:

I like the part where, after years of trying to get everyone to believe that Bitcoin will be THE way to engage in transactions, Rassah now has to argue that the OTHER thing that will run on top of Bitcoin will in fact be the the really REAL way to engage in transactions.  I look forward to finding out out what Plan C is.

Unblock her, you might learn a thing or two. I'll admit I've learned a thing or two from her and you

Yeah, so that was a waste of time. As I said, it's not "other things" it's still bitcoin itself, just with an upgrade. Apparently nothing new to learn from her.

3 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

I'm talking about daily volatility, since, you know, you're claiming that bitcoin is supposed to be usable as an actual currency (yes currencies are supposed to be involved in transactions)?

Things get more stable as they get bigger. Look at Big Cap vs Small Cap stocks, big currencies vs small ones, and things like sticky prices. I have no reason to believe that an economic concept that applies to everything else won't apply to bitcoin too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Rassah said:

I promised that it would grow in adoption and value. As far back as when it was $5. And then what happened?

You promised that it would be fast and cheap for transactions. It isn't.

8 hours ago, Rassah said:

Maybe the world isn't as conspiratorial as you think?

Or maybe you don't know what public relations means?

It's not like as if it's a new thing, Edward Bernays was talking about it in the 1920s.

8 hours ago, Rassah said:

Or if you understand what this technology means, and expect that it will continue to explode as it has been, and you can become the new Switzerland. You seriously think Bitcoin has no future? Even with $260 billion worth of vested interest in seeing it keep going? (That's bigger than Citibank, Boeing, and all of New Zealand)

I understand that bitcoin is nothing but a vehicle for speculation at this point. The fact that some people are even willing to take out a loan to rely on bigger fools to pay them back shows how desperate they are for yield.

This vested interest is purely based on the bigger fools concept, the currency isn't even fit for everyday transactions. Just like speculative bubbles before it, it will eventually fall.

At least Switzerland handles currency that you can actually use for transactions (as in buying stuff not just converting from one currency to another).

It impressive for a bubble I'll admit, but at the end of the day it is not useful for anything else.

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

A lot of things that have value and use don't get used for everyday transactions. And what's wrong with being able to be converted into another currency, especially when that's almost any currency in the world? Doesn't that just make the exchange easier?

Nothing wrong with that, just saying that with the way it is you can't use it for anything else and it's otherwise useless on its own.

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

Your figures show a fixed point in time. Yes, if you look at that, and assume that's all it will ever be, that's the conclusion you'd come to. If you look at the trend, where it seems to grow by 5x a year on average, you have $260bil this year, $1 trillion next year, then $5tril, then $25tril, and in a few years it's worth more than all dollars. Even if it just doubles every year, it can reach that goal pretty quickly.

I mean, you could point to the numbers that there were 16 million internet users in 1995, and claim that internet is an insignificant spec that isn't going anywhere (Paul Krugman actually did just that in 1998), but you'd obviously be wrong.

By that logic all speculative bubbles should keep going on forever and blow out to ridiculous proportions rather than just burst.

Also false equivalence, the internet is actually useful as a means of transferring information.

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

See costs and times to send an international wire, and this demo of the new tech I mentioned 

A controlled demo is not the same as using something "in the wild".

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

Dutch tulip mania was made up (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/there-never-was-real-tulip-fever-180964915/), the Roaring 20's was a product of USD being printed like crazy by the Federal Reserve to "stimulate" the economy in the same way we had QE recently, which is a problem bitcoin actually solves, and the dot com bubble is a great example, since bitcoin also had and will have a few mania bubbles and crashes, but like the internet, is expected to continue to grow.

Even if the tulip mania isn't what it seemed to be, it doesn't change that bitcoin is merely a greater fool's frenzy.

Also false equivalence with the internet again.

Actually I'll admit there were other dimensions to the depression as well, energy being one of them:

https://ourfiniteworld.com/2017/12/19/the-depression-of-the-1930s-was-an-energy-crisis/

 

The QE from the Fed and other central banks was conducted in order to try to mask much larger economic problems, though that discussion probably merits its own thread.

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

Well, yes, because it had a fixed limit on how much volume it could process, and that fixed limit wasn't actually hit until just a year ago. The tech to fix it was in the works for the last three years. It just didn't come out in time, with this sudden unexpected interest.

Given that it's still a speck it sounds like it has a very long way to go before one can use it for everyday transactions on a significant level.

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

Tangibility doesn't give something value, and money shouldn't have any uses outside of just storing and moving value, because those outside uses can unnecessarily distort its value. Imagine if we used bags or rice (like China did once), and there was a famine where we ended up eating our money. No outside uses is a good thing.

Actually being tangible does give certain advantages. If the electricity/telecommunications goes down in an area for example, one can still trade tangible items.

Also my previous response was to you trying to establish false equivalence between gold and bitcoin:

13 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:
18 hours ago, Rassah said:

Look at gold, which was our currency for thousands of years. Almost no one accepts it. But countries and wealthy individuals use it to store and transfer value, and gold obviously has value. So, is gold a pyramid scheme that is only supported by fools too? (technically yes, yes it is)

Gold is a tangible material that has uses outside of being a store of value. Bitcoin does not.

Its usage outside of a store of value does alter its value storage qualities, but that wasn't the argument.

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

No it's not. See above video. It's also what I'm building, right now.

So you've made a slick presentation. Lets see how this will work on the bitcoin blockchain itself and whether anyone will actually use it for regular transactions in a significant capacity.

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

Yeah, so that was a waste of time. As I said, it's not "other things" it's still bitcoin itself, just with an upgrade. Apparently nothing new to learn from her.

Given how things have turned out for bitcoin so far, you'll have to forgive her skepticism ;)

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

Things get more stable as they get bigger. Look at Big Cap vs Small Cap stocks, big currencies vs small ones, and things like sticky prices. I have no reason to believe that an economic concept that applies to everything else won't apply to bitcoin too.

The biggest reason why the vast majority hold any bitcoin is because they expect someone to come along soon to give them more for it than what they've paid. Such pyramid schemes won't stabilize as the gains get smaller and smaller, what happens is that such people panic and try to offload their positions as quickly as possible.

Also false equivalence again, bitcoin can't be used like a "real" currency for everyday transactions and it is not a company.

Looking at the wiki definition it is indeed a classic pyramid scheme:

"A pyramid scheme (commonly known as pyramid scams) is a business model that recruits members via a promise of payments or services for enrolling others into the scheme, rather than supplying investments or sale of products or services."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_scheme

Bitcoin doesn't provide anything apart from the promise of payments from others entering into the scheme.

4 hours ago, Tsuujou said:

I'm rich!

Congratulations, though the gains aren't realized until you exit your positions ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually your claim that the biggest reason the vast majority hold bitcoin is for speculation is not entirely right. It might be currently, during this latest bubble run-up where people are buying it just as a get rich quick scheme, but such run-ups have happened before, and crashed before without bitcoin disappearing (they actually crashed to higher prices than it started at). So something is holding the price up besides just price speculation.

Before the rise of the last few months, the actual reason for the rise was due to uses in other countries with weaker currencies and/or weaker banks. People use it to secure wealth when their own currencies are hyperinflating, they use it to send money overseas where doing so is difficult or impossible. For example sending money to Venezuela using transitional means is almost impossible, so Venezuelans in US are actually supporting their families back home by sending them bitcoins. Likewise I send bitcoin to my friend in Ukraine, since a wire would cost $25, and (until recently) sending bitcoin would cost under $5, and then she could use it to charge up a debit card for a 1% fee. I actually use a bitcoin debit card that I charge up with bitcoin too. People also use it to secure their wealth against confiscation by government, since it works much better than gold or valuables for that. And quite a few super wealthy (like hundreds of millions of dollars meet worth) are using it to store their money safely away from banks and any kind of fiat, including dollars, when they have nowhere else to invest that money. That's actually a pretty complicated problem: if you have $100mil, you can't just deposit it in a bank since all the regulations would be nuts to deal with, and that money would only have $250k of it, about 0.2% protected by FDIC. Bitcoin makes securing, moving, and spending such large amounts so much easier.

Yeah, there's not much use for it for the middle class average person. You have a somewhat stable currency and an okay banking system. Bitcoin is more for third world, and super rich I guess. 

I never promised that it would have easy and cheap transactions. Just that it would keep growing in adoption and price. Why would I tell people to invest in it with "It's cheap and easy to use!" instead of "You'll make a fuckton of money?"

 

By the way, in case you weren't aware, due to a disagreement in the development path, bitcoin has split into two directions last August. One group is the one implementing Lightning Network on top of the bitcoin you're keeping track of, where transaction fees are $15 or more. The other already implemented immediate fixes, and transactions on that chain are about $0.05 or less. Both are bitcoin, technically, and we'll have to see which method wins in the long run, but if you just want cheap and fast transactions, you already have that available.

And so as to not leave out Canadians, https://www.coindesk.com/bank-canada-paper-bitcoin-adoption-stabilize-price/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the real question you have to pitch to Rassah:

Would Rassah pay a worker in bitcoin?  As in, would he formulate a contractual arrangement where someone would be paid an account if of bitcoin/hour for their labor?  Not 'X USD Worth Of Bitcoin per hour', but 'Bitcoin Ammount/Hour'?  Simple as that.  Would Rassah use Bitcoin as a currency where the worker's wages would be as volatile as bitcoin itself.  Where Rassah's boasts about 'How much Bitcoin went up in the past week' would also mean 'How much relatively more expensive the employee got compared to last week'.

Rassah can go on on on about the extreme minority of things one can just buy bitcoin for but would he use it as a value to negotiate and pay wages?  After all, I don't get paid in 'X Euro Worth Of CAD' for my work.  My contract was negotiated and is paid in CAD as simple as that.  That's how ALL of us are paid, either as a salary or hourly wage in our local currency.  ...So since Rassah is so adamant that bitcoin is a currency then surely it can be used DIRECTLY to pay out as wages, right?

Don't worry though, Rassah is going to continue to pretend he has me blocked and this works to his advantage here because rest assured, he fucking hates the question I just posed because he'd have to be insane to say 'Yes' but to say 'No' undermines his ideology regardless of the mental gymnastics he'll present to why it doesn't REALLY undermine his ideology.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rassah Even in the third world you still need buyers willing to exchange currency for the imported bitcoin for it to be usable.

We'll see what happens with Bitcoin Cash, which is what I'm assuming you were referring to as the other currency.

Remember the rich have many methods to squirrel away their wealth. The problem of storing lots of money isn't exactly a new one.

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

I never promised that it would have easy and cheap transactions. Just that it would keep growing in adoption and price. Why would I tell people to invest in it with "It's cheap and easy to use!" instead of "You'll make a fuckton of money?"

If that's the case then your promises were no different to any other pyramid scheme.

Here is Ashley's post so you cannot claim ignorance of it:

4 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

Here's the real question you have to pitch to Rassah:

Would Rassah pay a worker in bitcoin?  As in, would he formulate a contractual arrangement where someone would be paid an account if of bitcoin/hour for their labor?  Not 'X USD Worth Of Bitcoin per hour', but 'Bitcoin Ammount/Hour'?  Simple as that.  Would Rassah use Bitcoin as a currency where the worker's wages would be as volatile as bitcoin itself.  Where Rassah's boasts about 'How much Bitcoin went up in the past week' would also mean 'How much relatively more expensive the employee got compared to last week'.

Rassah can go on on on about the extreme minority of things one can just buy bitcoin for but would he use it as a value to negotiate and pay wages?  After all, I don't get paid in 'X Euro Worth Of CAD' for my work.  My contract was negotiated and is paid in CAD as simple as that.  That's how ALL of us are paid, either as a salary or hourly wage in our local currency.  ...So since Rassah is so adamant that bitcoin is a currency then surely it can be used DIRECTLY to pay out as wages, right?

Don't worry though, Rassah is going to continue to pretend he has me blocked and this works to his advantage here because rest assured, he fucking hates the question I just posed because he'd have to be insane to say 'Yes' but to say 'No' undermines his ideology regardless of the mental gymnastics he'll present to why it doesn't REALLY undermine his ideology.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

@Rassah Even in the third world you still need buyers willing to exchange currency for the imported bitcoin for it to be usable.

Of course! And there are plenty of people willing to take your global deflationary currency for the local hyperinflationary crap in those places. 

13 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Remember the rich have many methods to squirrel away their wealth. The problem of storing lots of money isn't exactly a new one.

True, but cash is dangerous to keep, banks are untrustworthy, and after storing it you still have a problem of accessing and using (like Switzerland and Panama demonstrated). When you can keep all your billions on a tiny device you can take with you anywhere in the world though...

13 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

If that's the case then your promises were no different to any other pyramid scheme.

Not really. The only purpose of a pyramid scheme is to make money. Bitcoin's purpose isn't to make money, that's just a side effect of adoption. And if people stop buying into a pyramid scheme, it collapses (since it's entire purpose is no more). If people stop buying into bitcoin, its price will simply remain as is, with people who already own it simply continuing to use it. It's money, not a scheme or a business 

13 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Here is Ashley's post so you cannot claim ignorance of it:

Here's the real question you have to pitch to Rassah:

Would Rassah pay a worker in bitcoin?  As in, would he formulate a contractual arrangement where someone would be paid an account if of bitcoin/hour for their labor?  Not 'X USD Worth Of Bitcoin per hour', but 'Bitcoin Ammount/Hour'?  Simple as that.

Yes, if I fix that value so it adjusts to something else that's used daily. Dollars are just an easy thing to fix it to. I could likewise ask Ashley, would she pay a worker in dollars (CAD or USD), as in would she formulate a contract where someone would be paid in dollars per hour for their labor, for many years? Let's say 30 years? Would Ashley take a job that pays $20 an hour, with the price fixed for 30 years, knowing that with 3% inflation in 30 years that $20 would only maybe buy what $8 buys today?

I would guess not. The only difference is the time horizon. So, yes, I would pay a worker in bitcoin, with that pay tied to inflation, or deflation, and with the labor tied to market prices of that labor, same as other workers get paid in other currencies.

 

13 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Would Rassah use Bitcoin as a currency where the worker's wages would be as volatile as bitcoin itself. 

I would, both pay and receive, as long as the pay covers the volatility risk. That's not a new concept...

13 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

WhereRassah's boasts about 'How much Bitcoin went up in the past week' would also mean 'How much relatively more expensive the employee got compared to last week'.

Not if the price is adjusted more frequently (see annual inflation adjusted raises)

13 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

 After all, I don't get paid in 'X Euro Worth Of CAD' for my work.

No, she gets paid X value of labor worth of CAD for her work. And if CAD value fluctuates, she either gets a raise, or gets laid off.

13 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Don't worry though, Rassah is going to continue to pretend he has me blocked 

I do have her blocked. Her posts show up as hidden.

But I'm curious if, knowing what she knows now, if she would have bought any bitcoin when I first mentioned it to her and others back on the old Furaffinity forum a few years ago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

But I'm curious if, knowing what she knows now, if she would have bought any bitcoin when I first mentioned it to her and others back on the old Furaffinity forum a few years ago?

"But I'm curious if, knowing what she knows now, if she would have bought stock in Apple back in 1995."

Like, this question is just so stupid.  If one's investments methods literally involve a Time Traveling Delorean, then weather an investment is good, legit, a scam, or what, no longer matters.  If one can establish that something will go up, weather it will go down, how hard, and why, becomes irrelevant, one just knows exactly when to get in and when to get out.  ...This would also be helpful in being the life time Jeopardy champion, because you'll already know the answer to every question for eternity.  Fuck you Ken Jennings and IBM's Watson, I GOT A GOD DAMN TIME MACHINE! :D

 

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

Yes, if I fix that value so it adjusts to something else that's used daily. Dollars are just an easy thing to fix it to. I could likewise ask Ashley, would she pay a worker in dollars (CAD or USD), as in would she formulate a contract where someone would be paid in dollars per hour for their labor, for many years? Let's say 30 years? Would Ashley take a job that pays $20 an hour, with the price fixed for 30 years, knowing that with 3% inflation in 30 years that $20 would only maybe buy what $8 buys today?

Only in Rassah's universe where he sits, oddly disconnected from regular, every day people, does he both theorize that a 30 year employment contract with fixed pay could be a thing or that a contract who's pay varies DAILY (Other than by certain quotas or by hours worked) would also be a reasonable thing.  But I think it's cute that here, in the real world, where one year evaluation or renewal of employment contracts are the norm that thus such a thing being DAILY would be just as reasonable.

But hey, I called it that he would exercise mental gymnastics and I was right.  (Spoiler Alert: It's because I have a TIME MACHINE)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rassah Perhaps banks aren't trustworthy if you're not friends with the right people in them (not saying I am just that they don't offer the same shitty service to all ;) ).

Bitcoin isn't used as money (for transactions) by the vast majority of people "using" it, they're only in it for bigger fools to buy in later.

As for the rest, the previous arguments still stand: bitcoin is far more volatile than the vast majority of currencies (the ones from somewhat stable countries anyway) and barely any person or business uses it for transactions. Don't pretend you're not looking at Ash's posts either ;P

@AshleyAshes You may have predicted the future, but what about your kids? Something's gotta be done about your kids!

emmett-brown_9686.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

@AshleyAshes You may have predicted the future, but what about your kids? Something's gotta be done about your kids!

emmett-brown_9686.jpg

Screw'em, they just want to steal my jeopardy money.

Also, since Rassah's scenario involves me having time travel or a flawless means to see into the future, I probably WOULDN'T buy into BitCoin or a lot of other major that rose to prominence or at least not significantly.  You'd attract too much attention and people would start wondering what your 'Method Is' and start paying a lot of attention to you.  It'd be a lot safer to make a range of low key moves to build a fortune.  You can see through time so it's not like you need one single huge payout because that's how idiots get found out for being time travelers.

It's like when the Allies cracked the Nazi Enigma code.  They didn't just jump and counter the Nazi's at every move because the Nazi's would have quickly realized that their communications were compromised and develop new methods.  They carefully picked what information they acted on so the Nazi's wouldn't catch on and ensure that they could continue to read their communications.

I mean, I get how the fantasy appeals to Rassah; for him, psychologically speaking, it's important for him to be a 'big deal' and to 'prove himself', even to this slowly withering forum of Millennial furries.  So he likes the idea of being able to say 'LOOK AT HOW I MADE ALL THE RIGHT MOVES.  LOOK AT IT.  TELL ME I'M WORTHY OF YOUR ATTENTION GOD DAMNIT'  Me?  I'm a NOBODY and I like that.  Being nobody means no one has any expectations of you.  Being nobody means nobody cares what I do and how I do it and that's my preference.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...