Bitcoin Forum

A hyperactive spew of utter nonesense, someone has obviously spiked his ritolin.

http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/1048/bitecoin.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/864/bitecoin.jpg/)


Good reply by davincij15

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeI6tpKxBD0

That rawdog guy topped it, man... that was epic...

anyone following silverfuturist and davincij15 might be familiar with youtuber RawDog.
This guy claims to be an IT professional but the bitcoin disinformation he is spreading is laughable.

'bitcoin mining is for idiots'
'bitcoin mining is hackers paying you to crack bank algorithms'
'there are infinite number of bitcoins'   etc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0CtyUKUbSw&feature=feedu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko5lOc4nsac&feature=feedu

http://img857.imageshack.us/img857/4296/rawdogherpderp.png (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0CtyUKUbSw&feature=feedu)

anyone following silverfuturist and davincij15 might be familiar with youtuber RawDog.
This guy claims to be an IT professional but the bitcoin disinformation he is spreading is laughable.

'bitcoin mining is for idiots'
'bitcoin mining is hackers paying you to crack bank algorithms'
'there are infinite number of bitcoins'   etc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0CtyUKUbSw&feature=feedu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko5lOc4nsac&feature=feedu

http://img857.imageshack.us/img857/4296/rawdogherpderp.png (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0CtyUKUbSw&feature=feedu)

Rawdog strikes again!

Hmmm he makes some good points, maybe we should reconsider this silly project of Bitcoin.

Even more raw dog.  This guy is obsessed with bitcoins more than me. lol

http://youtu.be/NT-EQOcflus

Even more raw dog.  This guy is obsessed with bitcoins more than me. lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgYamdGLuA4

Quite sad that he is also going for the Ponzi scheme thing... actually it is an insult to all the early adopters, who are entrepreneurs!

But the early Bitcoin adopters got too much.  Not "too much" in the sense of "unfair" nor in the sense of "I want them" or "it can't work", but enough to plague the currency with exchange rate volatility for the foreseeable future.  Perhaps even enough to limit the exchange value's upside.

I don't think we would be where we are today if it was done differently.I don't think many people would be interested if Bitcoin inflated as the user base grew, or if mining paid less in the beginning, etc. I realize others disagree, but I guess we will never know.

Miners don't create wealth. They print money. They are simply limited by algorithms but it is still the printing of money.

You effectively said that major currencies like EUR and $ are ponzis. Good job.

A crucial, critical misunderstanding here.  Miners compute blocks that increase the block chain, the block chain is what "secures" the currency from fraudulent transactions, this work re-enforces the value of the currency, "printing money" does the opposite, it debases the value of a currency.. The security of the block chain has value (ie wealth).. it not only protects the bitcoin network from fraud, it also makes it something very hard to compete with, since any new digital currency will have to start from scratch and play catchup.

What backing does BTC have? Absolutely zilch.

Can't you see the flaw now? What makes BTC so special against these 9,999 other currencies? Nothing at all.

What makes BTC so special against these 9,999 other currencies?

What backing does BTC have? Absolutely zilch.

A currency has to be backed by "something", no matter how weak it is.

Ha ha! Then tell me what backs gold.

it is the properties of gold that back it up.   scarce, doesn't tarnish, fungible, etc

similarly, it is the properties of bitcoin that back up its value

Gold has physical properties that give it value. BTC has none of these physical properties.

Gold has physical properties that give it value. BTC has none of these physical properties.

I discovered that both of the most aggressive anti-bitcoin guys on youtube: rawdog and theweeklytelegram delete their past videos/accounts every couple of weeks or months, so they cannot be held accountable.

The weeklytelegram deleted all his videos about 4 weeks ago, then he made a couple of videos bashing bitcoin, then he deleted all his videos again last week, then he made a new video bashing bitcoin today.

Rawdog deleted his account a couple of weeks ago (deleting all his videos), and created a new one a couple of weeks ago.

How would you call this kind of public people that pathologically "clean their digital past" in a regular manner? Quite strange to me... Why being a public person and destroying your credibility this way?

Should we call them "digital amnesiacs?", "cyber Schizophreniacs?".... hmmm...

This is BS. Value is in the mind of people. By your standards music has no value because its just information.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgYamdGLuA4

Quite sad that he is also going for the Ponzi scheme thing... actually it is an insult to all the early adopters, who are entrepreneurs!

Do you know what true value is? The average layman does not.

We are talking monetary value here, not just any old value.

For music, the intellectual property has value. You can sell the IP or you can use it to manufacture records that will sell.

Now let me ask again, where is the value in a bitcoin? Mining is no different to printing money and we have all seen what happens to economies that print money. They suffer for it.

I didnt watch the video, but bitcoin has party of a ponzi scheme, namely the graph of money creation.

why the rate of money creation would be the biggest at the beginning, when it was obvious there would be no demand, is beyond me. money creation should have started slowly, then picked up when wider adoption was expected for a couple of years and then decline.
when other monetary systems were started they didnt distribute 10 mil each to 100 people.
the money supply was increased when the currency got more widely used (for example: more countries were added to the eurozone).

now I understand you can't manage this in the same way with bitcoin because there is no central authority, but the graph should have been shaped differently.

I didnt watch the video, but bitcoin has party of a ponzi scheme, namely the graph of money creation.

why the rate of money creation would be the biggest at the beginning, when it was obvious there would be no demand, is beyond me. money creation should have started slowly, then picked up when wider adoption was expected for a couple of years and then decline.
when other monetary systems were started they didnt distribute 10 mil each to 100 people.
the money supply was increased when the currency got more widely used (for example: more countries were added to the eurozone).

now I understand you can't manage this in the same way with bitcoin because there is no central authority, but the graph should have been shaped differently.

The Euro works because the legacy currencies were tradable for it.

There is hardly any real wealth transferred into bitcoins, mainly because you can just create bitcoins with mining.


Bitcoins is like a new country inventing their own currency but without giving up their old one. They decide to trade this currency among themselves and then they try to sell it to others (for USD, for example). Wow, they can't believe it - people will actually pay them for their "invented out of thin air" currency, they're all going to be rich.

This picture is not sustainable. Eventually, people refuse to pay anything for bitcoins.

It has all the hallmarks of a ponzi because the only people who believe in swapping real wealth for bitcoins are those who have convinced themselves that they will get a long term return. They can get a short term return if they are quickly in and quickly out but in the long term they will lose all their money.

Out of thin air? No, out of (currently) 10.574 Thash/s. You think that kind of computing power is made of faery dust unicorn-horn? Think again.

hard work to obtain something doesnt make it valueable.
this guy worked hard with his lawn mower: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIaCHqxdSXc&feature=feedf

and he's funny, too, which got to be worth something.

No, that's not my claim. Value is in the exchange, but saying bitcoins are created out of thin air is fucking ridiculous. They are ade out of shit-hot graphics cards, electricity and processing time, applied specifically to the purpose of creating a good form of money. The value comes from trade. The more people trade for them, the more value.

Currency and money are very similar and many people think that they are one of the same. However, there is one major difference that separates the two. First, let's obtain a firm grasp of how they are similar. Both currency and money have to be:

-A unit of account
-A medium of exchange
-Portable
-Divisible
-Durable
-Fungible (one coin in my hand has the same value as one coin in your hand)

Money must be all of the above, but has to also be a "store of value" over long periods of time.

Paper is never a store of value  in the long term, because it can be printed at will and only has the value given to it as determined by the issuing government. Also, all paper currencies have failed in the past, that means they have gone to its intrinsic value of zero. Gold and silver have been used as "money" for over 5000 years because it satisfies every requirement stated previously. Once upon a time, the U.S. was on a gold standard. This meant that for every dollar printed, there had to be gold to back it up. Our dollar was considered "money" because of this gold backing. Thus, the phrase "good as gold" was coined (you could redeem your dollars for gold). Gold has to be mined and that process takes time and physical effort.


So by all means, BitCoin could become MONEY! Alas, dollars are not money, only currency! Of course, to become money, Bitcoin still needs prove two things:
-To withstand the test of time (and by so doing becoming a store of value in the long term).
-To become a medium of exchange (it has the potential to be one, but it is still not widely accepted as a medium of exchange in the world).

People, if the technical aspects of Bitcoin prove to be solid, and it becomes a widely accepted medium of exchange, it could not only become MONEY, but the best money the world has known so far, because of its capability to be managed digitally which allows the instant transfer allover the world without any centralized authority.

Of course precious metals will be preferred for more long term security, as bitcoins could be made inoperative worldwide in minutes with any massive attack to the internet. Even if we return to the stone age after a nuclear catastrophe, gold and silver would still be money accepted by people, as it does not requiere technology to fulfill its function.

But Bitcoin runs far ahead of gold and other PMs in portability (try to carry a gold bar in your pockets), divisibility (try to cut a gold coin), and the most important one: as medium of exchange (try to send gold overseas in minutes with a click of a button using P2P).

Regards.

has anyone here denied bitcoin could become money? I didn't.

it's just very unlikely, and if so, several government bans are ahead which have to be overturned by the people.

Now let me ask again, where is the value in a bitcoin? Mining is no different to printing money and we have all seen what happens to economies that print money. They suffer for it.

that's not true either.
bitcoins are created by a predetermined function over time.

the whole hashing exercise is just a way to determine their distribution (and to verify transactions) but bitcoins aren't really created by hashing power. the rate of creation stays the same, no matter how much "shit-hot graphics cards" are online.

one lawn-mower could mow the whole world.

A predetermined function over time whose impact on the real world is the employment of physical resources as described above. You're missing the point.

Creating something out of nothing means that you are not bound to the use of any physical resources.

you are changing your argument with each post you make.

you aren't. you are bound by a function over time/algorithm, and by the fact that everyone agrees to that function by downloading the same bitcoin client.
there are no resources involved in bitcoin creation, aka out of thin air.

by employing resources, you can only make it so that YOU get a bitcoin, instead of someone else.

Believe me, if people could magically create bitcoins by downloading or hacking together an alternate client,

they can, if others agree to that, as I've mentioned. also known as forking the blockchain (or creating a new one).

still, out of thin air.

forking the block chain would be an enormously expensive and foolhardy venture, and creating a new block chain would give you something that's not really a bitcoin, because it's essentially a new, less secure currency.

agreed. not the point though.

I didnt watch the video, but bitcoin has parts of a ponzi scheme, namely the graph of money creation.

why the rate of money creation would be the biggest at the beginning, when it was obvious there would be no demand, is beyond me. money creation should have started slowly, then picked up when wider adoption was expected for a couple of years and then decline.
when other monetary systems were started they didnt distribute 10 mil each to 100 people.
the money supply was increased when the currency got more widely used (for example: more countries were added to the eurozone).

now I understand you can't manage this in the same way with bitcoin because there is no central authority, but the graph should have been shaped differently.