Reference Link: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/12/why-i-want-bitcoin-to-die-in-a.html

Above-the-fold Excerpt:

Bitcoin just crashed 50% today, on news that the Chinese government has banned local exchanges from accepting deposits in Yuan. BtC was trading over $1000 yesterday; now it's down to $500 and still falling.

Good.

I want Bitcoin to die in a fire: this is a start, but it's not sufficient. Let me give you a round-up below the cut.

--------

My response to his rant:

How utterly depressing.

Your leading title - "Why I want Bitcoin to die in a fire" is so completely at odds with what I thought you were about, that I'm having a bit of cognitive dissonance parsing it.

It would be as if Isaac Asimov said "Robots - seriously, screw those buckets of junk, I just wrote about it for the checks."

You open with admitting the current financial system is crap, but apparently not crappy enough to replace, as Bitcoin isn't "IT".

In light of the massive fraud that we've seen globally, from the 2008 mortgage securitization fraud, LIBOR rigging scandal, HSBC Drug Money laundering and the continued Eurozone implosion courtesy of the Eurodollar and everyone hooking together the worst parts of their respective economies into a debt-chain of nightmare proportions, it seems that preserving the current system is one of the last things we should be considering.

And yet, when faced with the potential of complete freedom, the solution apparently is for Bitcoin to "die in a fire". Lightning has struck outside of our financial cave, and we're not rushing to the smouldering tree to nurture this spark, we're instead fleeing back into the damp cold depths, somehow reassuring ourselves that once you can feel the cave walls, you don't need light at all.

I find this particular view shockingly regressive. You, an author that I admire and have many times re-read your stories on taking technologies to the limit - "Accelerando" in particular comes to mind - and yet the very words out of your mouth regarding Bitcoin are riddled with fear and hostility.

Perhaps it was always part of your internal agenda, when I read this from "Accelerando":

"The last great transglobal trade empire, run from the arcologies of Hong Kong, has collapsed along with capitalism, rendered obsolete by a bunch of superior deterministic resource allocation algorithms collectively known as Economics 2.0."

I initially took this to mean that you recognized progress comes at a cost, but ultimately it is what enables us collectively to advance and improve our situation. Now, in light of your post about Bitcoin, I see this as fear of such an advance telegraphed four years before Bitcoin even existed.

As others will no doubt shine bright lights into the dark crevices of misunderstandings you have about Bitcoin, I'm just simply here to express my utter disbelief that someone as visionary as yourself can't see the benefits of a system that allows financial freedom.

You touch upon the fearful subjects of "Carbon Footprint" (Ignoring advances in lowered power consumption of the same.), "Bitcoin Malware" (Every ecosystem has predators and prey, surely), "Violates Gresham's Law" (Apparently we can steal electricity rather than pay? Funny how the utilities still operate then.) "Bitcoin's Lack of Regulation" (Like they've done such a stellar job with the regular system - please.)

And then, finally - "Bitcoin is designed for tax evasion" argument. Oh my. I suppose everyone is a crook and nobody would want to support their communities? Is this really the kind of thought process I'm supposed to believe you have? As for the "Gini Coefficient" you linked to, you do realize that distribution was on a singular exchange that ran with the money not long after, right? I'd say those funds have already been redistributed.

There's more, but honestly it all sounds like you're throwing your weight behind is the legacy financial system, warts and all, and somehow its better than having the ability to spend your money on what you want, or being able to shift your wealth around the globe without artificial barriers or constraints.

Perhaps I should ask about your stance on ebooks and Digital Rights Management, because it seems they're rather similar. Granted, "Accelerando" was released using a Creative Commons license, but what about the rest? Are you in favor of restrictive policies regarding data? Is every "regulation" in your view fair and just?

Am I to conclude that all of those flights of fancy that you've eloquently penned over the years really spring from the restricted and fearful psyche of someone who prefers flawed "protection" instead of actual freedom?

Please say it isn't so.

I'm not here to change your mind, because it seems you're quite firmly set on the issue, I'm just here to express my complete and utter shock that a visionary would rather hide in the back of his cave, feeling the walls for comfort, in the utter darkness.

Yeah, no way people could possibly do that on their own without exchanges... </eyeroll>

You give up too easily, that's for sure.

Here's my government-required registered wallet balance: 0.00000001

What's the tax on less than a penny? Oh, no problem Mr. Tax Guy, keep the change!

Ridiculous, they have zero clue how easily this is circumvented.

----------

Edit: I want to add something here as well - that people would willingly contribute to their communities they live in and see direct benefit from. What I'm railing against here is intrusive fingers of government grabbing cash because it is simply there for the taking. I'd argue that the Return-On-Investment is inversely proportional to the locale where it is spent, which implies that the entire tax system needs an overhaul, and I hope Bitcoin is the very thing that makes it so.

You guys are pretty demanding for a service that has been sponsored - and therefore provided free to you.

Maybe back off with the breathless demands of this and that for a bit, eh? Its getting a bit ridiculous.

Your theory falls flat on its face when we get massive declines. If they were so interested in "manipulating" prices, why couldn't they keep it from falling?

Its a ridiculous theory I keep seeing again and again on this forum. Its an Urban Legend that will never die, apparently.

Holding to prior decline patterns, the likely rock-bottom is around 260's before gaining ground again.

But keep it up with the "hold spartans" thing, I'm sure that's what the market listens to... (not really.)

All depends on whether you think he's stupid enough to destroy his creation, or nurture it. I'm in the latter camp, myself...

You've got to be fucking kidding me.

The very fact you guys don't understand a self-promotional piece isn't "news" just says a lot about how desensitized you are regarding advertisements in general.

My understanding of this section was that actual news items regarding Bitcoin get posted, not someone's "PR Release" - which is deliberately spun to encourage certain activities or product usage.

Get it?

For fucks' sake.

< Rationalization one, recorded >

Out of an abundance of caution, I'd recommend not maintaining any balances on EU Bitcoin exchanges, if you can help it. The sad fact is, they're not very far from a resurgence of the problems they thought they had "solved" with Greece, and there are a lot of other countries closer to the brink than ever before. It only takes one domino to make it fall, and the first thing that gets nailed is banking relationships, as they circle the wagons and try to remain capitalized.

I wouldn't put it past them to just freeze EU Bitcoin Exchanges accounts, or outright confiscate them. This is always a risk in general with anything that interfaces with the legacy financial system, but in this particular case, I see it coming to a head sooner rather than later.

Just watch out, is all...

There are parasites in every system, unfortunately. For Bitcoin it was Satoshi Dice, and now the inquisitive blood-funnels of Disastercoin making inroads.

For Wall Street, there will be some firms that sell products based on Bitcoin that are skewed massively in favor of the "house". People won't know better at first, because they'll be focusing on the exchanges value - or worse yet - if the Wall Street firms make up their own "weighted" index to rip people off, and the average retail consumer just jumps in to get the next "hot idea" without much research.

Look back at the Facebook IPO - most people were buying into that oversubscribed failure because of name recognition alone, not because they did their due diligence themselves. Hell, most people don't even read the prospectus anymore, they just want quick bucks, and they want it NOW.

So sure, there will be some high-profile products that will burn retail customers, but that's just the general nature of Wall Street - they need the "greater fool" to make their sky-high bonuses and extravagant lifestyles possible. Hopefully though, that period will be brief, and people will eventually realize that trading a piece of paper based on Bitcoin isn't the same as having the "real thing".

Then we'll see some disintermediation going on that will make all the Wall Street parasites gnash their teeth and rue the day they tried to run their shell game with Bitcoin.

The upshot of this whole thing is that it even saw the light of day, whether it was an internal project that got leaked inappropriately or not, it shows that some of the financial heavyweights are weighing Bitcoin to see how they can fold it into their product offerings and portfolios.

So while most of the Bitcoin haters are crowing over the retraction, the main point here is - even if Fidelity ultimately decides not to work with Bitcoin, it only means it is a matter of time before someone else does, and I think that makes sense given the trends in visibility and overall Bitcoin awareness.

In a year or so, we'll laugh at someone if they don't know what Bitcoin is. What was strange and geeky is now making its inroads into other areas we can only guess at.

Attention-seeking extroverts don't match the cautious technologist profile that Satoshi is. Also, can we knock off the "who is satoshi" game? Its completely idiotic. The guy went anonymous for a reason, can't we respect that?

I'm watching this closely, because the route you take will determine how fast you get hard-forked to irrelevance. This ought to be illuminating. Also, nice one about not wanting to "inconvenience" your disastercoin users, (to the detriment of everyone else) because hey, you're already hooking in to the Bitcoin hashing power, why limit your blockchain resource usage?

Just speaks volumes to what the priorities are here.

< Cue rationalizations about why disastercoin is doing the "right thing".... >

I know we like to focus on the "big ticket" users of Bitcoin, but this kind of adoption matters too. Thanks for posting it.

"Will Bitcoin Undermine the U.S. Dollar?" -- Well, considering that $85 Billion a month is doing a fine job of that already, Bitcoin will just have to pick up the pieces after its all said and done. Of course Barron's wouldn't say it would, they're beholden to the very financial system that they cover every day.

Can someone take this PR-Piece off the PRESS section?

It clearly says at the top of the article - "Press Release"

I'm sick of this crap.

I'm glad Krugman panned it, because he's now in the company of Greenspan and Cramer. That's all the contrary indicators you need. If these bozos don't like Bitcoin, you're golden.

Apple is a corporation. Corporations are pussies when it comes to doing things they aren't sure are sanctioned by the countries they operate in. (Unless you're a bank, then they launder funds whenever they want.) So, Apple is being the predictable weasels when they pull Bitcoin-oriented apps, because someone in legal can't find justification for it. Also, it may impinge on a future product, so they're not too keen on that either.

Just use Android and avoid the big 'ol Apple. Even if google play won't let you host the app there, its easy enough to spread it around.

This is a bunch of bullshit.

In the USA, its near the major holiday - and guess what, people shop. And guess what, inventories are low because this is the one time of year everyone has to buy something for somebody, or they buy it for themselves.

Correlation is not causation, you Litecoin try-hards.